FROM TANGA TO METRO: SHARED TRANSPORT AS EMPLOYMENT INFRASTRUCTURE The Evolution, Importance, Consequences and Benefits of Worker Mobility in the Indore–Dewas–Pithampur Industrial Corridor

 

FROM TANGA TO METRO: SHARED TRANSPORT AS EMPLOYMENT INFRASTRUCTURE

The Evolution, Importance, Consequences and Benefits of Worker Mobility in the Indore–Dewas–Pithampur Industrial Corridor

 

Abstract

Urban transport is often presented as a linear transition from traditional modes to modern mass transit. The experience of Indore, Madhya Pradesh, demonstrates a different pattern. The city has moved through several generations of mobility—from the horse-drawn tanga, to tempo and private minibuses, to organised city buses, iBus/BRTS, e-rickshaws and app-based cabs, and finally the metro. Yet older and semi-formal forms of shared transport have not disappeared.

This case study examines the continuing importance of shared transport in the Indore–Dewas–Pithampur economic corridor, with particular attention to worker commuting. The study argues that shared buses and other intermediate public transport modes remain important because industrial workers do not necessarily travel according to the fixed routes, frequencies and station locations of formal mass transit. Their travel is determined by shift timings, affordability, factory locations, housing clusters and last-mile connectivity.

The study uses secondary evidence, historical transport documentation and a case-based analytical framework. Historical evidence shows that after the withdrawal of organised urban transport by MPSRTC in the late 1990s, Indore experienced a major expansion of minibuses, tempos and auto-rickshaws. An Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad case records approximately 300 private minibuses, 150 tempos and 10,000 auto-rickshaws by January 2004.

The paper concludes that shared transport should not be viewed merely as an outdated competitor to metro and BRTS. For industrial workers, it can function as employment infrastructure. The appropriate policy is therefore not elimination but integration, regulation and feeder connectivity.

Keywords: Indore, Pithampur, Dewas, shared transport, tanga, tempo, city bus, BRTS, iBus, metro, e-rickshaw, industrial workers, commuting, labour mobility, public transport.

 

1. Introduction

Indore has witnessed a remarkable transformation in urban mobility.

A resident travelling through the city several decades ago could encounter the traditional tanga. Later, the tempo became an important shared mode. City buses subsequently created a more organised system. The introduction of iBus/BRTS added a higher-capacity corridor-based system, followed by e-rickshaws, app-based cabs and, most recently, metro connectivity.

Yet the transformation has not meant complete replacement.

The contemporary Indore commuter may use:

home → e-rickshaw → city bus/BRTS → shared bus → factory

or

home → shared auto → Rao/Dewas bus → industrial area → factory gate.

This is particularly important in the case of workers travelling towards Pithampur and Dewas, two major industrial destinations associated with the wider Indore economic region.

The central research question of this paper is therefore:

Why does shared transport continue to survive and remain important even after the arrival of city buses, BRTS, e-rickshaws, app-based cabs and metro?

The answer lies not simply in transport technology but in the economics of everyday employment.

 

2. The Central Case: From Tanga to Metro

The transport history of Indore can be understood as a sequence of overlapping mobility systems.

Figure 1. Evolution of Indore's Shared Mobility

TANGA
↓
TEMPO
↓
PRIVATE MINIBUS
↓
CITY BUS
↓
iBUS / BRTS
↓
E-RICKSHAW + AUTO
↓
APP-BASED CAB
↓
METRO

But the arrows should not be interpreted as complete replacement.

A more accurate model is:

Tanga + Tempo + Bus + E-rickshaw + BRTS + Metro = layered mobility system

That is the distinctive feature of Indore.

A 2025 account of Indore's transport history records tanga stands around Rajwada, Chhawani and Gandhi Hall and reports historical tanga fares of eight annas, ₹1 and ₹2, while tempos had already become established from the 1970s and remained prominent into the late 1990s/around 2000.

The commonly remembered local story of fares moving from "10 paisa" in an older era to today's ₹10–₹20 minimum urban fares is useful as an oral-history theme. However, it should not be presented as a single officially documented fare series unless archival tickets or government fare schedules are obtained.

 

3. Research Problem

Modern transport planning frequently assumes:

Metro/BRTS → better transport → decline of informal transport.

Indore challenges this assumption.

Despite the emergence of formal transport infrastructure, workers continue to require transport that provides:

low fares;

frequent departures;

early-morning and late-evening availability;

direct access to industrial areas;

flexibility around shift timings;

last-mile connectivity;

affordable return journeys.

This creates a major research problem:

Formal transport may be modern, but informal/semi-formal transport may be economically better matched to the worker's daily life.

 

4. Objectives of the Study

The study has seven objectives:

To trace the evolution of shared transport in Indore from tanga to metro.

To examine the historical role of tempos, minibuses and intermediate public transport.

To examine the relationship between Indore and the industrial employment centres of Pithampur and Dewas.

To analyse why shared buses and other paratransit services continue alongside formal public transport.

To examine the economic importance of affordable commuting for industrial workers.

To analyse the positive and negative consequences of shared transport.

To develop policy recommendations for integrating shared transport with city buses, BRTS and metro.

 

5. Research Questions

RQ1

How has shared transport in Indore evolved from tanga to metro?

RQ2

Why have shared and semi-formal modes survived despite the development of BRTS and metro?

RQ3

How does affordable shared transport influence workers' access to Pithampur and Dewas employment?

RQ4

What are the economic, social and environmental consequences of shared commuting?

RQ5

Can shared transport be integrated with formal public transport rather than eliminated?

 

6. Methodology

This is a case-cum-research study based primarily on secondary evidence and analytical interpretation.

The research uses:

historical accounts of Indore transport;

documented public-transport studies;

AICTSL-related information;

BRTS information;

current bus-route evidence;

transport fare information;

industrial-region context;

secondary information concerning worker mobility.

The paper deliberately does not fabricate a primary survey. Any worker percentages, satisfaction scores or statistical tests should be added only after an actual survey is conducted.

Analytical framework

The paper examines shared transport through five dimensions:

Dimension	Research question
Cost	Is shared travel affordable for workers?
Accessibility	Can workers reach factories conveniently?
Timing	Does transport match factory shifts?
Connectivity	Does it solve first/last-mile problems?
Employment	Does mobility expand access to jobs?

 

7. Historical Evolution of Indore Transport

Stage I – Tanga

The tanga represents the traditional shared mobility system.

It provided:

relatively flexible movement;

multiple passengers;

short-distance connectivity;

access to markets and central-city locations.

Historical reporting describes tanga stands at Rajwada, Chhawani and Gandhi Hall and fares such as eight annas, ₹1 and ₹2.

The tanga therefore represents the first stage of shared mobility based on pooling passengers rather than individual ownership.

 

Stage II – Tempo

The tempo transformed the economics of urban mobility.

According to historical reporting, tempos began operating in Indore in 1975 and remained an important part of the city's transport system until around 2000.

The tempo was particularly important because it combined:

low capital cost + high passenger turnover + flexible stopping

This made it highly suitable for a growing city whose formal bus infrastructure was insufficient.

 

8. The Public-Transport Crisis of the 1990s

One of the most important turning points occurred when MPSRTC's urban services were suspended following mounting losses.

The resulting gap was filled by Intermediate Public Transport (IPT).

An IIM Ahmedabad case records approximately:

300 private minibuses

150 tempos

10,000 auto-rickshaws

operating in Indore by January 2004.

This is a crucial finding.

The informal system was not merely a cultural preference.

It emerged because demand existed before formal supply was able to meet it.

 

9. Emergence of Organised City Bus Transport

Indore subsequently moved towards a more structured public transport system.

The Indore City Transport Services system was established to manage urban public transport, and city buses eventually expanded beyond the municipal area.

Historical descriptions of the system show services extending towards areas including Mhow, Rau, Hatod, Pithampur and Manpur.

This is particularly relevant to the present study because it demonstrates that the city-bus concept itself recognised the importance of suburban and industrial connectivity.

 

10. iBus and BRTS

The next major technological and institutional step was the iBus/BRTS.

The BRTS began commercial operations in 2013, providing a structured high-capacity corridor. Contemporary reporting recorded an initial fare structure of ₹5, ₹10 and ₹15.

This represented an important change:

Earlier shared transport

Flexible + decentralised + demand-driven

BRTS

Structured + corridor-based + higher capacity

The two systems therefore solved different problems.

 

11. Why BRTS Did Not Eliminate Paratransit

BRTS works most efficiently on high-demand corridors.

Industrial workers, however, may live:

inside residential colonies;

in peripheral settlements;

near markets;

in rented accommodation;

along factory-worker housing clusters.

Their destination may be:

a specific factory gate rather than a transport station.

Therefore:

BRTS can provide the trunk journey, but paratransit can provide the journey from the trunk network to the workplace.

This creates a complementary relationship.

 

12. E-Rickshaw and the New Shared-Mobility Layer

The e-rickshaw introduced another important layer.

Its main advantages are:

low operating cost;

small vehicle size;

flexible routing;

suitability for short distances;

first/last-mile connectivity.

The significance of the e-rickshaw is therefore not that it replaces the bus.

It often performs the function:

home → bus/metro station

or

bus/metro station → workplace.

 

13. Metro: The Newest Layer

Metro introduces the highest level of formalisation and mass-transit capacity into the system.

But the metro also illustrates the central argument of this paper:

A metro station is not the final destination of a worker.

The worker needs to reach:

factory gate → production unit → warehouse → industrial estate → workplace.

Consequently, metro expansion creates an even greater requirement for:

feeder buses;

e-rickshaws;

autos;

shared vans;

worker buses.

The future of Indore transport should therefore be viewed as a network, rather than a competition between individual modes.

 

14. The Indore–Dewas–Pithampur Labour Corridor

The economic geography of the region explains why this issue is especially important.

Workers may live in Indore while their workplaces are located in:

Pithampur;

Dewas;

Rau;

nearby industrial estates.

The transport corridor consequently becomes part of the labour market.

Simplified labour-market model

Indore households

↓
Affordable transport

↓
Pithampur/Dewas factories

↓
Employment income

↓
Household consumption

↓
Local economic growth

Transport is therefore not merely a mobility service.

Transport becomes an employment-enabling infrastructure.

 

15. Rao and Dewas Shared Bus Services

An important feature of the contemporary system is the continued presence of worker-oriented shared/private bus services commonly recognised locally through names such as Rao and Dewas services.

These services are important to this research not simply as individual operators but as examples of a wider phenomenon:

Private/semi-formal shared transport survives where demand is geographically and temporally specific.

For a worker, the important question is not:

"Is the vehicle modern?"

The important question is:

"Can I reach my factory on time at a price I can afford?"

This explains why a conventional shared bus can remain competitive even after the introduction of metro.

 

16. Why Workers Prefer Shared Transport

16.1 Affordability

A worker's transport expenditure directly affects disposable income.

Suppose a worker earns ₹15,000 per month.

If commuting costs ₹100 per working day:

₹100 × 26 days = ₹2,600 per month

That is approximately:

17.3% of a ₹15,000 monthly wage.

Therefore, even a ₹10–₹20 difference in daily commuting expenditure can become significant for low- and middle-income households.

 

17. Fare as an Economic Variable

The historical story can be represented conceptually as:

Transport era	Typical character
Traditional tanga era	Very low absolute fares; locally remembered as annas/paisa-era mobility
Tempo era	Low-cost shared travel
Early city-bus era	Regulated low fares
iBus/BRTS	₹5–₹15 initial fare structure
Contemporary city bus	Minimum fares have risen with distance/fare revisions
E-rickshaw	Short-distance shared mobility
Metro	Formal high-capacity corridor transport
Worker shared buses	Corridor-specific, demand-oriented commuting

A 2010s transport planning study recorded an early ICTSL fare structure beginning around ₹4 for trips under 3 km, illustrating the historical emphasis on affordable bus travel.

In 2024, AICTSL revised its fare slabs; contemporary reporting indicated a minimum fare of ₹5, while longer journeys could reach ₹40 depending on distance.

Thus, the user's observation of a long journey from paisa-era transport to today's ₹10–₹20 minimum urban travel environment can be treated as an important historical narrative, while exact historical fare comparisons should rely on archived fare records.

 

18. The Economics of Shared Transport

Shared transport generates an important economic principle:

Cost per passenger falls when vehicle capacity is shared.

For a worker:

Shared bus

→ lower individual cost
→ predictable expenditure
→ affordable employment access

For a company:

→ larger labour pool
→ fewer transport-related absenteeism problems
→ reduced pressure to provide employee housing
→ easier shift management.

For the city:

→ fewer private vehicles
→ better road-space utilisation
→ reduced pressure on parking.

 

19. Shared Transport and the Effective Job Market

One of the most important concepts emerging from this case is the effective job-market radius.

Without affordable transport:

A worker may consider only jobs close to home.

With affordable shared transport:

The same worker can consider employment 20–40+ kilometres away.

Therefore:

Transport expands the geographical labour market.

This is particularly significant for Pithampur and Dewas.

 

20. Consequences of Shared Transport

Positive consequences

1. Employment accessibility

Workers can travel to industrial centres without relocating.

2. Household income protection

Lower transport expenditure leaves more income available for food, education, housing and healthcare.

3. Labour-market integration

Indore households become connected to industrial employment outside the city.

4. Industrial productivity

Factories obtain access to a larger labour pool.

5. Social inclusion

Workers who cannot afford private vehicles can still access employment.

6. Reduced dependence on private vehicles

Pooling passengers can reduce the number of individual vehicles required for the same number of trips.

 

21. Negative Consequences

Shared transport is not automatically efficient or safe.

Potential problems include:

overcrowding;

unsafe stopping;

irregular vehicle standards;

fare disputes;

inadequate passenger information;

poor night-time security;

traffic congestion;

absence of formal grievance mechanisms;

duplication of profitable routes.

Therefore:

The objective should not be to romanticise informal transport.

The objective should be to recognise its economic function and regulate it appropriately.

 

22. Formal versus Shared Transport

Variable	Metro	BRTS/City Bus	Shared Worker Bus	E-rickshaw
Capacity	Very high	High	Medium/high	Low
Route flexibility	Low	Medium/low	High	Very high
Factory-gate access	Low	Medium	High	Very high
Shift flexibility	Medium	Medium	High	High
Long-distance efficiency	High	High	High	Low
Last-mile function	Low	Medium	Medium/high	Very high
Formalisation	Very high	High	Variable	Increasing
Worker suitability	High on corridor	High on corridor	Very high on selected routes	High for short trips

The conclusion is clear:

No single mode can perform every function efficiently.

 

23. The Multimodal Worker Journey

The future transport chain can be represented as:

HOME

↓

E-RICKSHAW / SHARED AUTO

↓

CITY BUS / BRTS / METRO

↓

RAO / DEWAS / WORKER BUS

↓

INDUSTRIAL ESTATE

↓

E-RICKSHAW / WALK

↓

FACTORY GATE

This is not transport fragmentation.

It is potentially a multimodal transport ecosystem.

 

24. A Conceptual Model

Independent variables

Fare affordability
Frequency
Route coverage
Shift compatibility
Last-mile connectivity
Reliability

↓

Shared Transport Accessibility

↓

Worker Mobility

↓

Employment Accessibility

↓

Household Income Stability

↓

Industrial Productivity

This provides the paper's central conceptual framework.

 

25. Research Proposition

Proposition 1

Lower-cost shared transport is positively associated with workers' ability to access geographically distant employment.

Proposition 2

Shift-compatible shared transport is more valuable to industrial workers than transport based solely on conventional daytime schedules.

Proposition 3

The availability of first- and last-mile shared transport increases the practical usefulness of formal mass-transit systems.

Proposition 4

Shared transport and formal public transport can be complementary rather than substitutive.

 

26. Case Analysis: Why Rao/Dewas-Type Services Survive

The continued existence of worker-oriented shared buses can be explained through five economic factors.

1. Spatial factor

Factories are dispersed across industrial estates.

2. Temporal factor

Factory shifts may begin earlier or finish later than conventional urban travel peaks.

3. Economic factor

Workers are highly price-sensitive.

4. Network factor

Formal buses and metro may not reach every factory gate.

5. Social factor

Workers often travel in groups from the same locality or employment cluster.

Therefore:

The market for shared worker transport exists because the formal network does not completely match the geography and timing of industrial employment.

 

27. Policy Implications

Policy 1 – Map worker routes

Authorities should identify:

Rao routes;

Dewas routes;

tempo routes;

e-rickshaw concentrations;

industrial worker boarding points.

 

Policy 2 – Create legal worker-bus stops

Instead of forcing buses to stop randomly, authorities can create designated:

Worker Mobility Stops

near industrial gates.

 

Policy 3 – Integrate with metro

Metro stations should have:

e-rickshaw stands;

shared-auto stands;

worker-bus bays;

city-bus connections.

 

Policy 4 – Introduce minimum safety standards

Regulation should cover:

vehicle fitness;

driver licensing;

passenger capacity;

insurance;

emergency contact information;

visible fare information.

 

Policy 5 – Do not eliminate the informal system

The policy objective should be:

Formalise without destroying flexibility.

This is perhaps the most important policy conclusion of the study.

 

28. Transport as Employment Infrastructure

The conventional view is:

Transport moves people.

The Indore–Dewas–Pithampur case suggests a broader interpretation:

Transport moves workers, workers operate factories, factories generate income, and income sustains households.

Thus:

Transport → Labour mobility → Employment → Production → Income → Regional development

This means transport policy is also employment policy.

 

29. The Indore Paradox

The case reveals an interesting paradox.

Indore has become more technologically advanced:

Tanga → Tempo → City Bus → BRTS → E-rickshaw → Cab → Metro

Yet the older principle remains:

People want affordable shared mobility that takes them where they need to go, when they need to go.

Technology changes.

The fundamental economic requirement does not.

 

30. Conclusion

Indore's transport history should not be interpreted as a simple journey from an old-fashioned tanga to a modern metro.

It is better understood as:

a journey from one shared mobility system to another, with multiple layers accumulating over time.

The tanga represented early shared urban mobility.

The tempo and private minibus filled gaps when organised public transport was inadequate.

City buses created a more structured system.

The iBus/BRTS introduced corridor-based mass transit.

E-rickshaws and app-based cabs provided flexible first- and last-mile mobility.

Metro now adds a high-capacity rail layer.

Yet Rao and Dewas-type worker-oriented shared bus services continue because industrial workers have a very specific mobility requirement: they need inexpensive, frequent and shift-compatible transportation connecting residential areas with workplaces in Pithampur and Dewas.

The central finding of this case study is therefore:

Shared transport is not merely a temporary stage before modern transport. In an industrial labour market, it can function as permanent employment infrastructure.

The appropriate policy for Indore is consequently not:

Metro versus bus
Bus versus e-rickshaw
Formal versus informal

but:

Metro + BRTS + City Bus + Worker Bus + E-rickshaw + Shared Auto

as an integrated mobility ecosystem.

Indore's journey from tanga to metro therefore represents not the death of shared transport, but its transformation.

 

31. Proposed Empirical Research Extension: Testing the Economics of Shared Worker Mobility

The present case study establishes that the evolution of Indore's transport system cannot be understood as a simple replacement of traditional modes by modern transport. The continuing use of shared buses, tempos, e-rickshaws and other paratransit services indicates that affordability, accessibility, timing and employment location continue to influence transport choice even after the expansion of BRTS, city buses and metro services.

The next stage of the research should therefore move from historical and conceptual analysis to an empirical investigation of industrial-worker mobility. The proposed research would examine whether the availability, affordability and reliability of shared transport actually influence workers' access to employment in Pithampur and Dewas.

The central empirical proposition would be:

Affordable, reliable and shift-compatible shared transport increases workers' effective access to industrial employment while reducing the commuting burden on low- and middle-income households.

 

31.1 Proposed Sample Design

A 475-respondent multi-stakeholder sample is proposed so that the research captures both the passenger and supply sides of the transport market.

Respondent category	Proposed sample	Analytical purpose
Pithampur industrial workers	200	Examine commuting cost, time, mode choice and employment accessibility
Dewas industrial workers	150	Compare mobility conditions with Pithampur workers
Shared-transport drivers/operators	50	Understand routes, fares, demand, shift patterns and operational constraints
HR/industrial managers	50	Examine transport-related absenteeism, lateness, turnover and workforce availability
Transport experts/planners	25	Assess policy, integration and regulatory issues
Total	475	Integrated mobility analysis

The sample should ideally include workers from different income groups, occupations, factory sizes and shift patterns. This is important because transport dependence is unlikely to be identical for a permanent skilled employee, contract worker, migrant worker or low-wage production worker.

 

31.2 Key Variables and Analytical Logic

The empirical model should treat transport accessibility as a multidimensional phenomenon, rather than measuring it only through distance.

The questionnaire should measure:

Economic variables

monthly income;

daily commuting expenditure;

monthly commuting expenditure;

transport expenditure as a percentage of income;

private-vehicle ownership;

willingness to pay.

Mobility variables

distance travelled;

one-way travel time;

waiting time;

number of changes/transfers;

daily frequency of service;

availability during shift hours;

reliability.

Service-quality variables

safety;

overcrowding;

comfort;

cleanliness;

fare transparency;

driver behaviour;

availability of information.

Employment variables

punctuality;

absenteeism;

late arrival;

job accessibility;

ability to accept distant employment;

intention to change job because of commuting difficulty;

intention to change transport mode.

This permits the research to move beyond the simple question "Which transport mode is used?" to the more important question:

"How does the transport mode affect the worker's economic opportunity?"

 

31.3 Construction of a Worker Mobility Index

A useful contribution would be to construct a Worker Mobility Accessibility Index (WMAI).

The index could combine:

Affordability + Reliability + Accessibility + Frequency + Safety + Shift Compatibility

Each dimension could be measured through a five-point Likert scale.

For example:

Dimension	Possible indicator
Affordability	Transport cost relative to income
Accessibility	Ease of reaching workplace
Reliability	On-time availability
Frequency	Waiting time
Shift compatibility	Availability at shift start/end
Safety	Perceived commuting safety
Connectivity	First/last-mile convenience

A higher index score would indicate better effective worker mobility.

This would allow workers using metro, BRTS, city buses, shared buses, e-rickshaws and private vehicles to be compared on a common analytical framework.

 

31.4 Transport Cost Burden

One particularly important variable should be transport cost as a percentage of monthly income.

The analysis can calculate:

Monthly Transport Burden (%) = Monthly Commuting Expenditure ÷ Monthly Income × 100

This variable is more meaningful than simply comparing fares.

For example, a ₹100 daily commuting cost has very different economic consequences for a worker earning ₹15,000 per month compared with an employee earning ₹50,000.

The research can therefore test whether transport affordability is a stronger determinant of mode choice among lower-income workers than among higher-income workers.

 

31.5 Hypotheses for Empirical Testing

The study can develop the following hypotheses.

H1: Income and transport-mode choice

H₀: There is no significant association between worker income and choice of transport mode.

H₁: Worker income is significantly associated with transport-mode choice.

This tests whether lower-income workers depend more heavily on shared transport.

 

H2: Shared transport and commuting cost

H₀: There is no significant difference in average commuting expenditure between shared-transport users and private-vehicle users.

H₁: Shared-transport users have significantly different, and potentially lower, average commuting expenditure than private-vehicle users.

The analysis should control for distance because a longer journey naturally increases cost.

 

H3: Transport mode and satisfaction

H₀: Worker satisfaction does not differ significantly among metro, BRTS, city bus, shared bus, e-rickshaw and private-vehicle users.

H₁: Worker satisfaction differs significantly across transport modes.

This is suitable for one-way ANOVA.

The purpose is not merely to identify the "best" transport mode but to determine which dimensions of the transport experience create differences in satisfaction.

 

H4: Travel cost and job accessibility

H₀: There is no significant relationship between commuting cost and employment accessibility.

H₁: Higher commuting costs are significantly associated with lower effective employment accessibility.

The expected relationship is potentially negative: when commuting becomes excessively expensive, workers may reject otherwise suitable jobs located farther from home.

However, correlation alone cannot establish causality; factors such as wages, distance and worker occupation should also be considered.

 

31.6 Multiple Regression Model

A stronger empirical model would explain Worker Job Accessibility through multiple transport characteristics.

Dependent variable

Worker Job Accessibility

Independent variables

commuting fare;

travel time;

waiting time;

service frequency;

reliability;

shift compatibility;

last-mile connectivity;

safety.

Conceptually:

Job Accessibility = f (Fare, Travel Time, Waiting Time, Frequency, Reliability, Shift Compatibility, Connectivity, Safety)

The regression would identify which variables remain important when the other factors are considered simultaneously.

For example, if travel time remains statistically significant after controlling for fare and reliability, the research could conclude that time cost—not merely monetary cost—is an important constraint on industrial-worker mobility.

31.7 Chi-Square Analysis

A chi-square test can examine categorical relationships such as:

Income group × Transport mode

Employment type × Transport mode

Shift type × Shared-bus dependence

Gender × Perceived safety category

Factory location × Preferred transport mode

For example, the analysis could determine whether low-income workers are disproportionately dependent upon shared buses and e-rickshaws.

The important point is that the research should report not only the p-value, but also the strength of association, preferably using an appropriate effect-size measure such as Cramér's V.

 

31.8 ANOVA: Comparing the Transport Ecosystem

ANOVA can compare mean scores across multiple transport modes.

For example:

Transport mode	Mean satisfaction
Metro	To be calculated from actual survey
BRTS/iBus	To be calculated
City bus	To be calculated
Shared worker bus	To be calculated
E-rickshaw	To be calculated
Private vehicle	To be calculated

No numerical result should be inserted until the survey is actually conducted.

If ANOVA shows a significant difference, post-hoc testing can identify which specific transport groups differ from each other.

 

31.9 Factor Analysis: Discovering the Hidden Dimensions of Mobility

Factor analysis can be particularly valuable because workers may rate many individual characteristics, but these characteristics may represent a smaller number of underlying dimensions.

For example, 20 questionnaire items could potentially produce factors such as:

Factor 1 – Economic Accessibility

fare;

affordability;

income burden;

value for money.

Factor 2 – Operational Reliability

frequency;

punctuality;

waiting time;

service availability.

Factor 3 – Passenger Security

safety;

crowding;

driver behaviour;

night-time security.

Factor 4 – Employment Connectivity

factory access;

shift compatibility;

last-mile connectivity;

route coverage.

This would strengthen the theoretical contribution of the paper because it could reveal what workers actually mean when they describe a transport service as "good" or "bad."

 

31.10 Mediation Analysis: A More Advanced Research Model

A particularly interesting extension is to investigate whether transport affects employment indirectly through commuting burden.

The proposed relationship is:

Transport affordability

↓

Lower commuting burden

↓

Greater willingness to accept distant employment

↓

Higher job accessibility

This would provide a deeper explanation than a simple transport-mode comparison.

Similarly:

Transport reliability

↓

Reduced lateness/absenteeism

↓

Better employment stability

This could connect transport research directly with industrial human-resource management.

 

31.11 Comparative Pithampur–Dewas Analysis

The study should not treat Pithampur and Dewas as identical.

A comparative framework can examine:

Dimension	Pithampur	Dewas
Average distance from worker residence	Actual survey	Actual survey
Average travel time	Actual survey	Actual survey
Average daily cost	Actual survey	Actual survey
Dominant transport mode	Actual survey	Actual survey
Shift compatibility	Actual survey	Actual survey
Last-mile difficulty	Actual survey	Actual survey
Worker satisfaction	Actual survey	Actual survey
Job accessibility	Actual survey	Actual survey

This comparison could reveal whether industrial geography creates different mobility requirements even within the same regional labour market.

 

31.12 The Most Important Proposed Test

The central empirical question of the paper should ultimately be:

Does affordable shared transport increase access to industrial employment?

This can be tested by constructing an Employment Accessibility Score and comparing workers according to their primary transport mode and commuting burden.

If actual data demonstrate that workers with lower-cost and more reliable shared transport report greater ability to access distant jobs, the research will provide empirical support for the proposition that:

Shared transport is an economic input into the labour market.

 

31.13 Expected Research Contribution

The empirical extension can make five important contributions.

1. Transport contribution

It challenges the assumption that metro and BRTS automatically make informal/shared transport irrelevant.

2. Labour-economics contribution

It demonstrates that commuting cost and travel time influence the geographical accessibility of employment.

3. Industrial-management contribution

It connects worker mobility with absenteeism, punctuality, employee retention and factory operations.

4. Urban-planning contribution

It demonstrates the importance of integrating formal mass transit with flexible feeder and worker transport.

5. Social-policy contribution

It highlights the importance of affordable transport for lower-income households whose employment opportunities depend upon daily commuting.

 

31.14 Proposed Final Analytical Framework

The complete research model can therefore be represented as:

Transport Infrastructure

Metro + BRTS + City Bus + Shared Bus + E-rickshaw + Auto

↓

Transport Characteristics

Fare + Time + Frequency + Reliability + Safety + Connectivity

↓

Commuting Burden

Money + Time + Waiting + Stress

↓

Worker Mobility

Mode Choice + Accessibility + Shift Compatibility

↓

Employment Outcomes

Job Access + Punctuality + Absenteeism + Retention

↓

Industrial Outcomes

Labour Availability + Productivity + Competitiveness

↓

Regional Economic Development

Indore ↔ Pithampur ↔ Dewas

 

31.15 Final Research Position

The proposed empirical study should ultimately test a simple but powerful proposition:

A modern transport system is not necessarily a system in which old modes disappear; it is a system in which different modes perform different economic functions.

The metro may provide the high-capacity trunk.

BRTS may provide the structured corridor.

City buses may provide urban and peripheral connectivity.

E-rickshaws may provide last-mile access.

And Rao/Dewas-type shared buses may provide the worker-oriented industrial connection.

The research therefore moves beyond the question of "old transport versus modern transport."

Its real question is:

How can every layer of Indore's transport system work together to reduce the cost of reaching a job?

That question gives the paper a much stronger transport economics + labour economics + urban management research orientation.

 

References

Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad. Indore City Bus Transport Service (A/B). The cases document the collapse of organised urban transport in the late 1990s and the subsequent role of minibuses, tempos and auto-rickshaws.

NIUA/EMBARQ. Bus Karo – Guidebook on Planning and Operations, including the Indore case and historical ICTSL fare structure.

Times of India. iBus fares fixed, minimum is 5, maximum 15, 2013.

Free Press Journal. AICTSL Revises Bus Fare Structure, 2024.

Historical account of Indore's transition from tanga to tempo and later transport modes.