Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 45 Public Attitude to Urban Public Transportation Services in Jember, Indonesia Willy Kriswardhana1,*, Nunung Nuring Hayati2, Achmad Reza Kusdiyanto1 1 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Jember, Jember, 68121, Indonesia 2 Urban and Regional Planning Study Program, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Jember, Jember, 68121, Indonesia *willy.teknik@unej.ac.id Received 28-02-2022; accepted 03-04-20221 Abstract. In this current condition, people’s interest in using public transportation in Jember is decreasing with a low load factor value below 50%. It can be caused by the quality of services provided by service providers to the satisfaction of public transport users. This study aims to examine the users’ satisfaction and investigate the willingness to pay (WTP) for public transport services in Jember. Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) method is used to determine the level of satisfaction of public transport users in Jember District. The descriptive statistics are performed to understand the WTP value. The satisfaction level of public transport users is obtained from several attributes that belong to the Cartesian diagram. The attributes that need improvement are the punctuality of the services, providing a sense of security and comfort and first aid facilities. The user's WTP is Rp.4,000.00 - Rp.5,000.00. Directions for future studies are presented. Keywords: customer satisfaction, public transport, service quality, willingness to pay 1. Introduction Urban public transportation is a transport mode needed to support economic activities and urban development. Urban transportation services must be implemented efficiently and effectively. The criteria for fast, safe, adequate capacity, convenience, and affordable transportation fares need to be considered in implementing good services of urban public transport. The facilities of public transport such as stops for boarding and dropping passengers that could be at any place and existing routes make this an advantage and one of the attractions for service users, unlike public transportation such as buses that have specific stops [1]. The decline in the quality of urban public transportation services is partly due to the less than optimal service from service providers [2]. Public transportation in Jember is one of the means of mobility for the community to meet the needs of daily life. Urban public transportation in the form of Lyn (8 seaters car) serves 17 1 Cite this as: Kriswardhana, W., Hayati, N.N., & Kusdiyanto, A.R. (2022). Public Attitude to Urban Public Transportation Services in Jember, Indonesia. Civil and Environmental Science Journal (Civense), 5(1), 45-54. doi: https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.civense.2022.00501.5 Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 46 transportation routes [3]. A study in Jember [4] stated that public transportation in Jember had a load factor of 50% in 2015. Based on the criteria contained in SK 678/AJ.206/DRJD/2002 concerning Technical Guidelines for the Implementation of Public Transportation in Urban Areas, public transport routes should be fixed and regular. Based on Department of Transportation Jember data, 80% of the urban public transportation system in Jember needs to be improved. Public interest decreased due to the fleet that was not feasible to operate. High investment costs and low potential demand make many unmaintained fleet conditions [5]. The tariffs for public transport in Jember currently are IDR 5,000 for the public and IDR 2,500 for students. The determination of the basic tariff should be calculated based on Willingness to Pay (WTP). The correct calculation was expected to produce urban transportation fares that are reasonably fair for producers and consumers so that urban transportation becomes the primary choice of transportation means. The cause of the poor condition of public transport is the insufficient level of service provided by providers. This condition leads to the low satisfaction of public transport users. Some factors affect the satisfaction of public transportation users, such as reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangible. Efforts to increase the interest of public transport users in Jember Regency need to be carried out to solve the existing transportation problems. Therefore, this study aims to determine the level of service quality and the factors that influence the interest of service users and the suitability of transportation fares based on WTP. This study contributes to the public transport study in two notable ways. First, to date, there is no study examining the public transport services performance from the user’s point of view in Jember. Second, in terms of survey technique, besides letting respondents filled the survey by themselves, we conducted several online meetings to guide some respondents in completing the questionnaire. This technique also beneficial to extract more information from respondents, especially when we use open questions in the survey. 2. Material and Methods Jember is the third biggest city in East Java Province, Indonesia. Based on the Indonesian Statistics data, Jember’s population in 2015 was 2.409 million. Jember has an area of 3.293 km2. This city has an urban public transport system called “lyn”. The performance of the urban public transport system is low due to the massive ownership of two-wheeled motorized vehicles, the popularity of the ride- hailing system, and the inadequate condition of supporting facilities. Therefore, Jember has been chosen as a case study. 2.1. Data Collection Method Data needed in this research is primary data. The primary data was obtained directly from the field by distributing questionnaires to service users. A total of 400 respondents participated in this survey— the first section of the questionnaire mainly contained socio-demographic characteristics. In the second part, respondents were asked to indicate their preferences towards the service quality of public transportation in Jember. This section required respondents to rate the importance and performance of service quality using a five-points Likert scale. Then, an open question regarding how much they are willing to pay for the service was asked. 2.2. Data Analysis Data analysis is carried out using Importance Performance Analysis (IPA). IPA is a tool in analyzing the performance of services provided with the level of satisfaction or expectations of users. The results of the comparison are in the form of conformity levels, which will later determine the priority scale in handling service improvements. IPA uses the performance and importance plotting of attributes scored by users into four quadrants: Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 47 • Quadrant 1: Low performance – High importance: attributes in this group show primary weaknesses. Users find these attributes essential. Thus, the organization should improve these attributes to raise the user’s satisfaction. • Quadrant 2: High performance – High performance: attributes falling to this category show major strength that has exceeded the standard performance level. Users find these attributes important, and they are satisfied with the performances. • Quadrant 3: Low performance – Low importance: attributes in this class show a low level of performance. However, these attributes are not too important, and they do not threaten an organization. • Quadrant 4: High performance – Low importance: attributes falling to this category have low potential to level up users' satisfaction. Although these attributes have high performances, users do not regard them as essential. The IPA method has been extensively used to investigate the user’s satisfaction towards transportation services. A study in Iran [6] use IPA to investigate the service attributes of the bus. This study argues that the policymakers should improve the comfort attributes such as cleanliness, ventilation, and facilities for disabled people and the elderly. Another study in Aceh [7] shows that there are several attributes that needed to be improved, such as arrival time punctuality, waiting time, passenger assistance, and available seats. Meanwhile, Ratnasari et al. [8] uses IPA method to examine users’ satisfaction toward railway station performance. Service attributes are obtained from the selection process with the general criteria needed by the community regarding existing public transportation services with a servsqual approach. There are eleven service attributes that are included in 5 variable dimensions with symbols. Table 1. Attributes of Public Transportation Services in Jember Dimension Symbol Statements Reliability A Places of the arrival of public transportation match the route B A stop (hop on/off) closes to the main road C Punctuality of arrival or departure of public transport matches the schedule Responsiveness D The speed of driver responds to complaints from transportation service users E The speed of the driver responds to an emergency on the way Assurance F The driver provides a sense of security and comfort while travelling G Availability of accident/safety insurance Empathy H The friendliness of the driver on the trip I The willingness of the driver to serve if a problem occurs on the way Tangible J Availability of good roads along the route K Availability of health facilities/ first aid in public transportation 3. Result and Discussion Table 2 provides a summary of the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. We have a balanced sampling of gender. More than half of respondents have senior high school education qualifications (65%) and are students (68%). This finding matches with the trip purpose where 59% of them are trip for school. Most of the respondents have income under IDR 1,000,000. Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 48 Table 2. Socio-demographic characteristics Characteristics Number of respondents Percentage Gender Male 198 50% Female 202 50% Age 10 – 18 years 53 13% 19 – 27 years 263 66% 28 – 36 years 36 9% 37 – 45 years 21 5% > 46 years 27 7% Education Junior high school 14 4% Senior high school 261 65% Vocational degree 37 9% Bachelor’s degree 85 21% Postgraduate degree 2 1% Occupation Student 270 68% Civil servant 25 6% Private sector 48 12% Entrepreneurship 45 11% Trip purpose Work/business 73 18% Family business 41 10% School 234 59% Leisure 45 11% Income (million) < IDR 1 231 58% IDR 1 – 2 54 13% IDR 2 – 3 47 12% IDR 3 – 4 43 11% IDR 4 – 5 19 5% > IDR 5 6 1% 3.1. Validity and Reliability Test The validity and reliability tests are used to determine whether the data collected is valid or not by matching the calculated r-arithmetic, Cronbach α and r-tables. The validity test is obtained by correlating each attribute score with the sum of the overall attribute scores offered. Suppose the results of the number of attribute scores are significantly correlated with the results of each attribute. In that case, the interpretation of the attribute values can be said to be successful (Table 3). The level of consistency of answers to questions that have been given to respondents can be known after conducting a reliability test. The results of the questionnaire can be said to be consistent if the reliability testing is completed. Reliability test is the level of accuracy, precision, and service attributes. Service attributes can be declared reliable or trustworthy if the Cronbach α > 0.7 [9] (Table 4). Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 49 Table 3. Validity Test of Service Attribute Expectation and Performance Attributes r table Expectation Performance r arithmetic Explanation r arithmetic Explanation A 0.098 0.593 Valid 0.695 Valid B 0.098 0.662 Valid 0.669 Valid C 0.098 0.599 Valid 0.744 Valid D 0.098 0.538 Valid 0.733 Valid E 0.098 0.641 Valid 0.754 Valid F 0.098 0.577 Valid 0.668 Valid G 0.098 0.612 Valid 0.711 Valid H 0.098 0.672 Valid 0.739 Valid I 0.098 0.69 Valid 0.761 Valid J 0.098 0.682 Valid 0.733 Valid K 0.098 0.48 Valid 0.681 Valid Table 4. Reliability Test of Service Attribute Expectation and Performance Attributes Expectation Performance Cronbach α Explanation Cronbach α Explanation A 0.734 Reliable 0.754 Reliable B 0.729 Reliable 0.753 Reliable C 0.734 Reliable 0.748 Reliable D 0.737 Reliable 0.750 Reliable E 0.730 Reliable 0.749 Reliable F 0.737 Reliable 0.751 Reliable G 0.733 Reliable 0.748 Reliable H 0.729 Reliable 0.750 Reliable I 0.726 Reliable 0.750 Reliable J 0.731 Reliable 0.748 Reliable K 0.740 Reliable 0.749 Reliable 3.2. User Satisfaction Analysis of Public Transport Services in Jember User satisfaction of public transport services is obtained from the level of importance (expectations) and performance levels by interviewing respondents. After obtaining the results, the actions to improve the service attributes can be determined (Table 5). The value of the highest level of importance for the service attribute is that the driver provides a sense of security and comfort with the symbol F, while the value of the level of importance for the smallest attribute is the speed with which the driver responds to complaints from service users with the symbol D. The average value of importance and level of performance is used to determine the coordinates of the Cartesian diagram. The coordinates of each attribute have an effect on determining the grouping of the four quadrants of the Cartesian diagram. On the X-axis, the quadrant axis value is obtained at the point of 2.5236, and on the Y-axis, the quadrant axis value is 3.5806. The average value is obtained from the sum of the average values of X and the average of Y divided by the number of service attributes. Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 50 Table 5. Average Value of Interest Level and Performance Level A tt ri b u te s ∑ X ∑ Y A v e ra g e o f X A v e ra g e o f Y A 1120 1443 2.8 3.6075 B 1084 1440 2.71 3.6 C 984 1454 2.46 3.635 D 1010 1377 2.525 3.4425 E 1049 1413 2.6225 3.5325 F 915 1500 2.2875 3.75 G 1040 1442 2.6 3.605 I 1056 1398 2.64 3.495 J 1010 1440 2.525 3.6 K 754 1433 1.885 3.5825 Table 6. Conformity Rate Value A tt ri b u te s ∑ X ∑ Y C o n fo rm it y R a te P e rc e n ta g e (% ) A 1120 1443 0.7762 77.62 B 1084 1440 0.7528 75.28 C 984 1454 0.6768 67.68 D 1010 1377 0.7335 73.35 E 1049 1413 0.7424 74.24 F 915 1500 0.6100 61.00 G 1040 1442 0.7212 72.12 H 1082 1415 0.7647 76.47 I 1056 1398 0.7554 75.54 J 1010 1440 0.7014 70.14 K 754 1433 0.5262 52.62 The priority order of service improvements to achieve user satisfaction is determined by the percentage value of the level of service attribute conformity (Table 6). Next, we compared the value of the level of conformity with the value of the decision-making score. If the results of the level of conformity have a lower value than the value of the decision- making score, the attribute needs to be treated with improvement (action); if the result of the level of conformity is higher, then the attribute needs to be maintained its performance (hold). Table 7. Result of Hold and Action Attribute Conformity Level (%) Decision Score Hold and Action A 77.6161 70.5488 Hold B 75.2778 Hold C 67.6754 Action D 73.3479 Hold E 74.2392 Hold F 61.0000 Action G 72.1220 Hold H 76.4664 Hold I 75.5365 Hold J 70.1389 Action K 52.6169 Action In Table 7, the results of hold and action are obtained from each attribute of public transportation services. Attributes A, B, D, E, G, H, and I with hold results mean that attributes with a level of conformity above the decision score need to be maintained or service quality improved. While attributes C, F, and J with a level of conformity below the decision score need improvement. In Figure 1, we get a Cartesian diagram with four quadrants and the position of the attribute points of each quadrant. There are attributes C, F, and K in quadrant I, which means that the service attributes Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 51 need improvements. In quadrant II, attributes A, B, G, and J mean that the service attributes are classified as good performance and high importance, so they need to be maintained. In quadrant IV, attributes D, E, H, and I mean that the service attributes are classified as having good performance but are not considered essential by service users. Figure 1. Cartesian Diagram of Public Transport Service Attributes Figure 2. Gap Between Performance and Importance It can be seen from figure 2 that the value of the importance level of all service attributes is on average 1,400 while the value of the performance level of all service attributes is on average 1 ,000. Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 52 This shows that all service attributes are considered important by users. All attributes are considered to have poor performance. 3.3. Public Transport Fare Based on WTP WTP analysis was conducted to determine the willingness of passengers to pay fares with service facilities provided by the owner or driver of urban public transportation. In the questionnaire, there are several choices of public transportation fares offered to range from IDR 2,000 to IDR 6,000. Users have the freedom to choose the tariff according to their willingness to pay for the services. Figure 3. WTP for Public Transport Services The fare based on the WTP survey for urban public transport passengers in Jember Regency is IDR 4,000 – IDR 5,000. The largest percentage of passengers chose willingness to pay range in accordance with the current urban public transport operating fare, which is IDR 5,000. This proves that the suitability of the current tariff is still considered good by passengers. 3.4. Discussion and Policy Implications Attributes that need improvements are the punctuality of departure and arrival of the services, the safety and comfort, and the first aid facility in the public transportation. Public transportation services in most developing countries are unreliable and do not have a fixed schedule. A study in Malaysia [10] argues that reliability (e.g. punctuality, frequency) is essential in choosing transport modes. This study also states that the safety factor is a major concern and needs to be improved to increase users' satisfaction with bus services. This aligns with a study in Amman, Jordan [10] which states that the safety of travel on public transportation is the most important factor needing improvement. In this study, many attributes are classified into quadrants II and IV. Places of arrival attribute found to be classified in quadrant II. It indicates that customers do really care about the arrival places of the public transport, as long as the services are running on their routes, customers will be satisfied. This condition explains the condition of public transport in most developing countries, where public transport can stop everywhere at the customers' request. Respondents also indicated that accident insurance is essential for them. This is aligned with a study in Bandung [11] which states that respondents do not agree to pay insurance premium although they know that it is important for them. Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 53 Meanwhile, driver’s response regarding speed complaints is not important. However, a study in Denmark [12] find that speeding is one factor that influences the bus accident severity level. Therefore, these attributes should be maintained well to increase the number of customers. Driver’s friendliness is also found to be less important for customers. Nevertheless, a study in Columbia [13] suggests that drivers' kindness is important and that authorities should train their BRT drivers and staff to improve communication skills. 4. Conclusions Using a case study in Jember, Indonesia, eleven public transport attributes were evaluated by performing IPA. The reliability and validity test showed that attributes used in this study were acceptable. IPA results indicated that transport agencies and policymakers should improve the punctuality of the arrival and departure schedule. The safety factor is one of the essential needs to be improved to raise the satisfaction of users towards the services. In addition, public transport providers should occupy their services with the first aid facilities. WTP survey showed that respondents were satisfied with the fares. Users are willing to pay in the range of IDR 4,000 – IDR 5,000. This value is relatively similar with the actual tariff of public transportation in Jember. This study's limitation is that the attributes used were extracted from the current regulation. Future studies can explore more attributes extracted from the previous studies, such as cleanliness [6] and vehicle safety against accidents [14], [15]. Furthermore, including fares as a factor to investigate the satisfaction of public transport users can be a good idea [16]. Other methods could give additional insights regarding the user’s satisfaction study towards transportation services, such as ordinal logistic regression [17], [18] and Important-Satisfaction Analysis [19]. References [1] M. H and L. B. Said, “Analisis Penyebab Penurunan Minat Pengguna Angkutan Umum Mikrolet Di Kota Makassar,” vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 94–101, 2020, doi: 10.31219/osf.io/mxy26. [2] A. Munawar, “Perencanaan Angkutan Umum Perkotaan Berkelanjutan,” Unisia, vol. 29, no. 59, pp. 53–59, 2006, doi: 10.20885/unisia.vol29.iss59.art2. [3] S. Sulistyono, J. W. Soetjipto, and W. Hariadi, “Analisis Tarif Angkutan Umum Kota Jember Berdasarkan Biaya Biaya Operasi Kendaraan (Bok) Dan Pendapatan,” Simp. XI FSTPT, Univ. Diponegoro, no. October, pp. 1–11, 2008. [4] N. N. Hayati, S. Sulistyono, and W. Sabiq, “Strategi Peningkatan Kinerja Trayek Utama Angkutan Umum Perkotaan Jember,” 18th FSTPT Int. Symp. Unila, Bandar Lampung, August 28th, 2015, 2015. [5] S. Sulistyono et al., “Kebijakan penataan jaringan trayek angkutan umum perkotaan jember,” vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 99–110, 2017. [6] J. Esmailpour, K. Aghabayk, M. Abrari Vajari, and C. De Gruyter, “Importance – Performance Analysis (IPA) of bus service attributes: A case study in a developing country,” Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., vol. 142, pp. 129–150, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/J.TRA.2020.10.020. [7] F. Fachrurrozy, E. Wulandari, and Y. Darma, “The study of the operation of Trans Koetaradja public bus transportation of the corridor II A and II B in Banda Aceh city,” in IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2020, vol. 933, no. 1, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/933/1/012021. [8] S. D. Ratnasari, W. Kriswardhana, and N. N. Hayati, “Evaluasi Standar Pelayanan Minimum dan Tingkat Kepuasan Penumpang di Stasiun Kereta Api Jember dengan Penerapan Sistem Boarding Pass,” J. Rekayasa Sipil dan Lingkung., vol. 1, no. 02, 2017, doi: 10.19184/jrsl.v1i02.6043. Civil and Environmental Science Journal Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 045-054, 2022 54 [9] I. Ghozali, “Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate Dengan Program IBM dan SPSS.,” in aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program ibm spss 19, 2011. [10] M. N. Borhan, A. N. Hakimi Ibrahim, D. Syamsunur, and R. A. Rahmat, “Why public bus is a less attractive mode of transport: A case study of Putrajaya, Malaysia,” Period. Polytech. Transp. Eng., vol. 47, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.3311/PPtr.9228. [11] T. B. JOEWONO and H. KUBOTA, “SAFETY AND SECURITY IMPROVEMENT IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BASED ON PUBLIC PERCEPTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES,” IATSS Res., vol. 30, no. 1, 2006, doi: 10.1016/s0386-1112(14)60159-x. [12] C. G. Prato and S. Kaplan, “Bus accident severity and passenger injury: Evidence from Denmark,” Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., vol. 6, no. 1, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s12544-013-0107-z. [13] L. Márquez, R. Pico, and V. Cantillo, “Understanding captive user behavior in the competition between BRT and motorcycle taxis,” Transp. Policy, vol. 61, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.10.003. [14] J. Allen, J. C. Muñoz, and J. Rosell, “Effect of a major network reform on bus transit satisfaction,” Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., vol. 124, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.04.002. [15] J. Allen, L. Eboli, C. Forciniti, G. Mazzulla, and J. de D. Ortúzar, “The role of critical incidents and involvement in transit satisfaction and loyalty,” Transp. Policy, vol. 75, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.01.005. [16] C. Zhang, Y. Liu, W. Lu, and G. Xiao, “Evaluating passenger satisfaction index based on PLS- SEM model: Evidence from Chinese public transport service,” Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract., vol. 120, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.12.013. [17] G. C. L. Bezerra and C. F. Gomes, “The effects of service quality dimensions and passenger characteristics on passenger’s overall satisfaction with an airport,” J. Air Transp. Manag., vol. 44–45, pp. 77–81, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.03.001. [18] W. Kriswardhana, N. N. Hayati, and R. Septiana Desy, “Passenger satisfaction with railway station service quality: An Ordinal Logistic Regression approach,” in MATEC Web of Conferences, 2018, vol. 181, doi: 10.1051/matecconf/201818107001. [19] R. C. P. Wong, W. Y. Szeto, L. Yang, Y. C. Li, and S. C. Wong, “Elderly users’ level of satisfaction with public transport services in a high-density and transit-oriented city,” J. Transp. Heal., vol. 7, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2017.10.004.