Benefits of transport subsidisation: Comparing findings from a customer perception survey and Most Significant Change Technique interviews

Abstract

BackgroundPre-1994 spatial development policies that separated racial groups into geographically segregated neighbourhoods left South Africa with sprawling cities that increase the cost of public service delivery. Low-density areas in cities make transport networks extremely inefficient, resulting in high transport costs and long commuting hours, according to the Government Technical Advisory Centre (Republic of South Africa 2013:1), which has determined that '[t]he higher costs, combined with affordability constraints, mean that passenger fares tend to cover a smaller proportion of the operating costs of public transport in South African cities'. To cover operating cost, government spent nearly R140 billion on public transport subsidies in major cities between 2012and 2016 (Republic of South Africa 2013. Subsidisation is mostly through the conditional Public Transport Operations Grant (PTOG) that 'subsidise public transport services in poor communities thus making these services accessible and affordable' (Republic of South Africa 2017:112).The Western Cape Department of Transport and Public Works (DTPW) 'is responsible for the management and administration of road-based subsidised public transport and the associated PTOG allocation' (Western Cape Government 2017a:52). Department of Transport and Public Works applies the PTOG to subsidise bus services in the City of Cape Town through financial support to Golden Arrow Bus Services (GABS) (Western Cape Government 2017a). Golden Arrow Background: An evaluation of a transport subsidisation programme in the Western Cape, South Africa, was undertaken to capture the outcomes and benefits of the service from the perspective of the bus user.Objectives: The objective of this article was to compare the findings from the adopted parallel mixed-methods design that included a perception survey and the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique. The article presented the advantages of each approach and reflected on the benefits and challenges in applying the MSC technique.Method: Data on the intended outcomes of the Provincial Transport Operations Grant programme were collected from 458 commuters on four bus routes through a structured close-ended questionnaire. The MSC technique was applied to collect 69 stories of change that captured changes regarded as most significant by beneficiaries of the public transport subsidy.Results: It was found that the survey better captured the intended and predetermined objectives of the programme, while the large response group allowed for comparisons and cross-tabulations. The MSC interviews better captured the real-life experience of participants and identified the benefits most valued by commuters, including outcomes not specifically anticipated by the programme. It also served to clarify contradicting responses or ratings on the closed-ended questionnaire and informed further bivariate analysis of the structured questionnaire data. Conclusion:To maximise benefits from the MSC technique, sufficient time is needed to solicit value responses f...

Remotely and collaboratively evaluating a campus-based therapy dog program during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…First, we found that the technique was suitable once adjusted to meet the time-sensitive evaluation needs of the small-scale [program]. Some evaluators suggest that the technique is not appropriate for time-sensitive evaluations ( Serrat, 2010 , Rabie and Burger, 2019 ), as time is essential to have discussions with multiple groups of program stakeholders and to repeat the process as required. In our case, one round of significant change data was sufficient to investigate potential outcomes of the newly remote program.…”

Evaluating a peer-led wellbeing programme for doctors-in-training during the COVID-19 pandemic in Victoria, Australia, using the Most Significant Change technique

“…Fundamentally a narrative method, MSC garners rich qualitative data and is more complex than it seems ( Willetts & Crawford, 2007 ). While sometimes used as a sole evaluation tool (see, for example, Aisiri et al, 2020 ), triangulation with quantitative methods is strongly recommended ( Davies & Dart, 2005 ; Ho et al, 2015 ; Rabie & Burger, 2019 ).…”

“…Even so, MSC has been widely applied to evaluation projects within Australia and internationally; however, the majority are described in grey literature, which can be difficult to access ( Tonkin et al, 2021 ; Willetts & Crawford, 2007 ). Some examples appearing in academic publications include a professional development initiative for Australian teachers ( Heck & Sweeney, 2013 ); customer perceptions of a transport subsidisation programme in South Africa ( Rabie & Burger, 2019 ); and water and sanitation projects in Laos ( Willetts & Crawford, 2007 ).…”

Towards ecological and social impact through collaborative governance of a seascape of marine protected areas in Honduras

“…Given the profusion of sites and organizations involved in the project, an adapted version of the most significant change participatory interview method was used to capture the perceptions of the individuals and organizations involved. This method involves the collection of stories from those involved in the fieldwork (Davies & Dart, 2005) and has been used as a monitoring and evaluation tool to facilitate inclusive project reflection, learning and adaptation in diverse disciplines, including conservation (Wilder & Walpole, 2008), development (Kraft & Prytherch, 2016) and government policy delivery (Rabie & Burger, 2019).…”