On November 21, the Korean National Assembly passed a bill that makes taxis a mode of public transport. Since then, around 47,000 buses all over the country have gone on strike, demanding the Assembly to modify the bill. However, taxi drivers welcome the new law as they were suffering from low profits due to high oil prices. The KAIST Herald delves deeper into the issue.

Pro: Last Mile Covered and Increased System Efficiency With Proper Implementation
By Paulo Kemper

I personally do not like taxis. The reason is that the person who is driving it benefits from me being inside of it, the longer the better. And the driver can deny or complain for the whole duration of a trip if I decide to go to a destination that is not to his liking, being it too close or not too popular. I do admit, however, that they are cheaper in many ways and, in most cases, are very convenient, especially for people like me who do not have their own car but have to go to places that public transportation cannot reach. While I am not aware of the implementation details for including taxis as part of the public transportation grid, I can see potential benefits for the direct users, the indirect users (private drivers), and the whole transportation system itself, and thereby, I support this policy.

The public transportation of Daejeon, although existent, has problems: mass transport is optimized to minimize implementation costs, maximize usage, and cover most of the users, but is not convenient for every user. In the system, the more the users of mass transportation mode, the more efficient it becomes and the less the traffic. To gather more users, the lines have to pass through several interest points. In most cases, that path does not mean a straight line, which means that single users need to involuntarily sacrifice their own benefit (such as a shorter travel time) for a better system performance. While the combination of buses and subways is substantially cheaper, very convenient, and may even shorten the travel length, the series of transfers and eventual “first/last mile” to the bus stops or subway stations are usually a huge hassle for people who are carrying heavy, bulky items or are short of time. Thus, unless there is enough demand, such as in Tokyo, it is highly unlikely that the public transportation grid will cover most spots with time-efficient routes.

On the other hand, Korea has a very interesting taxi system: it is cheap and has good quality. The taxi drivers, as profit-oriented entities, communicate among themselves and usually are already positioned at or fairly close to areas in which their services are required, and can also drive you straight to the doorstep of your destination. Should a taxi be requested at a specific location, in most cases a simple call to the company will arrange a taxi to be delivered to right where you are within minutes. However, again as profit-oriented entities, it is to their interest to maximize your usage, which sometimes means purposely choosing longer routes or going through traffic, possibly leading to overall transportation system inefficiency and user encumbrance.

However, if the driver had a commitment to minimize the time you will spend inside his vehicle (i.e. he does not benefit anything from having or not having a passenger), he might as well direct you in more efficient routes. Better yet, making taxis a part of the public transportation discount for multi-modal usage could motivate users to take mass transits in between taxis. Users could also be motivated to share rides with strangers. For example, a public taxi could drive you towards the nearest subway station, where you could transfer onto the next mass transport with no additional costs (it is covered by the taxi fare), and at your destination, you are able to take another cab at a discounted rate because a stranger who is going to the same destination is boarding with you. The taxi would avoid high-traffic zones and congestion would be minimized while the mass transportation system would see an increase in its usage and a decrease in travel time.

As mentioned earlier, public taxis have great potential if implemented correctly. Having the taxi drivers receiving a regular salary, such as bus drivers, so that it is no longer correlated with the time users spend in their vehicle, and having the taxi fare system integrated with the mass transportation are probably beneficial policies for everyone. Of course, there should be some cost penalty to users who choose taxis over buses or trains so that they are motivated to continue the use of mass transportation. The benefits of multi-modal travel, be it reduction of time of population on transit, reduction of pollutant emission, or increased energy efficiency, are very attractive to the society as a whole and thus, such policies should be implemented and improved as soon as possible.

Con: The True Meaning of Public Transportation
By Ah Hyun Kim

The most common transportation KAIST students use is probably taxis, as our campus is situated in a somewhat isolated location. Furthermore, even to use the subway, a cheaper means of transportation, one has to first take a cab to reach the nearest subway station. And as a student who commonly uses taxis as transportation, I can relate to the many complaints regarding the service, such as high cost and the reluctance of drivers toward certain customers. Comparing them with buses, the other commonly used transportation means, it is hard to comprehend taxis as public transportation.

First, taxis are not qualified as public transportations. The common features of public transportation are low prices, capacity to accommodate numerous people at once, and availability to anyone and everyone who can afford to pay for the service. Furthermore, the efficiency in saving energy and reducing traffic jams is also an important advantage that public transportation provides. Basically, public transportation is a service for the majority. However, taxis cannot be a service for the majority. Most importantly, the price is considered to be too expensive for the majority of people. Also, a single taxi can accommodate only four people at most, which explains its impracticability as a public transportation. In addition, it does not save energy or reduce pollution, nor does it relieve traffic jams. Rather, it enhances the turbulence of traffic. Moreover, there is no transferring system like other public transportations and, lastly, taxi services have the issue of refusing passengers. It is against the law for a public transportation driver to refuse customers, but taxis can do so easily. They tend to avoid passengers who are disabled, old, with lots of luggage, or traveling short distances. This significantly contributes to the dissatisfaction of passengers. It goes not only against the law, but it also goes against the true meaning of public transportation, which is that it should be equally open to all people. As stated above, taxis are not qualified as public transportation.

In addition, taxis as public transportation will bring much inconvenience to bus users. Public transportation is maintained through financial aid from the government. As a result, if taxis are registered as public transportation, either the budget for the other public transportations will decrease, causing rises in either the transportation fee or taxes to supplement the divided budget. This causes inconveniences for bus passengers, who mostly feel uncomfortable with high cost of taxi services, because they are contributing to help taxi passengers pay for the fee without any returning benefits. Furthermore, if taxis become public transportation, it is likely that exclusive bus lanes will be shared. The bus lanes were made to reduce the time interval between the buses and to help buses arrive on time. The increased influx of vehicles using the bus lane will nullify all the advantages of having bus lanes in the first place, causing more inconvenience for bus passengers. Changes are important, but if the change damages the previously existing state, it may be better to stick with the old way. Therefore, taxis should not be made as a mode of public transportation.

The true meaning of public transportation arises in its service for all people. There should not be any passengers who get refused or who cannot afford to pay for the transportation because it is too expensive. Moreover, the current advantages of efficiency in transporting many people at once, saving energy, reducing air pollution, and solving traffic jams cannot be ignored. In so many ways, taxis do not qualify as public transportation, and the change can make it inconvenient for the other public transportation users. To conclude, taxis should not be changed to public transportations.