Many cities in the world are searching for ways to address their urban transportation challenges (Adebambo & Adebayo 2009:106–199) ranging from traffic congestion to road safety and environmental issues (Mobereola 2009). Modern viable alternative transportation options have grown in recent years to include BRT systems (Adebambo & Adebayo 2009). This system is defined by Levinson et al. (2003:10–26) as ‘a flexible, rubber-tired form of rapid transit that combines stations, vehicles, running ways and information technology elements into an integrated system with a strong identity’. A BRT system integrates flexibility and low-cost features and continues to exhibit modernity and technology in comparison to the minibus taxi (Mfinanga & Ochieng 2006:35–52); the advantage of the BRT system over a minibus taxi is, inter alia, the operation of longer buses on dedicated bus lanes, thereby offering passengers a regular, faster, safer and congestion-free drive (Hensher, Stopher & Bullock 2003:499–517). Rapid transit is not a mode of transport; it is a means or system of mass transportation that provides a faster service than available alternatives, mostly with a mean speed of 50 km/h or more and with a dedicated right of way (Iles 2005:25–26). The BRT system is operating successfully around the world (International Association of Public Transport [UITP] 2010) in cities such as Lagos, São Paulo, Johannesburg, Curitiba, Bogota, Beijing, Los Angeles and Taipei and continues to show that with functional and successful implementation, it can become a quality mass transit system (Adebambo & Adebayo 2009) that is capable of serving daily travel needs at affordable rate to commuters (UITP 2010). However, the challenge lies in the fundamental development of an affordable BRT system that will not only meet transit objectives, but will do so without sacrificing service quality and commuter satisfaction.

The population of the City of Johannesburg is 4.4 million (Statistics South Africa 2012a:2–10) and an analysis of commuter uptake of the BRT system in Johannesburg reveals it is higher than most of the cities in Table 1, including Cape Town. In Johannesburg, the BRT is called ‘Rea Vaya’ and figures from ticket sales between January 2009 and July 2010 show a significant increase in ridership, with Traffic Management Technologies of South Africa recording total ticket sales of 548 175, whilst the independent vendors ticket sales stood at 414 800 (Greuning 2012). The combined monthly ticket sales for this period was 962 975, which is three times more than the average monthly sales trend relative to other cities in South Africa. Currently, more than 40 000 commuters travel on Rea Vaya daily, bringing the total ridership to 1.2 million per month.

However, it is important to note that the information and references to ridership in this study provide an overview of the BRT system in some cities and should not be taken necessarily as an ‘apple-to-apple’ comparative analysis, because of, inter alia, variation in population density, distance of transport corridors and the urbanisation profile of the various cities. It does, however, serve to stimulate policymakers that BRT is an efficient transport system that can be used as a viable alternative transport in African cities.

In 2007, the City of Cape Town announced the introduction of a new bus service (Eichhom 2013). This was necessitated by, inter alia, Cape Town's role as one of the host cities of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, as City administrators pondered that match-day transportation requirements were crucial as a host city. Consequently, a huge capital injection by the National Treasury provided the financial base (MyCiTi 2013). The first phase of the system assisted the City to meet the public transport requirements for hosting the World Cup. Whilst this initial work is primarily a BRT system, it is also tailored in a way that emphasises the need for integration with other modes of transport, with emphases on rail, which is regarded as the pillar of public transport in Cape Town and South Africa in general (MyCiTi 2013).

In line with the integrated public transport network model that is supported by the National Land Transport Act (Act No. 5 of 2009) (Republic of South Africa 2009), the City of Cape Town was inspired and motivated to not only improve public transport, but to transform the sector totally. Since 2007, the City of Cape Town has been working on the initial phase of an IRT system in Cape Town (MyCiTi 2013), which is aimed at significantly improving public transport in the ‘Mother City’. The commencement of this IRT system was the dedicated work on the MyCiTi BRT system (City of Cape Town 2013:40–43) and the City continues implementing the MyCiTi bus service in phases. The first IRT construction contract was awarded on the 06 October 2008 (City of Cape Town 2010). Planned phase 1A is divided into four milestones, with November 2013 as the projected completion timeline, whilst the phase 1B projected completion date is October 2014, subject to availability of funding (City of Cape Town 2012).

The concept of service quality has been broadly applied to the public transport system and defined as commuters’ perception of how well a particular transport service meets or exceeds their expectation (Nandan & Geetika 2010:97–112). Service quality in the public transport sector can be measured in relationship with customer's expectations, perceptions, satisfaction and attitude (Litman 2008:43–62); it encompasses several topics such as comfort inside and outside of the vehicle, journey duration and the existence of infrastructural support systems (Currie 2005:41–53).

A holistic approach to service quality improvement in the public transport system is required, particularly in the identification of customer's needs and priorities, including use of complaints and feedback to evaluate necessary service quality indicators (Dell'Olio, Ibeas & Cecin 2010:388–396). Public transport usually competes with other modes of transportation (Currie 2005:41–53) and will definitely be utilised if it can meet the expectations of the commuters, specifically if it can deliver the accessible, safe, affordable and reliable service it claims to provide (Stradling et al. 2007:283–289).

A review of literature on public transport quality indicates that service quality in the public transport sector reflects commuters’ perceptions of the transport system's performance (Hensher et al. 2003; Wallis & Currie 2008). In a journey, commuters generally have a choice between modes of transport, each with unique features interwoven with pros and cons (Garling 2005). Customers’ expectations and perceptions are paramount to service quality (Davidoff 1994); they are not objective and may also not based on reality (Ungerer & Daweti 2007). If a customer expects a certain level of service and they perceive that an equal or higher level was delivered, they will most definitely be satisfied (Vavra 1997); however, even when good service as measured by an objective standard is delivered and customers expected better service, they will be dissatisfied (Ungerer & Daweti 2007). An aspect that is a major determinant in service quality is customer expectations (Foster 2013); these are formed by the customers in what is called the ‘moment of truth’ (Ungerer & Daweti 2007). A moment of truth is any contact between a customer and a business whereby a positive or negative judgement about the service received is formed (Moreo 1996). Therefore, when a customer expects something to happen that will make them come back, it should happen (Foster 2013; Ungerer & Daweti 2007) and the moment of truth always will result in either happy customers or lost customers (Foster 2013). These moments of truth therefore are the moments that ultimately determine whether or not a company will succeed from a sustainable business point of view (Davidoff 1994).

A comprehensive understanding of user perceptions of service quality provided by the system is tantamount to realisation of the primary objectives of the transport system (Nkurunzia et al. 2012:95–101). Further research alluded to the fact that the importance each commuter places on public transport service attributes is directly proportional to their service quality experiences (Foote, Stuart & Elmore-Yalch 2001:93–100) and the desire to improve the public transport services to meet the increasing needs and expectations of commuters has been one of the primary goals set to be achieved by the urban transport planners globally (Delbosc & Currie 2011; Ji & Gao 2010; Mfinanga & Ochieng 2006).

Thus, a widely recognised and acceptable set of service quality variables that was used to measure commuter satisfaction in this study is as follows (McKnight, Pagano & Paaswell 1986:423–441; Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1985:40–49; Zeinthaml, Bitner & Grembler 2006):

Tangibles: This includes, inter alia, the physical features of the service facility, the equipment, personnel and communication materials.

The key to customer retention is customer satisfaction (Hennig-Thurau & Klee 1998:737–761). Customer satisfaction is usually a self-reported assessment of how much customers like a company and how happy they are with goods purchased or services obtained from the company (Klein 2014). However, customer satisfaction and loyalty are interwoven and the measurement of loyalty is based on the likelihood to purchase again or not migrate to a competitor (Boulding et al. 1993). Customer satisfaction is strongly associated with how a customer feels about his or her previous transaction (Klein 2014). It can be a fast-growing phenomenon and can disappear even faster after a bad service transaction experience (Ungerer & Daweti 2007).

Most studies previously conducted have shown that higher levels customer satisfaction leads to greater customer loyalty (Barabino et al. 2012:238–252; Beirao & Cabral 2007:478–489; Dhingra 2011; Eboli & Mazulla 2007:30–42; Jaisal 2008:405–416; Javid et al. 2013:461–472; Mokonyama 2012:1–17; Zeinthaml et al. 2006), whilst Blose and Tankersley (2004:75–89) argued that providing services on time and meeting commitments as promised will greatly influence a customer perception and satisfaction, as well as increase customer loyalty (Brink & Berndt 2005; Bruhn & Georgi 2006; Ekinci 2004:197–203), which leads to a reduction in the operational cost of future transactions (Reichheld & Sasser 1990:105–111). In any business transaction, if an organisation makes an avoidable mistake that leads to failure in delivery of quality services, it demoralises the customers’ confidence and consequently leaves a negative imprint on the business service quality performance (Fen & Lian 2007:59–72; Malhotra 2010). Customer satisfaction is mostly viewed from a psychological point of view, which involves the feeling of well-being and a pleasure that results from obtaining an appealing product and or service (World Tourism Organization 1985). Customer satisfaction should be a fundamental performance indicator of businesses because of its links to the behavioural and economic pattern of businesses (Anderson, Fornell & Rust 2001:129–145). Customers subconsciously evaluate businesses not only on the basis of whether they obtain what they want but on the strength of meeting the following six basic customer needs (Leland & Bailey 1995):

Friendliness: This is the most basic of all customer needs and is usually associated with being greeted politely and courteously.

What is paramount in the above customer needs is that customers do not ask for these needs, yet miss them when they are not provided (Ungerer & Daweti 2007); thus, customer satisfaction is a satisfaction based on processes (Vavra 1997).

Modal competitiveness in public transport cannot be dealt with in isolation; competition does not exist between modes per se but on the ability of the operators to attract more commuters consistently over time. The rate of competition between transport modes depends on, inter alia, factors such as safety, comfort and reliability (Finn & Mulley 2011:89–107; Mazulla & Ebloi 2006:42–53), but these factors are mostly not an issue in developing countries where better alternatives simply do not exist. For example, passengers that use minibus taxis often do so for reasons other than an opinion regarding the mode; it can be for basic convenience of the mode, as opposed to safety, reliability and comfort (Barabino, Deiana & Tilocca, 2012:238–252; Govender 2014:317–326).

Competitiveness of BRT versus other transport modes poses a challenge, especially with rail, because of loading patterns, designs and carrying capacities (Henser & Golob 2008:501–518; Hildalgo & Graftieaux 2008:77–88). The comparisons of passenger capacities are made even more challenging by large variations amongst BRT systems, for example, whilst 45 000 passengers per direction per hour is achieved in the case of Bogotá, other busway systems average only one tenth this passenger volume, with even lower peak hourly throughputs at an average of 1000 passengers in cities such as Cape Town, Amsterdam and Changde (Cervero 2013:1–31). In practice, the carrying capacities of BRT systems are lower, as found in the crunch-load ridership of various BRT systems, which ranges from 2000 to 8000 passengers per direction per hour (Cervero 2013:1–31; Cervero, Murakami & Miller 2010:1–7). Thus the line capacities of BRT relative to urban rail, and its cost-effectiveness, could also be overrated (Cervero 2013:1–31; Currie 2006:1–21; Duarte & Rojas 2012:1–18). The cost-effectiveness edge of BRT is also hindered to the extent that large-scale rail networks provide greater connectivity and accessibility at faster travel speeds, in addition to having vigorous city-shaping impacts than the more constrained range of BRT systems (Cervero 2013:1–31).

Yet, passenger rail is a relatively inflexible mode and it also has significantly low rapid accessibility when compared with minibus taxis, in relation to urban dynamics and sprawl (Agunloye 2011:443–448; Mashiri, Moeketsi & Baloyi 2010), thus the taxi industry was particularly effective at competing for the off-peak market, especially in the city edge and townships (CSIR 2005). Low volumes in the off-peak periods meant that even infrequent trains were largely empty (Finn & Mulley 2011:89–107; Ryneveld 2008) and the same can be said about the BRT in most cities, especially cities with a low population density in transport corridors. This implies that minibus taxis were much better at serving the market within such periods (Ryneveld 2008). However, high return on investment in public transport, as with other transport systems, is mostly determined by peak demand (Agunloye & Oduwaye 2011:98–103; Andaleeb, Haq & Ahmed 2007:1–25; Ryneveld 2008; Schade & Schlag 2003:45–61). Where there is a high peak-to-base demand ratio, significant investments will ultimately lie dormant during off-peak intervals. By more successfully serving the off-peak market, minibus taxis were able to maximise their demand profile during the day and thereby reduce their peak-to-base ratio, at the same time aggravating the ratio for trains (Ryneveld 2008), as well as the BRT system in cities that are yet to implement integrated rapid transit schemes. Therefore, partly as a result of the profound competitiveness of minibus taxis with BRT, cities such as Cape Town and Johannesburg are removing buses along the BRT corridors, as mentioned above, and this strategy has yielded positive results in terms of an increase in ridership.

Curitiba is the capital city of the State of Paraná in southern Brazil, located about 250 km south-west of São Paulo (Goodman, Laube & Schwenk 2006:75–76). The success of the Curitiba BRT infrastructure has been extensively articulated in various academic literature and policy documents globally, therefore it will not be overemphasised in this paper, but from Curitiba's urban dynamics perspective, BRT was seen as not only a transportation investment but also an opportunity to redirect and shape urban growth (Suzuki, Cervero & Luchi 2013) in a more sustainable and transit-oriented manner (Cervero 2006; Cervero & Kang 2011). There were zoning reforms, pro-development tax policies, assistance with land assemblage and supportive infrastructural investments at local government level, with a clear mandate that all medium and large-scale urban development be positioned along a BRT corridor (Cervero 2013:1–31; Duarte & Ultramari 2012:183–194). A design element used to enhance transit accessibility in Curitiba was what is popularly referred to as ‘trinary’ (Goodman et al. 2006:75–76), which is a three parallel roadway system with compatible land uses and building heights that align with the distance from the BRT corridor (Santos 2011). An important benefit of mixed land uses and transit service levels along these corridors, including the high ridership rates in Curitiba, has balanced bidirectional flows, which ensures efficient and effective use of bus capacity. Thus, the higher population density of the city supported by the trinary design has translated directly into higher ridership (Cervero 2013:1–31).

High transit use has also considerably reduced the city's environmental footprint; it has the cleanest air in relation to any Brazilian city (Suzuki et al. 2010). The integration of rapid transit and land use has been a work in progress that spans over 40 years and the sustainability of a bus-based transit system with a mixed land use settlement pattern, as seen in Curitiba, is a lesson for cities globally, especially in developing countries.