Study On Economic Cost of Inter-State Barriers in Goods Traffic

FINAL REPORT
STUDY ON ECONOMICS OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY
Submitted to:
The Under Secretary Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways Department of Road Transport and Highways Parivahan Bhavan 1, Sansad Marg New Delhi - 110001
Oct, 2011
JPS ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.

CONSULTANTS
NEW DELHI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sl. No Contents Page Nos.
Executive Summary
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Introduction Scope, Approach and Methodology Organizational Structure of the Trucking Industry Ownership Pattern of Trucking Industry in India Nature and Volume of Goods Transported Contribution of the Trucking Industry to the Economy Economic Parameters of Trucking Industry Problems Facing the Trucking Industry and Recommendations
E XIII
1 11 12 30 31 43 44 53 54 67 68 76 77 87 88 102
ANNEXURES
Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States Table I: Selection of cities and towns in Stratum I States Table II: Selection of Locations in Stratum II States Annexure II Annexure III List of Villages (28 Villages) Region Wise Summary of Total UFS Blocks and Selected UFS Blocks JPS Transport Studies Multipliers for Estimation a) Urban Areas b) Villages Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry: Questionnaire A: Composite Questionnaire for Agents/Transport Operators/Brokers/Truck Owners Annexure VI Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry: Questionnaire B: Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry (For Truck Drivers)
103 165
Annexure I
103 105
106 107 108 111
Annexure IV
112 119
Annexure V
120 129
130 134
Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
Sl. No Annexure VII Annexure VIII Classifications
Contents
Page Nos. 135 136 137 141
Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Number and Type of Vehicles Owned Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Type of Unit and Regular Employment Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Gross Value Added (GVA) Calculations for BTKM per Vehicle & Total BTKM based on Vehicles as per Survey Basic data from Sample Cities of Orissa after application of multipliers Calculations for estimates for contribution of Orissa to the All India Estimates Calculations for TKM per Vehicle as per Survey Example Chattisgarh - Gross Value added by per unit and by GVA per worker
Annexure IX Annexure X Annexure XI

Annexure XII-A
142 144 145 152 153 156 157 157 158 158 159 162 163 164 165 165
Annexure XII-B Annexure XIII AnnexureXIV(a)
AnnexureXIV(b) Example Chattisgarh-Raw Data for GVA Calculations
LIST OF TABLES
Sl. No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Contents Table 1.1: Trends in Rail-Road Modes in Freight & Passenger Traffic Table 1.2: Share of Various Modes of Transport in Gross Domestic Product Table 1.3: Road Length (in 000 kms) in India (1950-51 to 2005-06) Table 1.4: Growth in Number of Registered Motor Vehicles in India Table 1.5: Projections of Number of Goods Vehicles Required Annually During the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-08 to 2011-12) under 9% GDP Growth Scenario Table 2.1: States Selected in Stratum-I of Different Regions. Table 2.2: Process of Selection of States in Stratum-II Table 2.3: States Selected for the Study Table 2.4: Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States Table2.5: Region wise Summary of Total UFS blocks and selected UFS blocks Table 2.6 Number of Identified Goods Transport Units in the Selected Blocks Table 3.1: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Type of Units in Different Regions Table 3.2: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Type of Units in Different Classes of Cities Table 3.3: Multiple Activities of the Goods Transporting Units (All Regions) Page Nos. 2 3 4 5
6. 7. 8. 9.
14 15 16 18
10.
20
11.
22
12.
34
13.
35
14.
36
Sl. No 15.
Contents Table 3.4: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Class of Cities and Legal Status Table 3.5: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Type of Transport Unit and Legal Status Table 3.6: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Regions and their Legal Status Table 3.7: Association Membership Status of Goods Transporting Units Table 3.8 Distribution of Goods transporting Units by Source of Business (All States) Table 3.9: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Operational Channels (All States) Table 3.10: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Their Usual Area of Operation Table 3.11: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Employment Levels Table 3.12: Distribution of Transport operating units by type of unit and regular employment Table 3.13: Distribution of Employees in Urban Areas by Goods Transport Operating units and Type of Workers Table 4.1: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength in Different Regions Table 4.2: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength for different size class of cities Table 4.3: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength for different classes of transport operators
Page Nos. 37
16.
37
17.
38
18.
39
19.
40
20.
40
21.
41
22.
42
23.
42
24.
43
25.
46
26.
47 48
27.
Sl. No 28.
Contents Table 4.4: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles and type of operators Table 4.5: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles over cities of different size classes Table 4.6: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles over cities of different size classes Table 4.7: Proportion of Vehicles with National and Local Permits in different Regions Table 4.8: Proportion of Vehicles with National and Local Permits in different Vehicle Ownership Patterns Table 5.1: Distribution of Utility of Vehicles by Different Regions Table 5.2: Distribution of Utilization of Vehicles Covered by Survey Table 5.3: Estimated Annual Volume of Freight Hauled Per Vehicle for Different Classes of Vehicles in 2009-10 (in Million TKM) Table 5.4: All India Estimates of Volume of Goods Carried per Annum in 2009-10 expressed as Billion-Tonne-Kilometers (BTKM) State and Region Wise Table 5.5: Distribution of Volume of Freight by Industrial Sector (2009-10) Table 6.1: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per Unit through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Region Table 6.2: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per Unit through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Type of Unit-owner Table 6.3: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per Worker through Type of Goods Transportation by Road for Each Type of Unit
Page Nos. 50
29.
51
30.
51
31.
52
32.
53 59 60 62
33. 34. 35.
36.
64-65
37.
66
38.
72
39.
73 74
40.
Sl. No 41.
Contents Table 6.4: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per worker through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Region Table 7.1: Distribution of Owned Vehicles by Age (in years) Regionwise Table 7.2: Distribution of vehicles by type of vehicle and age of vehicle from Drivers Survey Table 7.3: Distribution of Owned Vehicles by Age (in years) by Size Class of Cities Table 7.4: Fuel consumption of Vehicles by Type and Age Table 7.5: Average Distance Covered by Trucks per Year by Age of Vehicle Table 7.6: Disposition of Trip Time by Activities Table 7.7 : Distribution of Drivers by Driving Experience Table 7.8: Pattern of Expenditure of Goods Transporting Units by Type of Unit Table 7.9: Changes in Delhi-Mumbai and Delhi-Kolkata Freight Rates for 9-tonne Truck and Diesel Prices (2002 to 2010) Table 8.1: Freight Rates (September 2008)
Page Nos. 75
42.
78
43.
79
44.
79 80 81 82 84 84-85
45. 46.
47. 48. 49.
50.
87 99
51.
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A) 1.
Objectives and Methodology This Report relates to a study on the economics of transportation of goods by road. The study is one of three transport sector studies assigned by the Department of Road Transport in the Ministry of Shipping and Road Transport and Highways, Government of India (GOI) to JPS Associates Ltd New Delhi.
2.
The Terms of Reference of the study covered a) identification of the structure of the goods transport by road industry, b) study of the organization of the industry, c) estimating the volume of goods transported by road, sector-wise / States-wise, d) estimation of the contribution of the goods transport by road industry to national economy, e) estimation of various economic parameters relating to productivity and efficiency in the industry, and f) making suggestions for improving the performance of the industry.
3.
The study made use of the results of a sample survey of goods transport units carried out by JPS Associates, as well as secondary data available from various sources. In addition to the sample survey of goods transport units, a small sample study of truck drivers was also undertaken.
4.
The sampling methodology adopted is one of stratified multi-stage random sampling of States, urban locations and villages within the States and Blocks within the urban locations, as described below: The country is divided into seven regions for the purpose of selecting the states within them. The seven regions are as follows: (i) Northern (Plains) Region (Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Chandigarh)
E-I
(ii)
Northern (Hills) Region (Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Jammu & Kashmir)
(iii)
Western Region (Maharashtra, Gujarat, Goa, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Diu & Daman and Lakshadweep)
(iv)
Southern Region (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamilnadu, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Pondicherry)
(v) (vi)
Eastern Region (Orissa, West Bengal, Jharkand and Bihar) North Eastern Region (Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland and Sikkim)
(vii)
Central Region (Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)
5.
In each of the seven regions, two strata of States have been formed the first stratum comprising the State with the largest number of registered mechanized goods transportation vehicles (used as a proxy for the number of mechanized goods transportation units), and the second stratum comprising all other States in the region. While the State in the first stratum is invariably selected, the second stratum has been covered on a sample basis with one State selected with probability proportional to the size measured by the number of registered goods vehicles in the State. Thus a total of 14 states were selected for the sample survey.
6.
In each state, 3 cities were selected. The Capital city was invariably selected and from the balance cities, on city of above I lac population and another of less than 1 lac population were selected on a random basis. Thus a total of 42 cities were selected.
7.
While it was felt that the goods transport units in villages may not be substantial, it was decided to cover a few villages on a sample basis. Two villages per state were selected randomly.
E-II
8.
Sampling within the selected locations was carried out by selecting randomly from the NSSO urban frame blocks categorized as Business/Industrial Blocks and Residential/other blocks. For the survey 20% of the Business/Industrial blocks were selected and 2.5% of the Residential/Other blocks were selected. Thus a total of 2306 blocks were selected from a total of 60648 blocks.
9.
In each of the sampled blocks, listing of all goods transport units was done and all such units were covered on a census basis. In this manner a total of 1212 goods transport units were covered and a total of 754 drivers were covered.
10. For estimation of various parameters the results will be combined to get estimates of each location. Multipliers were derived for each location to extrapolate these results for the state and then the region. The summation of all region gave us the All India Estimates. 11. The Volume of Goods Traffic was estimated by using the survey results to arrive at the Tonne Kilometres per vehicle. This was then multiplied by the estimated number of goods vehicles in-use derived from secondary data to estimate the total Volume of Goods Traffic for ALL INDIA. 12. For estimation of GVA, data was collected on all the items relating to transport sector in the NSSO schedules used in 63rd round and CVA estimated as per block 4.2 of the NSSO schedules.
B)
Current Trends in Goods Transport Industry
13. Estimates made by the Eleventh Plan Working Group on Road Transport indicated that the share of road transport in movement of goods by railways and road taken together, which was just 13.8 % in 1950-51, has grown enormously to 61.3 % of the freight traffic by 2004-05. 14. Statistics on the number of goods vehicles registered with the appropriate State Transport Departments indicate that during the first five years of the current
E-III
century the annual growth rate has been 10.2 against 7.4 over the period 19512001. 15. Projections made by the Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan showed that the demand for goods transport by road is expected to grow from 844 BTKM (billion tonne kilometers) in 2007-08 to 1,231 BTKM by the end of the Plan period (2011-12) under the 9 % overall GDP growth scenario, or by 10.8 % per year. 16. Road transport of goods is almost entirely is a private sector operation. It is also characterized by operations of a very large number of individual truck-owners and several layers of intermediaries like agents, brokers and transport operators. 17. Bad roads, aged vehicles, inter-State barriers and other interfaces with officialdom, result in losses in efficiencies of operation and productivity. Transit times are found to be nearly double those of developed countries. Equipment utilization rates for the Indian trucking fleet, which average 60,000 km to 100,000 km per truck-year, are less than a quarter of those in developed economies. Despite many such impediments, India has achieved a highly competitive low-cost road freight transport industry, with highway freight rates among the lowest in the world.
C)
Structure of Goods Transport by Road
18. Barring some captive freight movement operations of the government and some public sector enterprises, the entire goods transportation by road is in private sector. An important aspect of the trucking industry is the existence of a chain of intermediary transport entities. Between the actual consignor and the consignee, the ultimate receiver of goods, there exist a series of links in the form of transport booking agents, transport operators, brokers and the vehicle owners, though not all the entities of this chain may be present in all operations.
E-IV
19. Of the 1212 units covered in the main part of the survey, 5% were agents, 53% operators, 6% brokers and 35% vehicle owners. The classification boundaries are often blurred as many units classified as of one type also perform the roles of units of other types. Thus, the industry is characterized by considerable extent of informality. 20. About two-third (60%) of the units were individual proprietorships and one-third (34%) were private/public companies. Partnerships are rather rare, being only to the extent of just 3%. 21. About two-third of the units (68%) were members of the goods transporters associations (local or national). 22. About 13 % of the units employed between 1 to 5 employees and about 50 % employed between 6 to 15 employees.
D)
Ownership Pattern
23. The trucking industry continues to be dominated by small players. 24. Among the units classified as vehicle owners, about 83% had between 1 to 5 trucks. Of these 41 %t had just one truck, 42 % had between 2 to 5 trucks. Another 6% owned fleets of size between 6 and 9. 25. Apart from the units classified as vehicle owners, many units (about threefourths) classified as transport operators also had their own fleets. 26. About 52 % of the vehicles had national permits. 27. Analysis by type of vehicle showed that about 9 % of the vehicles owned were multi-axle vehicles (MAVs), 33 % were heavy commercial vehicles (HCVs), 42% were medium commercial vehicles (MCVs) and 16 % were light commercial vehicles (LCVs).
E-V
28. The Drivers survey conducted as a part of this study also threw up a similar vehicle mix.
E)
Nature and volume of goods carried
29. The study attempted an estimate of the total volume of freight in terms of billion tonne kilometers (BTKM) carried by mechanized road transport during 2009-10 making use of the data on per vehicle annual distance and tonnage hauled collected through the survey. 30. According to these estimates, the Volume of Goods hauled has been estimated at 1291 BTKM per annum for 2009-10. The Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan projected the likely demand for goods transport by road at 844 BTKM in 2007-08 and estimated a growth rate of 10.8 percent per year. On this basis our estimate is close to that of the working group upon adding the projected growth. 31. Of the total freight carried, industrial products accounted for 40 %, and Agricultural Commodities accounted for 22 %. About 17 % of the freight was made up of construction materials. 32. These above mentioned estimates of freight carried are sensitive to the estimated total in-use vehicle population. We have estimated it for 2009-10 by projecting the in-use vehicle population in 2006 from secondary sources. A vehicle utilization factor of 0.78 has been determined based on the survey and has been used for estimating the freight hauled per vehicle per annum. 33. The estimation of volume of road traffic movement of goods on the above basis can be no permanent substitute for a more methodical system of data on actual movement of goods by road that needs to be established.
E-VI
F)
Contribution of the Industry to the Economy
34. Gross Value Added (GVA) by trucking units surveyed has been derived, in accordance with the Factor approach, as the excess of total receipts over expenses less indirect taxes and wages and salaries to the pay roll and nonpayroll staff and income of proprietors and unpaid family members. 35. Based on the total GVA by the surveyed units, estimates of GVA per unit and GVA per worker have been derived. For all the locations in the seven States put together, GVA per unit came to Rs.11.8 lakhs and GVA per worker to Rs 123000. 36. Total contribution of the goods transport industry as a percentage of the national GDP has been estimated at 1.93% on current money basis. The ministry estimates for the entire transport sector (mechanized and non-mechanized) including passenger transport is 4.5%. G) Productivity and other parameters associated with the Industry
37. About 69% of all goods carrying vehicles were less than 10 years in age. About 30% were less than 6 years old. On the other hand, about 31% of the vehicles were over 10 years of age. 38. In the category of vehicles below six years of age, the vehicles were covering an average distance of 88800 kms. per year. Those which are 6 to 9 years in age had done 85000 kms per year, those vehicle which are 10 to 14 years covered 82000 kms. while those aged 15 years or more had done 78000 kms. per year cumulatively. 39. On an average, a commercial vehicle gave 7 kms. per liter of diesel. The consumption rate was 3.5 kms for MAVs, 6 kms. for HCVs, 7.9 kms. for MCVs and 10.5 kms. for LCVs. This appears higher than general belief, but may be reflecting the improved efficiency of modern goods vehicles.
E-VII
40. On an average, goods carrying vehicles were utilized to the extent of 76 per cent. 41. The total turn-around time was 21 hrs for trips of less than 500 km, 50 hrs for trips involving a distance of 500 to 999 km, and 110 hrs for distances longer than 1000 km. Of this total trip times, actual running times accounted for 33 % for trips of less than 500 km, 36 % for trips of distance 500 to 999 kms and 43 % for longer distances. 42. Check-post halts accounted for about 16 % of the total trip time and other official delays for another 8 %. 43. Overloading has not been admitted to by the respondents, even though the practice appears to be rampant. 44. From the drivers surveyed it appears that maximum number of drivers are well experienced with 6 years or more experience. 45. It is seen that direct costs account for more than 80 percent. A lions share of this expenditure is consisted of diesel (around 40%) and wages (around 30% for wages and payroll). 46. Similarly expenditure for taxes shows 5.5 percent of the total expenditure and expenditure on interest and depreciation shows only 5.0 percent of the total. 47. Fuel is an important component of the operational expenditure of truck owners, and periodic increases in fuel prices erode the profit margins unless the vehicle owners increase their rates periodically. The truck freight rates for a standard 9 tonne truck for the Delhi-Mumbai stretch during 2002- 2010 are increased by 28 % and for Delhi-Kolkata stretch during same period are increased by 20%.
E-VIII
H)
Problems and Suggestions
48. Small owners should be encouraged to come together in cooperatives and operate as a single unit. With the pooling of resources, it should be possible to invest for technological up-gradation. Another advantage out of several small operators coming together is that they can better resist the pressures from the consignors and transport operators to indulge in overloading as a measure of cutting transport costs. That will also result in better utilization of available vehicles. 49. More efficient multi-axle trucks are relatively hard to come by, though in recent years there is a tendency on the part of the goods transport vehicle owners to switch over to such vehicles. To further encourage the use of multi-axle
vehicles, suitable incentives such as lower transit tax and toll rates may be considered. The cost of such incentives would be more than paid back by way of lower levels of damage to the road system. 50. Rising fuel costs and competition preventing corresponding hikes in freight rates has been cutting into the margins of the transport operators. To ease the
problem, a policy of dual pricing of diesel favouring goods transportation could be thought of, at the same time taking appropriate steps to prevent misuse of the benefits. 51. There does not seem to be any need or justification for a regime to regulate freight rates as there is enough competition in the industry to drive the freight rates to reasonable levels. 52. Overloading trucks is a common problem, though not brought out by the present study, and affects the quality of roads that have been built for lesser axle loads. A system of penalizing for overloading is installed to discourage overloading but it is not effectively implemented 53. An insurance regime linking premium to past performance could be devised to promote road safety.
E-IX
54. Halts at check-posts result in loss of about 16 % of the trip time. Simplification of procedures, paper work and installing green channel system for movement of specified vehicles would result in better performance. 55. Rationalization of taxation regime could also result in speedier passage of trucks along the roads and improve the services. 56. Road transport of goods sector suffers from the absence of a sound statistical collection system. Apart from periodical special surveys on different aspects of the industry, it is necessary to put in place regular automated data collection systems on goods movement at least on national and state highways to begin with. An accurate and up-to-date data base on vehicle owners will also help in planning and executing sample surveys more efficiently.
E-X
Summary of Findings and Recommendations at a Glance

A. I.
Findings
Organizational Structure Vehicle owner : Transport Operators: Agents: Brokers: 35% 53% 5% 6%
II.
Ownership Pattern Single truck owner 2 5 trucks 6 -9 trucks > 10 trucks 41% 42% 6% 6%
III. Volume of goods transported Estimated No. of goods vehicles in use (2009-10) Estimated volume of freight 39.4 lakhs 1291(BTKM)
IV. Contribution of trucking industry to the economy V. Share of Transport in GDP Gross value added per unit of transporters Gross value added per worker in transport sector 4.38% Rs.11.8 lakh Rs. 1,23,000
Economic Parameters of Trucking Industry Vehicles of age below 6 yrs Vehicles of age 6 10 yrs. Average fuel consumption 30% 41% 7kms./Ltr
E-XI
Average distance covered /yr. Total average trip time Exp. on fuel, maintenance & wages
85000 kms.. (7083 km./month) 59 hrs. 80%
B.
Recommendations
In view of fragmented structure of the trucking industry, it is suggested that small owners should be encouraged to come together and operate as a single unit (like cluster concept being propagated in the case of MSMEs) To encourage the use of MAVs, which are more cost effective, introduction of incentives such as low transit tax and toll tax may be considered. In order to achieve better fleet utilization, consolidation of vehicle owners into co-operatives or similar entities should be considered so that loads can be easily distributed. Excessive overloading should be strictly curbed to protect the road network since very often the consignors indulge in pressurizing the truck owners to overload. A system of penalizing the consigner in addition to the vehicle owner for overloading may be evolved. Greater use of tractor trailer multi axle vehicles will improve turn-around times and reduce costs. World Bank estimates that a 10% increase in the usage of such vehicles could reduce transport cost by Rs. 5 billion /Yr. Introduction of lower excise and toll and permit charges for such vehicles could encourage increased usage. The time lost at the check posts can be reduced by having a system of a certification and sealing of trucks at point of origin and the certificate acting as a through pass.
E-XII
There is a need to improve the statistical base to monitor the performance of this highly fragmented sector. It is suggested that all states should set up a monitoring unit in the transport department and provide regular feedback to impact policy initiatives.
To contain rising cost, particularly of fuel and spares, dual pricing policy should be evolved. While lower price of diesel used for freight movement would work as a measure to check inflation the higher pricing policy should be used in the industry and the private passenger vehicles. However, one has to guard against the possibility of misuse of the duel prices and diversion of fuel purchased for freight movement to other purposes.
Lnking the amounts of insurance premiums to the past records of accidents caused by the vehicle, apart from the past insurance claims, might act as a deterrent and improve road safety. This, however, requires an integration of information on road accidents and vehicle insurance.
It is essential to identify all major data gaps relating to goods transport by road and establish suitable statistical systems in place.
E-XIII
Chapter 1: Introduction
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 1.1.1
Road Transport and National Economy An essential prerequisite of rapid economic growth is the availability of adequate support from the infrastructure sector that includes energy, transport and communications. One of the factors that has been inhibiting faster growth than is currently achieved and substantial inflows of foreign direct investment to the Indian economy is the relative scarcity of high quality infrastructure vis--vis many of the East Asian and South East Asian countries. It is estimated that the growth rate of 9 % per annum targeted by the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-12) would require massive investments in the infrastructure sector to the tune of 9 % of the GDP by the terminal year of the Plan (2012) compared to just 5 % of GDP in the initial year (2007)1.
1.1.2
The network of roads that enables transportation of people and goods is one of the most vital components of the countrys infrastructure. Together with railways, the road transport sector (including both the road network and the enormous edifice of road transport services) forms the lifeline of the entire economy. Because of the existence of wide road network, though not always the best possible, and easy accessibility to even the remotest corners of the country irrespective of the terrain, flexibility of its operations, availability of door-to-door service and reliability, transportation of passengers and goods by road has been expanding rapidly over the years in comparison to railways. The share of road transport in movement by all forms of land-based transport (railways and road), which was just 13.8 % of the freight and 15.4 % of the passenger traffic in 1950-
Ministry of finance, Economic Survey, 2007-08, Chapter 9 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
51, has grown enormously to 61.3 % of the freight and 87.1 % of the passenger traffic by 2004-05. This trend has occurred in spite of the existence of several inter-State barriers to the movement of goods and even passengers by road, which is an indication of the extent of the relative edge road transport has over rail transport. Table 1.1 shows the trends in the shares of railways and road transport in the movement of people and goods over the period 1950-51 to 2004-05. Table 1.1: Trends in Rail-Road Modes in Freight & Passenger Traffic Year Goods(Billion Tonne KM ) Road 1950-51 1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05(P) 6.0 (13.8) 14.0 (16.2) 47.7 (30.1) 90.9 (38.1) 145.1 (38.1) 467.0 (60.5) 494 (61.3) 515 (60.7) 545 (60.7) 595 (61.0) 646 (61.3) Railways** 37.6 (86.2) 72.3 (83.8) 110.7 (69.9) 147.7 (61.9) 235.8 (61.9) 305.2 (39.5) 312.4 (38.7) 333.2 (39.3) 353.2 (39.3) 381.2 (39.0) 407.4 (38.7) Passenger(Billion Passenger KM) Road 23.0*(15.4) 80.9 (51.0) 210.0 (64.0) 541.8 (72.2) 767.7 (72.2) 1831.6 (81.0) 2075.5 (82.0) 2413.1 (83.1) 2814.7 (84.5) 3070.2 (85.0) 3469.3 (87.1) Railways** 66.5 (84.6) 77.7 (49.0) 118.1 (36.0) 208.6 (27.8) 295.6 (27.8) 430.7 (19.0) 457.0 (18.0) 490.9 (16.9) 515.0 (15.5) 541.2 (15.0) 515.7 (12.9)
Figures in parentheses indicate percentage of modal share (P)- Provisional Note : 1. Figures for Road Transport from 1960-61 to 1990-91 are estimated based on percentage share of Road Transport and Railways given in the Working Group Report on Road Transport, Tenth Five Year Plan 2002-07 2. Figures for Road Transport from 1999-2000 to 2000-01 have been estimated by Transport Research Wing, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport & Highways, Government of India 3. Figures for Road Transport from 2001-02 to 2004-05 have been estimated by the Sub Group Source : * Tenth Plan Document ** Data on rail freight traffic from Ministry of Railways
Source: Report of the Working Group on Road Transport for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
1.1.3
Road transport sector contributed to the nations Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to the tune of 4.5 % in 2006-07 while the contribution of railways was only 1.2 percent. What is more, over the period 2000-01 to 2005-06, the sectors contribution to GDP has grown at an average annual rate of 9.5 % in comparison to an average rate of 6.5 % in the overall GDP, thus steadily pushing up the share of road transport in the GDP. The comparative performance of various sub-sectors of the transport sector in terms of their
contribution to GDP over the period 1999-2000 to 2006-07 is given in Table 1.2. The data reveal that the entire increase in the percentage share of transport sector as a whole in GDP since 1999-2000 has come from road transport sector only. Table 1.2: Share of Various Modes of Transport in Gross Domestic Product 19992000 5.7 1.2 3.8 0.2 0.2 0.5 200001 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 200502 03 04 05 06 As percentage of GDP (at factor cost and constant 1999-2000 prices) 5.8 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.5 1.2 3.8 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.2 4.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.2 4.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.2 4.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.2 4.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 3.9 0.2 0.2 0.5 200607 6.4 1.2 4.5 0.2 0.2 0.5
Sector Transport, of which: Railways Road Transport Water Transport Air Transport Services *
1.2
* Services incidental to transport. Source Central Statistical Organization: The share in GDP of Railways is exclusive of Financial Intermediation Services Indirectly. Measured (F.I.S.M.); for other modes it includes F.I.S.M.
1.2 1.2.1
Road Length and Vehicle Population The steady expansion in the volume of demand for movement of people and goods by road has been accompanied by an increase in the road length and the vehicle population over the years. The total road length has increased significantly from 3.99 lakh Km as on 31.3.1951 to 9.15 lakh Kms in 1971 and further to 42.36 lakh Km as on 31.3.2008. This translates to a CAGR of 4.2%. However, a bulk of this consists of rural roads (25.77 lakh km or 60%). Less than 6 % of the total road length is made up of national highways/expressways and State highways, which are of relatively better quality, though many of the roads are nowhere near international standards. Though National Highways formed only 2 % of the total road length, they carried about 40 % of the total road traffic. Single/intermediate lane roads make up about 32 % of the National Highway road length, while standard 2-lane roads cover 55 %, while 4 or more lane roads account for
only 13 %. The quality aspect has been receiving considerable attention, particularly since the last decade, with the initiation of Golden Quadrilateral and the East-West and North-South Corridor projects and other projects to up-grade other segments of the National Highways. Quantitatively, road length has expanded at an average annual rate of 4.3 % since 1951, primarily in the form of rural roads (average annual growth rate of 4.5%). The length of national highways increased by no more than 1.5 % per annum over the period 1951 1991, but since then a greater sense of urgency shown by the government in the wake of liberalized economic policies initiated in 1991 resulted in an acceleration of the growth to 5.1 % per annum during 1991-20022. As on 31.3.2010, the road length under National Highways was reported at 70,934 kms. Table 1.3: Road Length (in 000 kms) in India (1950-51 to 2008-09) Year 1950-51 1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91 2000-01 2005-06* 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 All Roads Total Surfaced 400.0 157.0 524.5 263.0 915.0 398.0 1485.4 684.0 1998.2 1024.4 3325.8 1573.8 3929.4 1846.6 4003.9 1910.8 4140.5 1997.3 4236.4 2090.2 National Highways Total Surfaced 22.2 19.8 23.8 21.0 24.0 23.3 31.7 31.5 33.7 33.4 57.7 57.7 65.6 65.6 66.6 66.6 66.6 66.6 66.8# 66.8 State Highways Total Surfaced NA NA NA NA 56.8 51.7 94.4 90.2 127.3 124.8 132.8 130.6 144.4 142.9 148.1 146.3 152.2 150.7 154.5 152.7
Source: Government of India, Department of Roads and Highways, Basic Road Statistics of India (2004-05, 200506, 2006-0 & 2007-08) * Provisional # As on 31.3.2010, the total Road length under National Highway is 70934 kms.
1.2.2
If the expansion of road length over the years has generally been sluggish, except in the recent years, due to inadequacy of invisible resources and other reasons, the growth in the number of vehicles using the available road network has been rapid as well as steady. During the first five years of the current century, the annual growth rate has been 9.3 for
Planning Commission, Report of the Working Group on Road Transport for the Eleventh Five Year Plan Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
all vehicles and 10.2 for goods transport vehicles. These are only slightly different from the corresponding historical rates of 10.9 and 7.4 respectively over the period 1951-2001. Table 1.4: Growth in Number of Registered Motor Vehicles in India Year 1950-51 1960-61 1970-71 1980-81 1990-91 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (P) 2005-06 (P) % Growth 1951-2001 % Growth 2001-06 No. of registered vehicles (000s) All vehicles Goods vehicles 306 82 665 168 1865 343 5291 554 21374 1356 54991 2948 58924 2974 67007 3492 72718 3748 79473 4393 85896 4782 Annual Growth Rate during the period All vehicles Goods vehicles 8.1 7.4 10.9 7.4 11.2 4.9 14.8 9.4 9.9 8.1 7.1 0.8 13.7 17.4 8.5 7.3 9.3 17.2 8.1 8.9 10.9 7.4 9.3 10.2
Source: Government of India, Department of Roads and Highways, Reproduced from Ministry of Finance, Economic Survey 2007-08, Statistical Table 1.28 P Provisional Note: All vehicles include heavy and light commercial vehicles, buses, cars, three and two-wheelers
The disparity between the expansion of road length and expansion of vehicle population has pushed up the vehicle density (number of vehicles per km of road length) from 0.76 in 1951 to 31.7 in 2005-06. Among all registered vehicles, two-wheelers accounted for 71 %, followed by cars with a share of 13 % and other vehicles (a heterogeneous category including 3 wheelers, trailers, tractors etc) with 9.4 %.
1.3
Road Transport of Goods3
Conceptually, road transport of goods would include movement by goods by mechanized and non-mechanized means of road transport. This study, however, is restricted to mechanized road transport only. Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
1.3.1
As observed above, movement of freight by road was only to the extent of 14 percent in 1950-51. This share has grown to 65 % by 2004-05. The National Transport Policy Committee (NTPC) in its report submitted in 1980 had recommended that at least 67 % of freight traffic should move by rail by the turn of the century (2000). However, this has not happened, as evidenced by the pattern of freight transport by road vis--vis by rail. Goods transportation by road has increased relatively faster than that by railways, particularly during the decade 1990-91 to 2000-01 when the Indian economy witnessed a sea change because of the liberalization of the policy regime. The shift in freight movement from railways to roads has taken place despite railways advantages in terms of bulk freight movement, carrying potential and economical land and the disadvantages of road transport of goods due to various inter-State barriers and other bureaucratic hurdles.
Trend in shares of railways and road transport in movement of goods

100 80 60 40 20 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2004 51 61 71 81 91 01 05
year
Railways
Road
1.3.2
The demand for road transport has increased faster than the demand for other modes. This growth could be attributed to both demand-side and supply-side factors. On the supply side, intense competition from the mostly privately run road transport services, coupled with operating inflexibilities and capacity constraints on key Indian Railways
routes, increased the modal share of roads4. Future demand for freight traffic is expected to be strong, growing at 1.5 times the economic growth rate for freight and 2 times the economic growth rate for passenger traffic5. Between 1992-93 and 2004-05, the demand for freight transport by road is estimated to have grown at an average annual rate of 6.7 % against the GDP growth of 6.2 %. Considering that the Eleventh Plan aims at a growth rate of 9 % per annum, it is expected that the demand for movement of goods by road would expand by at least 10 % annually over the five years 2007-08 to 2011-12. Using the elasticity of 1.1 for billion tonne kilometres (BTKM) with respect to GDP observed during the years 1992-93 to 2004-05, the Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan projected the likely demand for goods transport by road to grow from 844 BTKM in 2007-08 to 1231 BTKM by the end of the Plan period (2011-12) under the 9 % GDP growth scenario adopted finally. Thus, the average annual demand for road transport of goods during the Eleventh plan has been projected at 1028 BTKM. The projected annual growth rate during the Plan period is, thus 10.8 percent.
Projected demand for goods transport by road during the Eleventh Plan
1500 BTKM 1000 500 0 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Year Demand for road transport of goods (BTKM)
Transport Sector in India Focusing on Results, Sector Assistance Programme Evaluation, Asian Development Bank, June 2007. 5 Committee on Infrastructure www.infrastructure.gov.in Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
1.3.3
Data on vehicles actually plying on roads is not available. As per the RITES study on Road Traffic Flows (1998), the number of trucks was expected to rise to 26.90 lakh by the turn of the century and to 28.70 lakh in 2005. Here again, projections made by the Working Group on Road Transport for the Eleventh Five Year Plan are available for various growth and efficiency of truck use scenarios.
Table 1.5: Projections of Number of Goods Vehicles Required Annually During the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-08 to 2011-12) under 9% GDP Growth Scenario Type of Vehicle Light Commercial Vehicles Medium and Heavy Commercial Vehicles Multi-axle Vehicles Average annual vehicle fleet requirement (thousands) Without efficiency gains 2416.4 2673.5 51.4 With efficiency gains* 1599.4 1769.6 34.0
Note: With an efficiency gain of 10 percent increase in lead per year during the Eleventh Plan Source: Report of the Working Group on Road Transport for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
1.4 1.4.1
Some Features of Road Transport of Goods Industry There are certain features of industry of transportation of goods by road that distinguish it from railway mode of freight movement in this country. While railways are a well organized departmentally undertaken industry of the central government, road transport, particularly of goods, is almost entirely is a private sector operation. It is also characterized by operations of a very large number of individual truck-owners scattered all over the country, in urban as well as rural areas, the presence of several layers of intermediaries like agents, brokers and transport operators between the actual consignors and consignees of goods and the fleet owners. The bulk of the truck-owners are generally owners of just one or two trucks, often self-driving. Bad roads, aged vehicles, inter-State
barriers and other interfaces with officialdom, causing delays and additions to costs, often unofficial, slow speeds of movement, particularly in congested areas, result in losses in efficiencies of operation and productivity. Transit times are found to be nearly double those of developed countries. Equipment utilization rates for the Indian trucking fleet, which average 60,000 km to 100,000 km per truck-year6, are less than a quarter of those in developed economies. Despite many such impediments, mainly concerning the existing infrastructure, India has achieved a highly competitive low-cost road freight transport industry for basic services, with highway freight rates among the lowest in the world.
1.5 1.5.1
Lack of Regular Statistics Again, unlike transportation by railways, which has a well-organized system of generating detailed operational and financial statistics that enables planning for improved performance, transportation of goods by road suffers from a complete lack of essential statistics. As observed by the Working Group on Road Transport for the Eleventh Plan There is complete lack of regular and reliable data on freight movement, passenger movement on private buses, trucking industry; transaction costs involved in inter state movement of goods . the motor vehicle registration, apart being variable across States, does not give any indication neither of the actual number of vehicles in use at a particular place nor about the current owners of the vehicles. The Working group suggested measures for making the registration data more useful and recommended surveys on: Freight movement by Road: Origin, destination, size, type of freight and its movement by type of vehicle and age.
India Road Transport Efficiency Study, November 2005, World Bank Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
Passenger movement by Road: Passenger movement and related parameters by private bus operators need to be captured.
Trucking Industry: Survey of domestic trucking fleet covering operating cost, financing, vehicle technology, vintage, turn around time, utilization etc.
Time Motion Surveys: Assess time spent on various activities related to document compliance/clearances at barriers to ascertain transaction costs faced by road freight/passenger industry.
1.6 1.6.1
The Present Study It is in the above context that the Department of Roads and Highways in the Ministry of Shipping and Transport has decided to have a series of studies conducted on the road transport industry in the country. M/s JPS Consultants, New Delhi, have been assigned studies on the following three aspects: a) Volume of goods and passenger traffic on Indian roads b) Economic cost of inter-State barriers in goods traffic c) Economics of trucking industry
1.6.2
This report is based on the study conducted on the economic s of trucking industry. As per the Terms of Reference, this study is expected to make available the following outputs: i) ii) iii) iv) Ownership pattern of the trucking industry Organizational structure of the existing truck industry in India Volume of cargo handled per year sector-wise/state-wise in terms of Tonne-Km. Percentage share of revenue of trucking industry in GDP
10
v)
Other peripherals viz., vehicle productivity, operational cost, various cost parameters, time spent on various halts and check posts running time of vehicle performing the journey between origins to destination Suggestive measures to improve/systematization of trucking operation in India
vi)
1.6.3
The study has been conducted by M/s JPS Consultants during February August 2008. The field operations were carried out by the Society for Natural Resource Management and Community Development, New Delhi, and data processing by M/s B.R. Software Services, New Delhi.
1.6.4
While Chapter-1 deals with introductory references on trucking industry, Chapter 2 of the report presents the methodological details of the study. Chapter 3 analyses the organizational structure of the trucking industry and Chapter 4 the ownership pattern of trucking industry in India. An assessment of the volume of cargo handled per year is presented in Chapter 5 and an estimate of the share of trucking industrys contribution to GDP in Chapter 6. Issues like vehicle productivity, operational costs, various cost parameters, journey time and time spent on halts at the check posts and other barriers are covered in Chapter 7. Finally, some issues relating to goods transport industry and suggestions for improving the trucking operations in the country are presented in Chapter 8.
11
Chapter 2: Scope, Approach & Methodology
CHAPTER 2 SCOPE, APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
This Chapter outlines the scope of the present study and the approach and details of the methodology adopted. 2.1 2.1.1 Scope Conceptually, transportation of goods by road has two distinct segments based on the technology adopted in such transportation. The National Classification of Industries, 2004 thus distinguishes between freight transport by motor vehicles (NIC Sub-class 60231) and freight transport other than by motor vehicles (i.e. man or animal drawn vehicles like bullock carts, cycle rickshaws and the like) (NIC Sub-class 60232). The present study is confined to freight transport by motor vehicles only.
2.2 2.2.1
Objectives As required under the TOR, the present study aimed at collecting information on a) The ownership pattern of trucking industry in India, b) The organizational structure of the trucking industry c) The volume of cargo handled sector-wise and State-wise d) The contribution of goods transport industry to GDP e) Peripherals like the vehicle productivity, various cost parameters, time loss due to inter-State barriers, etc.
12
2.2.2
Approval of Methodology: It may be mentioned that the methodology outlined below has been finalised on the basis of various comments received from and discussions held with the Ministry of Shipping and Road Transport who had constituted a panel comprising representatives of Directorate of Transport Research, the CSO and NSSO to review and approve the appropriate methodology for the study. The sampling methodology thus finalised is completely probability based and has been approved by the Ministry vide their letter of 29th July 2010, and the study has been carried out in accordance with the approved methodology.
2.3
Sampling Methodology The sampling methodology adopted is one of stratified multi-stage random sampling of States, urban locations and villages within the States and Blocks within the urban locations, as described below:
2.3.1
Regions: The country is divided into seven regions for the purpose of selecting the states within them. The seven regions are as follows: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Northern (Plains) Region (Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Chandigarh) Northern (Hills) Region (Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Jammu & Kashmir) Western Region (Maharashtra, Gujarat, Goa, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Diu & Daman and Lakshadweep) Southern Region (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamilnadu, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Pondicherry) Eastern Region (Orissa, West Bengal, Jharkand and Bihar) North Eastern Region (Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland and Sikkim)
13
(vii) 2.3.2
Selection of States: In each of the seven regions, two strata of States have been formed the first stratum comprising the State with the largest number of registered mechanized goods transportation vehicles (used as a proxy for the number of mechanized goods transportation units), and the second stratum comprising all other States in the region. While the State in the first stratum is invariably selected, the second stratum is covered on a sample basis with one State selected with probability proportional to the size of registered goods vehicle population. The Variable the number of Registered Goods Transportation Vehicles is taken as the size measure of probability as it is expected to be highly correlated with the variable mechanized goods transportation units in use;
Selection of states in stratum-I: Thus, the seven states with the largest number of registered mechanized goods transportation vehicles selected from various regions are: Table 2.1: States Selected in Stratum-I of Different Regions Sl. No. 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Region 2 North (Plains) North (Hill states) West South East Central North East Total ( 7States) All India State Selected for Stratum I 3 Haryana Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra Tamilnadu West Bengal Madhya Pradesh Assam No. of Registered Goods Transport Vehicles (2004) in Lakh 4 2.06 0.44 4.99 4.81 2.41 1.07 0.98 16.76 37.48
Figures in brackets are numbers of registered goods transport vehicles as on 31 March 2004. The data are provisional. Source: Road Transport Statistics, Department of Road Transport and Highways
14
The seven States selected in Stratum I together accounted for about 45 percent of the total number of such registered vehicles in the entire country. a) Stratum II
Similarly the Process of selection of States from Stratum II with probability proportional to size, size being the number of registered goods transport vehicles is explained in Table 2.2 and the selected states shown in the last Column of this table (Table 2.2). Table 2.2 Process of Selection of States in Stratum-II
Region States in Stratum II (i.e. excluding the States in Stratum I) 2 Chandigarh Delhi Punjab Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Uttarakhand Dadra & N. Haveli Daman & Diu Goa Gujarat Lakshadweep A&N Islands Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Kerala Pondicherry Bihar Jharkhand Orissa Arunachal Pradesh Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Sikkim Tripura Chhattisgarh No. of regd. goods vehicles (lakhs) 3 0.09 1.52 1.10 1.87 1.52 0.42 0.15 0.07 0.04 0.26 3.87 0.00 0.02 2.10 1.92 2.09 0.04 0.63 0.63 0.86 0.03 0.07 0.14 0.05 0.50 0.02 0.07 0.57 Cumulative total in the regions (lakhs) 4 0.09 1.61 2.71 4.58 6.10 0.42 0.57 0.07 0.11 0.37 4.24 4.24 0.02 2.12 4.04 6.13 6.17 0.63 1.26 2.12 0.03 0.10 0.24 0.29 0.79 0.81 0.88 0.57 Random State number selected selected 5 6 (between 1 and Rajasthan (0.307) 610) 449
1 North (Plain)
North (Hills) West
(between 1 and Uttarakhand 57) (0.263) 56 (between 1 and Gujarat 424) (0.913) 262
South
(between 1 and Karnataka 617) (0.311) 258
East North East
(between 1 and Orissa 212) (0.406) 174 (between 1 and Meghalaya 88) (0.149) 13
Central
Automatically Chhattisgarh selected, as (1.000)
15
Region
States in Stratum II No. of regd. Cumulative Random State (i.e. excluding the goods vehicles total in the number selected States in Stratum I) (lakhs) regions (lakhs) selected 2 3 4 5 6 there is only one State
Notes: 1. Random number in each region has been chosen between 1 and the total number of vehicles (in thousands) in the Region (excluding Stratum I States), using Random Number Generator from Internet. 2. Figures in brackets in col. 4 are the probabilities of selection of the respective States.
The States thus selected for the study from the two strata in each region are given in Table 2.3 below: Table 2.3: States Selected for the Study Sl. No. Zone States selected No. of Registered Goods Transport Vehicles (2004) in Lakh Stratum I Stratum II 5 2.06 0.44 4.99 4.81 2.41 1.07 0.98 16.76 37.48 6 1.87 0.15 3.87 1.92 0.86 0.57 0.14 9.38
Stratum I 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 2 North (Plains) North (Hill states) West South East Central North East Total All India 3 Haryana Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra Tamilnadu West Bengal Madhya Pradesh Assam
Stratum II 4 Rajasthan Uttarakhand Gujarat Karnataka Orissa Chhattisgarh Meghalaya
Thus, the 14 States selected into the sample cover about 70% of all registered vehicles in the country.
16
2.3.3
Selection of Urban Locations In each of the selected States in Stratum-I and Stratum II, the urban localities have been stratified as follows: Sratum A : The State Capital Stratum B: Large Towns other than State Capital Stratum C: Other Towns
In all States, towns with a population of a lakh or more (according to 2001 Census) formed Stratum B and all other towns Stratum C. The only exception is Himachal Pradesh, where there is no town with a population of over 50,000, except Shimla, which has already been covered as State Capital. In this case, the cut-off point was taken as 20,000. While the State capital town is selected invariably in all States, one town each (locations) has been selected on simple random basis from the other two strata. Thus, a total of 42 urban locations have been selected from the 14 States in Stratum I and Stratum II. In all cases the alphabetical lists of cities and towns in different States published by Registrar General of India in their web-site www.censusindia.gov.in have been used for random selection of towns in Stratum B and Stratum C. Selection from the Stratum comprising the larger towns (Stratum B of localities) was completed first by assigning serial numbers to the individual towns and selecting one of them at random. Selection for Stratum C towns was then done from all the towns in that stratum randomly. The locations so selected are shown in Table 2.4. Further details of selection are given in the ANNEXURE I.
17
Table 2.4: Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States
State
State Capital
Town more than Town less one lakh one population population
3 4
than lakh
1. Haryana 2. Rajasthan 3. Tamilnadu 4. Karnataka 5. Maharashtra 6. Gujarat 7. Madhya Pradesh 8. Chhatishgarh 9. West Bengal 10. Orissa 11. Assam 12. Meghalaya 13.Himachal Pradesh 14. Uttarakhand
Chandigarh Jaipur Chennai Bangalore Mumbai Gandhinagar Bhopal Raipur Kolkatta Bhubaneswar Guwahati Shillong Shimla Dehradun
Rohtak Jodhpur Tiruppur Belgaum Solapur Vadodara Burhanpur Durg Raiganj Baleswar Tinsukia Tura Chamba Haldwani
Haileymandi Phulera Chetpet Karwar Chakan Kheda Hoshangabad Sakti Memari Jharsuguda Makum William Nagar Kulu Pauri
Note: In Himachal Pradesh, the cut off population adopted was 20,000
2.3.4
Selection of Rural Locations (Villages) Mechanized road transportation of goods may be urban to urban, urban to rural, rural to urban or rural to rural. The goods transport enterprises also may be located either in rural
18
or urban areas in the form of owners of trucks and truck drivers residing in rural areas. It is considered that omission of such rural based enterprises would not impact much on the study of various parameters relating to the economics of trucking industry. However, the situation relating to the density, pattern of operations and other characteristics of rural-based truck owning units will be assessed through a small sample study of villages. For this purpose, in each of the 14 States selected as indicated above, one district and one (CD) Block within the selected district and two villages in each selected Block have been covered. Thus, in all, 28 villages have been covered. The list of villages so selected is given in ANNEXURE II 2.3.5 Sampling within the selected locations The procedure for covering goods transport enterprises within the selected localities/villages as approved by the panel constituted by the Ministry on 3 March 2010 was adopted. a) Urban areas In the case of urban locations, lists of the NSSO Urban Frame Blocks (available from their 2002-07 Urban Frame Survey) were obtained for each of the selected locations, categorised by Type of Block (business, industrial, residential, etc as per the classification followed by NSSO). As the transport units would be located mainly in business and industrial areas, blocks have been selected using the following sampling fractions, and simple random sampling. 20% of the Business and industrial Blocks and 2.5% of other Blocks (residential, slum, hospital areas, etc.) In each of the sampled blocks, all the foods transport enterprises identified through listing units have been covered on a census basis. b) Rural areas In the case of rural locations (selected villages), all the goods transport units in each selected village have been covered on a census basis.
19
c)
Sample Size The rural sample, as mentioned above, consisted of 28 villages. In the case of the 42 urban locations, there were a total of 60,648 NSSO UFS Blocks, of which 4,400 are business/industrial blocks and 56,248 are residential and other blocks. Using the sampling fractions of 20% for business and industrial blocks and 2.5% for residential other blocks, subject to a minimum of 1 block of a type at the locality level, the total number of sampled blocks came to 2,306, of which 886 were business./industrial and 1,420 others. The sample size of UFS blocks for each locality and block type is given at Annexure III and a Region- wise summary is given below: Table2.5: Region wise Summary of Total UFS blocks and selected UFS blocks
S.No.
Region
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
North (Plains) North (Hills) West South East Central North East ALL INDIA
Total BA/IA UFS blocks 634 112 1709 975 495 402 73 4400
Total RA/Other UFS Blocks 6406 1030 20256 14948 8268 3875 1465 56248
Total UFS Blocks 7040 1142 21965 15923 8763 4277 1538 60648
Sample Sample Sample BA/IA RA / Total Others 126 161 287 24 342 197 99 81 17 886 28 509 376 209 98 39 1420 52 851 573 308 179 56 2306
20
2.4
Coverage of Transport Companies, Brokers and Agents, Truck Owners and Drivers in the selected blocks/villages
2.4.1
Motorised goods transport industry is not made up of a single homogeneous set of players. Between the consignor of the freight and the consignee who are the actual users of the goods transport services, there is a long chain of entities, though not all of the links of the chain necessarily play a part in all transport operations. In its simplest form, the consignor may directly engage a truck owner to deliver the goods to the consignee. In some cases, he may approach the truck owners through a broker. A more complicated operation, common when the business is large, is the involvement of intermediaries like transport companies and booking agents who are engaged by the consignor and who in their turn reach the truck owner for the actual haulage of freight directly or through a broker. Various models of operation are possible and exist. The study has targeted to cover all the types of players in the road transport of goods industry, and also the actual drivers of goods transport vehicles.
2.4.2
Since drivers are also a good source of information regarding the operations of the trucks on road, all the drivers found in the selected blocks were also covered.
2.4.3
The number of goods transport enterprises identified in the selected blocks of the two types is shown in Table 2.6.
21
Table 2.6 Number of Identified Goods Transport Units in the Selected Blocks Region 1 North-East North Region North-Hill Central Region Western Region Souther Region Eastern Region All India BA/IA 2 4 98 18 55 289 162 77 703 RA & Others 3 17 49 11 49 170 136 77 509 Total 4 21 147 29 104 459 298 154 1212
2.5 2.5.1
Development of Survey Instruments A composite questionnaire (Questionnaire A at ANNEXURE-V) has been developed for collecting the information from the sampled transport operating units on various aspects relevant to address each of the items included in the TOR. In addition a separate questionnaire (QuestionnaireB at ANNEXURE-VI) has also been developed for interviewing truck drivers.
22
2.6 2.6.1
Field Operations The field operations were carried out by the investigators and supervisors engaged by JPS. The investigators and supervisors were given adequate training in the concepts and definitions used in the two questionnaires and in the techniques of data collection and related matters. A pilot was also carried out at Rohtak, Jaipur and Phulera besides one village. The collected data were also scrutinized.
2.7 2.7.1
Reference Period Keeping in view the relevance, convenience and the need to minimize recall lapse on the part of the respondents, different reference periods have been used for different types of data. For instance, data on expenditure and receipts of the transport units collected through Questionnaire A related to the financial year 2009-10. Data on number of workers related to end of March 2010. Utilization of vehicles was collected with reference to the month preceding the data of survey. Detailed information on the recent trips collected through both the questionnaires was in respect of the week that ended on the date of the survey.
2.8 2.8.1
Data from Secondary Sources Used Apart from the primary data collected through the sample survey of goods transport units described above, material from a number of other secondary sources have been utilized in this report. Such material included the serial official statistics on the number of goods transport vehicles registered with the Directorates of Transport in different States and the reports on a number of earlier studies on goods transport industry commissioned/conducted by various agencies from time to time such as the World Bank, the Competition Commission of India and the Working Group of the Eleventh Five Year Plan for the Road Transport Sector, freight rates reported in Economic Times, etc.
23
2.9
Estimation Procedure The estimates of various parameters will be obtained first for each sampled location, then combined to get estimates for each of the sampled States and then combined to get regional level and national estimates. The procedure followed for estimation within any particular selected location and then combining them is as follows: The estimate of a parameter for a selected location is obtained first as the sample means for each Type of Blocks and combined by weighting them by the inverse of the sampling fractions for different types of blocks. These location level estimates will then be combined for all selected locations in the location stratum to get the estimates for each location stratum, and then the estimates of the two location strata in the State are combined to get estimates for the selected State. Derivation of estimates for the region and the country is straightforward extension of this procedure. In all the states the sample estimates for the selected State is divided by the probability with which it is selected to obtain the regional estimate, as the selection of the state is with probability proportional to size. Let X be the population total of the parameter to be estimated. Let x(ijkl) be the total of the sampled values of the parameter for the lth block type, in kth location type (or locality, as only one locality is sampled for each location type), in jth sampled state stratum (or State, as only one state is selected in each state stratum) and ith region.
24
Estimate of the parameter total for the sampled locality k is given by
Est x{L(k)} =
where f(b) is the sampling fraction for the bth type of NSSOs UFS blocks (b =1 for industry/business blocks, and 2 for Others). In fact, the fractions proposed are f(1) = 20% and f(2) = 2.5%
Estimate for the selected state as a whole is obtained by
Est x{S(j)} = where p(k) is the sampling fraction for the localities of type k ( k=1 for State capitals,
2 for localities with large population (in most States 1 lakh) and 3 for localities with less population). These fractions are in fact the reciprocals of the number of towns of that type in the State as per 2001 census, as only one town of each type at most was chosen (for States in Stratum I, State capital was already covered in the first phase of the survey and hence not chosen in the second phase.)
25
The estimate for Region i is then given by: Est x{R(i)} = {1/(i)}* where (i) is the probability with which the State is selected. (In State stratum I, new localities in the State already covered have been taken and hence (1) is 1 in all regions. (2), however, differs from region to region)
Finally, the national estimate is derived as the sum of estimates for all the seven regions as
The multipliers at various levels have been combined in to a single set of overall multipliers which can be applied directly to the sample totals within the sampled locality. These are shown in the table attached in Annexure IV. Estimation for the rural sample followed a similar pattern, from village to block to district, state region and national levels. Explanatory note on methodology used for Calculation of Overall (or composite) Multiplier and its use in Estimation
It is clarified that the overall (or composite) multipliers used for estimation is not any new concept, but only a computational convenience.
In the normal procedure, estimates are built up at various levels starting from the ultimate level of sampling upwards using multipliers appropriate to the level of sampling. This is necessary when estimates at various levels are required. However, when intermediate level estimates are not required but only the overall estimate, the use of overall multiplier,
26
which is essentially the product of the multipliers at various levels, provides an operationally convenient short-cut, without affecting the results in any manner whatsoever.
An example will make it clearer. Let us, for simplicity, assume that one State is selected in a region with probability p. Suppose there are 3 locations to be selected in that State the State capital, one out of the n1 other larger locations and one out of the n2 smaller locations. In each location, 20% (or one in 5) of the business blocks and 2.5% (or one in 40) residential blocks are selected. There is no further sampling involved as the selected blocks are completely surveyed for goods transport units. Let us assume (for simplicitys sake, and this does not in any way affect the procedure or argument) that the sample consists of 1 Business block and one residential block in each of the three locations. Thus, the sample is made up of
Location 1 B1 (business) and R1 (residential) Location 2 B2 and R2 Location 3 B3 and R3
Let us assume that the variable being estimated is X, and the total of the values of X for all the goods transport units in the sample are x (b1) and x(r1) for the business and residential blocks respectively in Location 1, x (b2) and x(r2) for Location 2, and x (b3) and x(r3) for Location 3.
Normally, estimates are built up as follows.
27
Since there is no sampling at the block level, the multiplier at that level is 1 and the estimates for various blocks are simply the totals x (b1) and x(r1) for the business and residential blocks respectively in Location 1, x (b2) and x(r2) for Location 2, and x (b3) and x(r3) for Location 3. The multipliers for different types of blocks are 5 for business block and 40 for the residential blocks, being the inverse of sampling fractions. Thus, the total Location-wise estimates are Estimate for Location 1 = 5* x (b1) + 40* x(r1) Estimate for Location 2 = 5* x (b2) + 40* x(r2) Estimate for Location 3 = 5* x (b3) + 40* x(r3)
Now, Location 1 is the State capital, and so its multiplier at location level is 1. For Location 2, the multiplier is n1 as one out of the n1 large locations is selected. Similarly, the multiplier for Location 3 is n2.
Thus, the estimate for the State is 1* {Estimate for Location 1} + n1*{Estimate for Location 2} + n2*{Estimate for Location 3} = 1* {5* x (b1) + 40*x(r1)} + n1*{5* x (b2) + 40* x(r2)} + n2*{5* x (b3) + 40* x(r3)}
Finally, since the State is selected with probability p, the estimate for the Region would be =1/p* (estimate for the State), i.e,
1/p[1* {5* x (b1) + 40* x(r1)} + n1*{5* x (b2) + 40* x(r2)} + n2*{5* x (b3) + 40* x(r3)}}
28
This is the same as
(1/p*1*5)*{x
(b1)}+(1/p*1*40)*{x(r1)}+(1/p*n1*5)*{x(b2}+(1/p*n1*40)*{x(r2)}+
(1/p*n2*5){x(b3} + (1/p*n2*40) { x(r3)}
Thus, if intermediate level estimates are not required, the overall estimate may be derived as the weighted sum of all the block level sample totals, the weights (the underlined factors) being simply the products of all the relevant multipliers at various stages, which may be called overall or composite multipliers. The numbers in each of the factors is known in advance, and hence, the overall (or composite multipliers can be determined in advance. National estimates are simply the total of all regional estimates and do not involve any estimation procedures. 2.10 Estimation of Gross Value Added One of the important objectives of the study is to estimate the contribution of the mechanised goods transport sector to the gross domestic product. The study therefore attempted to estimate the Gross Value Added by this sector. The principles laid down in the CSO Manual 2007 on National accounts have been followed while computing Gross Value Added. As a practical guide, the procedures adopted by NSSO in their 63rd Round (Economic characteristics of Enterprises in Service Sector) have been adopted. The NSSO used the following definitions: Operating Expenses: The total value of services purchased and other expenses incurred during the reference period by an enterprise on raw materials, electricity, fuel, lubricants and auxiliary materials consumed; cost of maintenance, etc Receipts: The sale value of services produced together with the value of services rendered to other concerns and other receipts incidental to entrepreneurial activities
29
including value of products and by-products manufactured, if any, by an enterprise during the reference period. Gross Value Added: GVA is taken as the additional value created by the process of production of an enterprise to the economy, and is calculated by deducting the total operating expenses from the value of receipts.
30
Chapter 3: Organizational Structure of the Trucking Industry
CHAPTER 3 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE TRUCKING INDUSTRY
3.1 3.1.1
General Barring some captive freight movement operations of the government and some public sector enterprises, the entire goods transportation by road is in private sector. An important aspect of the trucking industry is the existence of a chain of intermediary transport entities. Between the actual consignor, the original sender, and the consignee, the ultimate receiver of goods, there exists a series of links in the form of transport booking agents, transport operators, brokers and the vehicle owners. When the consignor feels the need to move his goods from one location to another, he contacts a transport operator either directly or through a transport agent. The transport operator may or may not have his own vehicles. Quite often, he does. In case he does not have his own fleet or his fleet is inadequate or otherwise occupied he will contact other transport operators (including vehicle owners) directly or through a broker. It is ultimately the vehicle owners who actually transport the goods from the consignor to the consignee.
3.1.2
Thus, between the actual users of goods transportation services, viz., the consignor and the consignee on the one hand and the actual provider of transportation, viz., the vehicle owner, there are a number of intermediaries who facilitate the entire process. The basic model of transportation of goods by road may thus be depicted as in the following diagram.
31
Consignor
Transport Agent
Transport Operator
Consignee
Vehicle Owner
Broker
Consignors are individuals or organizations who give orders to transport operators for transporting goods by road to desired destinations, where the goods are received by individuals or organizations known as consignees. Transport operators are the entities, again individuals or registered or un-registered organizations, who generally operate through regular or ad hoc arrangements with the consignors and book orders for transportation of goods. They may or may not own their own vehicles and operate through brokers and small truck owners. Some of them are large with their own truck fleets and other infrastructure like warehouses and offices at a large number of locations all over the country. Transport Corporation of India, for instance, has a fleet of about 7,000 trucks and 3,000 offices. Truck (or vehicle) owners are the individual owners of a small number of trucks, quite often one and owner-driven. They contact or are contacted by transport operators, usually through brokers, and actually carry out the transportation of goods from one location to another. Some of them, particularly those catering to transportation of household goods, are also directly contacted by the customers. Brokers have relations, usually informal, with the truck owners and transport operators and act as intermediate agents between the two, introducing truckers to the transporters operators or even consignors directly and work on a commission basis charged from either the transport operator or the vehicle owner. They also ensure to some extent, in an informal way, reliability and promptness of the transport services to the transport operator and business to the truck owners. Agents (also called transport suppliers or transport contractors) are also intermediaries, but their job varies from that of a broker. The agents, who usually operate from major project sites or in ports, collect, forward or distribute the goods
32
carried by trucks, and are the link between the transport operators and the consignors. Some of them may also provide finance and go-down facilities. The survey conducted by CIRT in 1998 revealed that around 44 % of small operators themselves take up the multiple role of a transporters, broker and booking agent.
3.1.3
The basic model illustrated above with all the major players in the goods transportation by road sharing the operations has a number of variations in practice. In the extreme case, the consignor himself may own trucks and may directly undertake the transportation himself, dispensing with all intermediaries. More often, the consignor may engage a transport operator directly who in turn may contact vehicle owners through a broker. Further, the above division of various transport entities into the categories shown in the above model is not watertight and the roles of various entities often overlap. A transport operator or a broker may himself be a vehicle owner, or a vehicle owner may himself be a driver of the vehicle. Thus, the industry is marked by considerable degree of organizational variation, flexibility, informality and dependence on intermediaries.
3.1.4
Size and reach of operations is an important source of variation among the transport operators. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the ownership pattern of trucking fleet is highly skewed in favour of small operators but the range of variation is sizeable. Also the truck operators can be classified on the basis of spread and extent of operations into local, regional and national carriers. Thus, while at one extreme of the spectrum are truck owners with a single truck each catering to haul of goods confined to a small local area, at the other are giants like Transport Corporation of India with around 7000 vehicles and over 3000 offices spread all over the country claiming a substantial share of the market. In between the large and small operators are the medium-sized operators with 10 to 100 vehicles engaged in regional or even national operations. The CIRT survey revealed that medium and large sized operators charter trucks to the extent of 10 to 12 times their own fleets. They get these either through lorry suppliers or directly from single truck owners.
33
Some fleet operators encourage their own employees to become owners of trucks by providing financial assistance, subject to the condition that vehicles should be permanently attached to companies.
3.2 3.2.1
Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Activity The proportions of different types of units, viz., agents, transport operators, brokers and vehicle owners, in different States covered in the present survey are given in Table 3.1. It may be mentioned in this connection that the classification of the goods transporting units into these four categories was based on the units own perceptions as their main activity and several times they may be engaged in multiple activities.
Table 3.1: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Type of Units in Different Regions State Agents North (plain) North (Hills) West South East Central North East All India No. of units reporting 7 0 5 5 3 5 6 5 51854 Percentage of units which are Transport Brokers Vehicle operators Owners 22 0 51 63 37 2 12 53 514576 6 0 19 4 25 4 3 6 62793 65 100 24 27 35 88 78 35 343449 972673 No. of reporting units 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 92159 15862 83472 682922 47160 41620 9477 972673
All
It may be seen that out of the total, about 5 percent are Agents and another 6% are brokers. The bulk of the units comprise of either the transport operators (53%) or the vehicle owners (35%). Moreover, the categorization was primarily based on the perceptions of the reporting units as to their dominant activity. Many of them may be
34
performing more than one role in the transportation of goods, as would be seen in the next paragraph. It may also be seen that as per the abovementioned estimates, there are a total of around 9.7 lakh units engaged in transport trade. If we were to analyze the same information by class of cities, i.e. the pattern of distribution of different type of units in bigger or smaller cities, we would get an idea of the type of concentration of activities in different class of cities (Table 3.2 below). Table 3.2: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Type of Units in Different Classes of Cities State Agents Capital Cities Cities >1 Lac Pop Cities<1 Lac Pop Rural All India No. of units reporting 19 10 4 8 5 51854 Percentage of units which are Transport Brokers Vehicle operators Owners 42 42 56 0 53 514576 8 14 5 15 6 62793 31 35 100.0 36 76 35 343449 83472 100.0 100.0 682922 All 100.0 100.0 No. of reporting units 92159 15862
From the above table it is apparent that the agents are much more located in Capital Cities (19%) and lesser numbers in smaller cities of below 1 lac population (4%). Similarly, maximum number of units in rural areas comprise of Vehicle Owners (76%) 3.2.2 While the above classification depicts the situation based on the units own perceptions about their main activity, the units do engage themselves in multiple activities. For instance, a transport operator or even an agent or a broker may also own vehicles and may be called an owner, and a vehicle owner may also perform the role of a transport
35
operator or a broker. The units were asked about their multiple roles during the survey and the results are shown in Table 3.3. Table 3.3: Multiple Activities of the Goods Transporting Units (All Regions) Type of unit Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner All India Percentage of units also performing the role of Transport Broker Vehicle Owner Operator 100 0 1 0 0 0 0 5.33 86 0 41 52.90 0 100 0 6.46 88 0 100 35.31 100.0
Agent
The sum of percentages in the rows exceeds 100 because of multiple responses
A majority of the classified as transport operators (86%) are also vehicle owners, while 41% of vehicle owners also operate as Transport Operator. Thus, the classification into the four categories is extremely fluid.
3.3 3.3.1
Legal Status of the Units The units were classified as Public and Private Limited companies, individual proprietorships or partnerships on the basis of information collected during the survey. Overall, about 60 percent of all units were individual proprietorships and most of the rest were limited companies. It was found that the pattern differed from one unit type to another (Table 3.4).
36
Table 3.4: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Class of Cities and Legal Status Unit Type Pub. Ltd. company Cap >1 lac <1 lac Total No. of reporting units 11 6 0 1 13478 Percentage distribution of units by legal status Pvt. Ltd. Company 52 30 33 33 324693 Individual Partnership Not Total proprietorship known 23 50 63 60 584821 10 5 2 3 26595 3 8 1 2 23085 100 100 100 100 13478 No. of reporting units 27139 165556 779979 972672
3.3.2
In overall terms about 63% of the units were either proprietorship or partnerships, the other 34% were limited companies out of which only 1% being Public Limited Companies while others were Private Limited Companies. Most agents were individual proprietorships (76%) as was the cases with owners since most of the truck owners have 1-2 trucks. However, in the case of transport operators, about 44% had limited companies while the other 54% were individual proprietorships (Table 3.5).
Table 3.5: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Type of Transport Unit and Legal Status Unit type Percentage distribution of units by legal status Pub. Pvt. Ltd. Individual Partnership Not Total Ltd. Company proprietorship known company Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total 4 1 9 0 1 9 43 56 19 33 76 54 26 73 60 0 1 3 6 3 11 1 6 2 2 100 100 100 100 100 No. of reporting units
51855 514576 62794 343449
37
Unit type
Percentage distribution of units by legal status Pub. Pvt. Ltd. Individual Partnership Not Total Ltd. Company proprietorship known company 13478 324693 584821 26595 23085 13478
No. of reporting units 972672
No. of reporting units
3.3.3
The data collected also indicate differences between different Regions, as brought out by the chart below (Table 3.6). In particular, the patterns shown by units in North, North East and Hills shows a preponderance of individual proprietorship whereas units in western region had 58% limited companies, East had 48% and south at 36%.
Table 3.6: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Regions and their Legal Status Unit type Percentage distribution of units by legal status Pub. Ltd. company North(plain) North(Hills) West South East Central North East All India No. of reporting units 1 0 10 0 2 3 0 1 13478 Pvt. Ltd. Individual Partnership Not Company proprietorship known 2 0 48 36 46 34 0 33 324693 89 100 30 62 47 18 60 60 584821 3 0 3 0 5 34 37 3 26595 4 0 9 1 0 11 3 2 23085 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 13478
No. of reporting units 92160 15862 83472 682922 47160 41620 9478 972672 972672
38
3.4 3.4.1
Membership of Trade Associations Not all of the goods transporting units reported themselves as members of the local, State or national level trade associations. Usually, it is to be expected that units above a certain size (in terms of turn-over or fleet strength) would become members of such associations to enjoy the benefits of collective clout. The proportion of units who were members varied from Region to Region and with unit type (Table 3.7). Table 3.7: Association Membership Status of Goods Transporting Units
Number of units classified by
Type of transport operating units
Membership of associations Member Not
Registration Status Registered Not Pub. Ltd. Pvt. Ltd.
Legal Status Ind. Partnership NR
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
100 49 100 85 68
0 51 0 15 32
15 47 85 29 42
85 53 15 71 58
4 1 9 0 1
9 43 56 19 33
76 54 26 73 60
0 1 3 6 3
11 1 6 2 2
3.5 3.5.1
Source of Business and Service Providers In order to explore the relative preponderance of various types of business models operating in the goods transportation industry as indicated in paragraph 3.1, each of the units surveyed was asked as to from whom they derived business and through whom they in turn operated their business. The results on the source of business are shown in Table 3.8 and those on the channel of operation in Table 3.9.
39
Table 3.8 Distribution of Goods transporting Units by Source of Business (All States) Type of Unit Percentage of units by source of business Consignor Agent Transport Broker Vehicle Operator Owner 21.73 18.09 13.25 9.32 19.93 16.04 19.13 18.94 14.94 22.89 26.89 32.71 18.30 22.27 33.07 5.10 25.11 20.71 7.67 33.93
Agent Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner
Table 3.9: Distribution of Goods Transport Operating Units by Operational Channels (All States) Type of Unit Percentage of units carrying business through Agent Transport Broker Vehicle Others Operator Owner 227665 1731482 101942 456101 34.28 6.06 18.8 23.6 19.71 32.21 27.1 30.6 6.80 31.23 35.4 4.6 30.44 30.21 16.8 40.4
Agent Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner
3.5.2
These data indicate that the industry is not governed by any rigid system and is generally operated through a large measure of informal interdependence, even though formal relationships do exist.
40
3.6 3.6.1
Spread of Operations The responses of the units to the question on their usual area of operation are summarised in the following Table (Table 3.10). Table 3.10: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Their Usual Area of Operation Type of unit Total Percentage of units with usual area of operation number Within Anywhere Inter-State AllAll of units district within along India State specific routes 51854 29 2 2 67 100.0 514576 8 2 0 90 100.0 62793 34349 972673 23 17 13 126754 7 11 6 55001 8 8 4 34699 63 64 78 756219 100.0 100.0 100.0 972673
Agent Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner All No. of vehicles 3.6.2
As may be expected, there is an increasing tendency for all goods transport units to also undertake All India Operations. Thus we find that 78% of the units report that they undertake All India operations. Most transport operators claim that they operate All India (90%). Of course this does not mean that 90% of their business comprises of All India business, but only that they also operate on All India basis.
3.7 3.7.1
Employment Employment in a unit is a good measure of the units size. Table 3.11 gives the distribution of various types of goods transport operating units by total regular employment (on payroll) in them and also the average employment per unit. Taking all the goods unit operators together, about 63% of the units employed 1 to 15 employees and another 37% employed 15or more workers. This means that most of the transports operating units are small entities, not having economies of scale compared to bigger units.
41
Table 3.11: Distribution of Goods Transporting Units by Employment Levels Type of units Distribution of employment (%) None 1 to 5 6 to 15 15 to 25 26 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 16 10 9 13 31 56 78 41 50 29 11 9 8 10 947150 8 17 4 42 26 ALL
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Total (Nos.)
264066 4600191 592725 3863478 9320459
1247351 4703420
2422539 9320460
3.7.2
The employment pattern can also be analyzed by class of cities (Table 3.12). It can be seen that maximum number of employees are in the smaller cities of below 1 lac population. However, the percentage of units with 25 or more workers is the highest in the large towns of above 1 lac population. Table 3.12: Distribution of Transport operating units by type of unit and regular employment Types of city Percent (%) % % % % N None 0 0 0 0 0 Distribution of employment 1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 24 7 3 19 13 1247351 31 30 62 50 4703420 29 14 7 10 947150 All 25 or more 33 53 12 26 2422539 4.0 32.5 63.5 100.0 9320459
All India All India All India All India All India
Cap >1 lac <1 lac Total Total
The table 3.13 below shows the composition of the work force in the transport industry. It can be seen that the drivers and cleaners form the biggest segment of the industry and account for threefourths of the work force. Office staff and working proprietors/partners account for another 10%
42
or so. They are mostly engaged in office work and organization. Of course many single truck owners also drive their own vehicles.
Table 3.13: Distribution of Employees in Urban Areas by Goods Transport Operating units and Type of Workers Type of No. of workers by type (%) ALL Office Drivers Cleaners Laborers Working Unpaid Other units
staff prop / Partner family member
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Total (Nos.)
16 5 8 5 6
528432
34 44 41 47 45
4163377
26 33 33 34 33
3105802
5 6 6 6 6
529912
15 5 8 4 5
466817
4 6 2 5 5
505856
0 0 0 0 0
10133
264066 4600191 592725 3863478 9320459 9320460
43
Chapter 4: Ownership Pattern of Trucking Industry in India
CHAPTER 4 OWNERSHIP PATTERN OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY IN INDIA
4.1 4.1.1
General This Chapter discusses the results obtained from the study about the ownership pattern of goods transport vehicles in the country. In general, all over the world, the trucking industry is in private sector, deregulated and presents a fragmented picture, with a few operators owning large fleets of trucks while most of the operators own a few vehicles each. For example, in the United States of America, about 79 % of the operators own less than 10 trucks, while the number of operators with over 100 trucks constitutes only 2 % of the operators. In Great Britain, 94 % of the operators own less than 10 trucks and just 0.2 % operate over 100 trucks7. The trend in UK is reported to be towards increasing concentration of ownership through acquisition. However, while the small operators are in an overwhelming majority, they control only a minority of the vehicles. A study showed that 69 percent of haulers (in 1992) operating between one and four vehicles each ran together only 16 % of all commercial vehicles, while the only one percent of haulers operating more than 50 vehicles each ran 37 % of all commercial vehicles operated by UK haulers8.
7 8
World Bank: India Road Transport Efficiency Study, 2005 Lawton-Smith, Helen, (1995): deregulation and Privatization in the UK Freight, and Bus and coach Industries in International Comparison of Privatization and deregulation among the USA, the UK and Japan- Vol. III: Airline and Trucking, Economic Analysis Series No. 143, www.esri.go.jp Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
44
4.1.2
Past evidence shows that in India too owners of small fleets not only formed the bulk of the operators but also accounted for the largest chunk of the vehicle population. A study by the National Council of Applied Manpower Research9 found that in the early seventies about 98 percent of the fleet was owned by operators owning up to 5 trucks each. The survey conducted by the Central Institute of Road Transport (CIRT), Pune, as a part of the comprehensive study of trucking operations in India organized by the Asian Institute of Transport Development (AITD) at the instance of the Ministry of Surface Transport in 199810 revealed that the structure of the trucking industry is skewed. The study revealed that 77% of fleet is under operators who owned 5 trucks or less; 10% belonged to those with 6 to 10 trucks; 4% belonged to those with 11 to 15 trucks; 3% belonged to those with 16 to 20; and 6% belonged to those with more than 20. Thus, in the two decades intervening between the two studies, there has been a significant increase in the fleet share of the larger operators, though the small operators continued to dominate the scene in terms of fleet ownership. More recent findings from a comprehensive survey of goods transport units in both urban and rural areas11, commissioned by the Central Statistical Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI) and conducted by JPS Associates, indicated that the industry continued to be dominated by small operators. According to this study, 86 % of the transport operators (apart from the 7 % who did not own any truck), owned 5 or fewer vehicles and only 5 % owned 10 or more vehicles.
4.1.3
Important reasons for the preponderance of small operators in goods transport industry are the low entry costs, easy availability of finance, relatively low levels of education and skill requirement and the easy access to driving license and operating permits. Another factor stated to be accounting for the dominance of small operators is the nature of experience in business. The study by AITD/CIRT found that for most operators in this
National Council of Applied Economic Research, (1979) Trucking Operations in India: Asian Institute of Transport Development (1999) 11 India Statistical Strengthening Project , Improvement of Services Sector Statistics, Goods Transportation by Road, JPS Associates, for Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2006 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
10
45
industry, the business ran in their family - 56 % of truck owners were found to have been in the business from 1 to 10 years, 30 % from 11 to 20 years and 15 % for over 20 years. However, an interesting feature observed during the survey by the Asian Institute of Transport Development was that very few operators admitted of owning even up to six trucks. Primarily to avoid falling under the purview of the Motor Transport Workers Act, truck owners intending to add to their fleets by acquiring additional trucks in the names of other persons. This phenomenon also contributes to keeping the fleet strength per owner low.
4.2 4.2.1
Truck Ownership Profile The current ownership profile, based on the results of the present survey, shows that small players continue to dominate the goods transport scene, though there has been some ground gained on the part of the bigger operators in the past decade. The following table (Tables 4.1) classifies the pattern of fleet strength among those categorised as vehicle owners in different regions. Table 4.1: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength in Different Regions
State Does not 1 own any vehicle North(plain) 0 32 North(Hills) 0 88 West 6 21 South 4 41 East 22 60 Central 3 52 North East 3 23 Rural 0 76 All India 5 41
Percentage of Vehicle Owners with Fleets of 2 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 49 50 to 99 32 8 47 47 6 10 62 24 42 15 2 8 5 9 0 9 0 6 13 3 14 2 3 34 0 0 5 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0
100 & above 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
46
4.2.2
Taking all the seven Regions together, the survey finds that about two fifths (41 %) of the vehicle owners had just one truck, while the proportion of those with five or fewer trucks was 83 %. Only about 1% of the vehicle owners had fleets of over 25 trucks. The percentage of small operators with less than 5 trucks is substantially more than what was brought out by earlier surveys and what is expected. In the rural areas, the single truck owners are as high as 76% and comprises of many army people who have retired and invested in trucks. Similarly 96% of North Hill owners and 85% of those in North East own between 1 and 5 trucks.
4.2.3
When we study the pattern of fleet strength in cities of different class sizes, we find that there is a consolidation taking place in Capital Cities where 29% of the fleet owners had between 6 to 100 vehicles. On the other hand in the case of smaller towns (Below one lakh population) only 9% of the fleet was of size between 6 to 100 vehicles. In the rural areas as expected the entire fleet composition was between 1-5 vehicles only. See table 4.2 below:
Table 4.2: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength for different size class of cities State Does not 1 own any vehicle 9 21 4 5 0 5 16 46 76 41 Percentage of Vehicle Owners with Fleets of 2 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 49 50 to 99 42 51 40 24 42 14 10 5 0 6 12 11 4 0 5 2 6 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 100 & Total above 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Capital Cities Cities >1 Lac Pop Cities<1 Lac Pop Rural All India
4.2.4
Apart from the units specifically classified as vehicle owners, many of the other units involved in goods transporting also own their own vehicles. The survey has brought out that on the whole, while about 5 percent of all units of all types did not possess any
47
vehicles, quite a proportion of units classified as other than vehicle owners had goods transport vehicles, particularly those identified as transport operators. Almost 90% of the transport operators were operating with less than 5 trucks. A very large proportion of agents (57%) and brokers, (21%) however, did not have vehicles. Details are given in table 4.3 below: Table 4.3: Distribution of Vehicle Owners by Fleet Strength for different classes of transport operators State Does not 1 own any vehicle 57 20 0 21 1 0 5 47 21 38 76 41 Percentage of Vehicle Owners with Fleets of 2 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 49 50 to 99 13 45 54 39 24 42 8 3 2 12 0 6 1 4 2 8 0 5 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 100 & Total above 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Rural All India
4.3 4.3.1
Type of Vehicles Owned In several countries of the world, goods transportation by road has shifted to the use of multi-axle trucks. In India, however, the industry primarily relies even today on the standard two axle or three axle vehicles. While precise data are not available, the proportion of multi-axle vehicles out of the total truck population in India is extremely low. According to Road Transport Year Book, 2004-05, for States where separate statistics are available for multi-axle and articulated vehicles, the profile of registered commercial vehicles for end of March 2004 shows the share of multi-axle and articulated vehicles as 5 %, of trucks and lorries as 55%, and of light commercial vehicles as 40 %. The Eleventh Plan Working Group on Road Transport sector assumed for their projections of goods vehicles the proportions of 1 % for articulated vehicles, 52 % for medium and heavy vehicles and 47 % for light commercial vehicles.
48
4.3.2
Some estimates by industry experts placed the number of multi-axle vehicles at the turn of the century at around 50,000 out of more than 30 lakh trucks in the country or less than 2 %12. According to the World Bank study of 200513, which, inter alia, estimated the composition of traffic flow on the main national highways (Golden Quadrilateral and East-West and North-South Roads) in 2002, trucks accounted for 41 % of all vehicles (commercial and non-commercial), and they comprised light trucks (5%), 2-axle trucks (30%), 3-axle trucks (4%) and multi-axle trucks (2%). If, therefore, one considers only truck population, multi-axle trucks would be about 5 % of the total and 3-axle trucks another10 %. This being the situation on the main arterial highways, it may be assumed that the overall proportion of multi-axle vehicles would be still lower. In recent years, however, there is slow but steady trend towards adoption of multi-axe trucks for goods transportation replacing the earlier traditional trucks, due to considerations of costs and benefits arising out of load and fuel consumption factors.
4.3.3
The main survey, which is a part of this study and covered 653 in seven States, showed the following distribution of goods carrying vehicles by their type. Thus, the proportion of the larger multi-axle vehicles was 9 %, while that of heavy commercial vehicles was 33 %. Medium commercial vehicles accounted for 42 % of all trucks surveyed and light commercial vehicles for about 16 %. The Drivers survey was primarily undertaken as a case study and to obtain some information about the productivity parameters of the truck industry. LMVs were clearly underrepresented in it. That might explain the rather high presence of multi-axle vehicles. HCVs for 64 %, MCVs for 13 % and LCVs for 7 % of all vehicles surveyed.
4.3.4
The pattern of ownership of different type of vehicles is given in the table 4.4 below. As mentioned earlier, overall 9% of the vehicles are multi-axle type, 33% are Heavy
12 13
Raja Simhan, T.E, Truck operators moving to multi-axle at last? in Business Line, 11 June 2001. World Bank, India Road Transport Efficiency Study November 2005 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
49
Commercial Vehicles which can carry 15 MT. The distribution of LCVs is 16%. These LCV vehicles are typically used for short routes and within city/district use. From the pattern of distribution it is interesting to note that the rural areas are having 63% as heavy commercial vehicles. It may be that they are investing in bigger vehicles to maximize their returns.
Table 4.4: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles and type of operators Type of Operator Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Rural All India Tpt. Multiaxle 13 9 19 8 0 9 Distribution of vehicles by type Heavy Medium Light commercial commercial commercial 65 25 69 37 63 33 8 53 8 35 21 42 14 14 4 20 16 16
All Types 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
4.3.5
When we view the distribution pattern by size class of cities (Table 4.5), we note that most of the multi-axle and heavy commercial vehicles are concentrated in Capital cities and large cities (pop>1 lac), where as the smaller cities have a lower percentage of holding. Similarly the percentage of Light Commercial Vehicles is higher in smaller cities.
50
Table 4.5: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles over cities of different size classes State Multi-axle Distribution of vehicles by type Heavy Medium Light commercial commercial commercial 55 60 18 33 63 18 18 56 42 21 11 7 21 16 16 All Types
Capital Cities Pop>1 lac Pop<1 lac Total Rural 4.3.6
16 14 6 9 0
100 100 100 100 100
A study of the distribution pattern by region (Table 4.6 below) reveals that the Northern Region has maximum number of Multi-axle and Heavy Commercial Vehicles, where as the North (Hills) have the maximum number of Light Commercial Vehicles. The pattern in other regions is more or less similar except that in South there is a preponderance of Medium Commercial Vehicles (58%).
Table 4.6: Distribution of Goods Transport Vehicles by Type, of vehicles over cities of different size classes State Multi-axle North(plain) North(Hills) West South East Central North East All India 14 8 12 7 14 7 8 9 Distribution of vehicles by type Heavy Medium Light commercial commercial commercial 73 5 8 20 40 18 43 44 43 33 25 33 58 34 28 15 42 48 15 18 10 20 34 16 All Types 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
51
4.4 4.4.1
Type of Permit Held A large proportion of the vehicles owned had National permits. Table 4.7 shows the proportion of vehicles with national permits was high in all States averaging about 52 %. The proportion was the highest in North Plains with 62% of the vehicles with National Permit. The percentage was the lowest in East at 43%. Interestingly the rural areas had 53% of their vehicles with National Permits, possibly because a number of rural owners may be hiring their vehicles to other transport operators, who would prefer the hired vehicles to have National Permits.
Table 4.7: Proportion of Vehicles with National and Local Permits in different Regions Region North(plain) North(Hills) West South East Central North East All India Rural Total Number of Percentage of Vehicles Vehicles with National permit 649653 28835 525951 2124485 86212 245230 40939 3701304 136753 62 47 57 49 43 49 53 52 53
52
4.4.2
A study of the pattern of National Permits by ownership of vehicles (Table 4.8) revealed that most of single truck owners (except in rural areas) had mostly local permits only and just 15% had National Permits. On the other hand as the ownership of vehicles increased, the percentage of vehicles having National Permits also increased to as high as 67%
Table 4.8: Proportion of Vehicles with National and Local Permits in different Vehicle Ownership Patterns No. of Vehicles 1 2-4 5-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 More than 100 Total Rural Total Number Percentage of of Vehicles Vehicles with National permit 394519 15 729474 1397078 683550 275744 193021 27918 3701304 136753 65 49 62 67 48 50 52 53
53
Chapter 5: Nature and Volume of Goods Transported
CHAPTER 5 NATURE AND VOLUME OF GOODS TRANSPORTED
5.1
General
5.1.1
There are no regular statistics available on the volume and nature of goods transported by road, except some broad estimates of the overall volume. Available estimates for various years have been given in Table 1.1 in Chapter 1. Provisional estimates placed the volume of goods traffic by road at around 650 billion tonne-kms in 2004-05. The Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan projected the likely demand for goods transport by road to grow from an estimated 844 BTKM in 2007-08 to 1,231 BTKM by the end of the Plan period (2011-12) or by 10.8 percent per year. This would amount to an average annual demand of 1,028 BTKM during the Plan. No break-up of this aggregate volume either by States or by type of goods carried is available. The Department of Road Transport has commissioned a separate study on the volumes of goods as well as passenger traffic. The present survey of transport units also made an attempt to obtain this break-up, as it is one of the Terms of Reference for this study.
5.2 5.2.1
Method of Estimation The present study approached this issue in the following manner. Firstly, data was collected regarding the Type and Number of Vehicles owned by the Goods Transport Unit by asking this question from the Goods Transport Units that were identified in the randomly selected blocks. This data was then collated and suitably extrapolated using the multipliers for different cities and villages as explained in the chapter No.2 to obtain the estimate for the number of vehicles owned by the Transporters.
54
5.2.2
Further, in order to obtain information on utilization of vehicles, information was collected from the Transporting Units as to the pattern of Utilization of different type of vehicles for the previous month. This data was then extrapolated to obtain the vehicle utilization and number of vehicles in use, using the collation at city level and then using the multiplier methodology to obtain All India picture.
5.2.3
Data obtained from the survey of drivers provided an estimate of the number of trips undertaken by each vehicle during a month, by type of vehicle, the average distance covered, the types of goods carried and the tonnage carried. Thus, the estimated annual tonne-km. of goods (of different types) carried per vehicle used has been derived. Applying the factors of utilization of vehicles owned, these estimates have been converted as annual tonne-km. of freight per owned vehicle. Estimates for different States have then been obtained by multiplying these annual freight-kms per vehicle by the number of vehicles in-use in that State as estimated from secondary sources for the year 2009-10.
5.2.4
The methodology for determining each of these parameters was to collate the data for each of the required parameters from the questionnaires administered to the respondents who were identified in the selected UFS blocks of different cities. Different multipliers have been derived for Business/Industrial UFS blocks and for Residential/others UFS blocks for each city as given in Annexure-IV. The respective multiplier multiplies the information collected from each respondent, before the average is determined. The totals of such figures for a city give the city average, and the sum of the three cities of the state gives the state average. The sum of the selected states gives the All India Average.
55
5.2.5
Methodology with Example for Estimation of Tonn Kms. Of Goods
An explanation with an example will clarify the methodology for Estimation of Tonne-km of goods carried in a year
1. The data The data relevant for estimation of volume of goods and distance carried that are collected from each unit are: No. of vehicles of each type (Ni i=1,2,3,4 MAV, HAV, MCV and LCV) No. of trips of each type of vehicle done in a month (Ti i=1,2,3,4) Average tonnage carried in a trip for each type of vehicle (Vi i=1,2,3,4) Average distance covered in a trip (Di i=1,2,3,4)
The total tonne-km of goods carried by all vehicles of Type i in a month is determined as the product TKMi = Ni *Ti *Vi *Di (1)
2. The approach in developing State-wise estimates The sample covered only 14 States and as such development of direct estimates is not possible for all the States. Hence, the estimates have been obtained indirectly by estimating the factor of TKM per vehicle of each type at all India level from the sample and applying it to the number of vehicles in use in each State derived independently. 3. Estimation of the factor of TKM per vehicle The factor TKM per month per vehicle of each type is estimated through the following steps:
56
The total number of vehicles (Ni) of each type is estimated as the weighted total of the sample values, the weights being the respective multiplying factors. The overall average values Ti, Vi and Di of a) the number of trips in a month, b) the tonnage carried per trip, and c) the distance per trip respectively have been estimated by aggregating the unit level data using the appropriate multipliers and dividing these totals by the corresponding number of vehicles of each type. The total TKM by all vehicles of a particular type has then been obtained using the relation (1) mentioned above. The ratio of the total TKM for a particular type of vehicle to the total number of vehicles of that type provides an estimate of TKM per vehicle of that type per month 4. Estimation of TKM carried As mentioned above, the sample data have been used only to derive average values of TKM per vehicle of each type. For estimating the total TKM using these factors using the external data on the number of vehicles, the following steps have been followed. Total number of vehicles-in-use of each type in the State has been taken from the number of permits issues, which is available from official statistics as explained in the Chapter 4 of this report. The proportion of vehicles of each type actually in use and intensity of their usage (i.e.use factor) has then been determined using the survey data Total TKM has been estimated as the product of number of vehicles in use, and the TKM per vehicle obtained from the survey as derived in table 5.4 of this chapter. Since the secondary data for vehicles-in-use was available only for HCV and LCV, the data of freight per vehicle for MAV and MCV was merged with the data of HCV by taking the weighted average of MAV, HCV and MCV and using it as the composite value for HCV.
57
5 An example The method is illustrated below with the help of data in respect of one State, Orissa. It must be clarified that in the sampling design adopted Orissa represents the stratum of states in the eastern region other than West Bengal, i.e., Orissa, Bihar and Jharkand. The estimate of the factor TKm per month therefore is applicable for all these three States. But that is sufficient to illustrate the method. Data for each of the sampled units in the State of Orissa and detailed calculations are given in the Annexure XII-A and XII- B. The final estimates of the factors of TKm per vehicle of each type derived on the basis of these data are shown in the following Table. Estimates of Total TKM per Vehicle/annum - Orissa Type of Vehic le Avg. No. of Estima ted Vehicl es Est. Avg Tonnage carried No. of trips/m onth per vehicle Avg.dist ance per trip/vehi cle Total Million TKm/annum (a*b*c*d*12) Million TKm/Ve h (a*b*c* d*12)/a Usage factor % Million TKM/Ve h after usage factor
a MAV HCV MCV LCV Total 99 2229 333 12 2672
b 18 9.57 5.85 6 9.41
c 4 18 13 17 17
d 1440.03 404.17 751.39 199.92 484.62
e 123.17 1862.25 228.34 2.93 2485.75
f 1.24 0.835 0.685 0.244 0.930
g 98.35 98.34 92.55 77.28 95.22
h 122.36 82.16 63.46 18.91 88.58
58
The above estimates are in respect of the three States Orissa, Bihar and Jharkhand only. The estimates of TKm per vehicle of each type per month for All-India may be derived by extending the aggregation with appropriate multipliers over all the sample States in a similar manner. The TKM/Vehicle are then moderated by the usage factor as explained in para 5.3 below. It may be mentioned once again that the State-wise estimates have been arrived at by applying the AllIndia factors to the number of vehicles in use in each State. The total TKM / Vehicle at All India level are indicated in Annexure XIII of the report.
5.3 5.3.1
Utilization of Vehicles Owned Vehicle-owning units in the sample were asked to indicate the extent of utilization of their vehicles during the month preceding the date of survey. Results based on the responses are shown below in Tables 5.1. On an average trucks are used for about threefourths of the time. This factor is fairly stable across the seven Regions except North, which has the highest utilization ar around 81%. Expectedly, the utilization is lower in rural areas at around 72% with 37% of the vehicles being used for less than 15 days in a month. Table 5.1: Distribution of Utility of Vehicles by Different Regions Region Not operated at all Percentage of vehicles used for 1 to 7 days 2 0 7 0 18 8 to 14 15 to days 21 days 9 20 21 17 22 49 51 31 48 17 22 or Total more days 39 29 39 33 42 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 80.75 77.25 74.5 77.5 70.25 59 Utilization factor
North(plain) North(Hills) West South East
0 0 1 1 0
Region Not operated at all Central North East Rural All India 0 0 0 1
Percentage of vehicles used for 1 to 7 days 6 0 9 2 8 to 14 15 to days 21 days 42 8 28 18 49 66 50 45 22 or Total more days 3 26 12 33 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Utilization factor
62.25 79.5 72.33 77.52
@ Utilization factor has been derived as the weighted average of the number of vehicles operated for various extents divided by the total number of vehicles. The weights used are 0 for vehicles not operated at all, 0.25 for those used for 1 to 7 days, 0.50 for those used for 8 to 14 days , 0.75 for those used for 15 to 21 days and 1 for those used for 22 or more days in a month.
The data obtained from the survey was also analyzed over different class of vehicles to determine the relative utilization of different class of goods vehicles. The highest utilization is for the MCVs at 80% with Heavy Commercial Vehicles following closely. It can be observed that 84% of the time HCVs than 15 days for 25% of the time.
Table 5.2: Distribution of Utilization of Vehicles Covered by Survey Class of Vehicles Not operated at all MAV HCV MCV 0 1 0 5 2 1 20 13 23 42 48 42 33 36 34 100.0 100.0 100.0 76.54 78.32 80.24 Percentage of vehicles used for 1 to 7 days 8 to 14 days 15 to 21 days 22 or more days Total Utilization factor
are utilized for more than 15 days.
Expectedly the utilization of LCVs was the lowest at 65% with them being used for less
60
Class of Vehicles Not operated at all LCV Total No. of vehicles 41848 5 1 6 3
Percentage of vehicles used for 1 to 7 days 8 to 14 days 15 18 15 to 21 days 50 45 22 or more days 24 34 100.0 100.0 Total
Utilization factor
65.16 77.52
92871
692099
1744739
1266499
3838057
5.4 5.4.1
Estimates of Volume of Freight Carried in Tonne-km. per Year per Vehicle The Drivers survey yielded the average annual tonne-km. achieved by various types of trucks. These estimates have been worked out by multiplying the average number of trips per vehicle, the average distance covered and the average tonnage hauled for each type of vehicle in each of the seven States covered in the survey. Using this data, which was moderated by the vehicle utilization factor explained in Para 5.3.1 above, the Volume of Freight Carried per year per vehicle for different size classes of vehicles was arrived at.
5.4.1
The results obtained are given below in Table 5.3 below. It has been estimated that the Annual Volume of Freight carried per vehicle (in 000) in 2009-10 is around 42.26 Million-Tonne-Kilometers. Details are given in Annexure XIII. .
61
Table 5.3: Estimated Annual Volume of Freight Hauled Per Vehicle for Different Classes of Vehicles in 2009-10 (in Million TKM) No. Of Type of Vehicle % Vehicle Utilization Avg. Tonnage trip per month MAV HCV MCV LCV Total 76.54 78.32 80.24 65.16 77.52 16.4 9.4 5.8 2.8 8.2 7 11 17 14 13 Avg. Distance Covered Per round 1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72 84 132 204 168 156 Avg. No of trip per year Avg. distance covered per year 85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32 Volume of Freight per vehicle in Million TKM/vehicle 106.84 47.56 23.58 4.95 42.26
5.4.2
The results obtained indicate that Maximum TKM per vehicle are hauled by the MAVs (Multi-axle Vehicles) as they carry the maximum Average Tonnage and also the maximum distance covered at around 85000 Km per annum. Next largest contributor per vehicle is the HCVs at 47.56 Million TKM per vehicle. Conversely the contribution of LCVs appears to be low at just 4.95 Million TKM per LCV, indicating that their usage is limited to within city or short distances.
5.4.3
It is further observed that the average tonnage carried is 8.2 tonne per vehicle. The average number of trips per month is 13 nos. and the average distance covered per vehicle per annum is around 65000 Kms. This comprises of 85000 Km per annum for MAVs and 27000 Kms per annum for LCVs.
62
5.5 5.5.1
Estimates of Vehicles in use for 2009-10 Data on goods transport vehicles registered with the transport authorities of various States are available only for 2005-06 (Provisional). To extrapolate them forward to 2009-10, the growth rates between 2004-05 and 2005-06 have been calculated in each State for MAVs and HCVs and LCVs, moderated wherever there had been excessive increase and increased to the national level wherever no growth was indicated, and then used to get the estimates for March 2010.
5.5.2
The data of permits issued (Vehicles in use) is available from the Transport Year Book 206-07 for some of the states. Data of some of the states was doubtful as the vehicles inuse were seen to be higher than the registered vehicles. Such data was suitably moderated to make it equal to the number of registered vehicles. The states for which data was not available, the All India Averages ratio of Registered vehicles to In-Use vehicles was used to extrapolate the in-use vehicles for the states whose data was not available.
5.6 5.6.1
State-wise Estimates of Volume of Goods Traffic (in BTKM) Estimates of the volume of goods traffic hauled during 2009-10 in various States and regions have been made by multiplying the estimated tone-km per vehicle as obtained from table 5.3 above and the Vehicles In-Use data extrapolated from the secondary data available. These estimates are presented in the following Table (Table 5.4).
63
Table 5.4: All India Estimates of Volume of Goods Carried per Annum in 2009-10 expressed as Billion-Tonne-Kilometers (BTKM) State and Region Wise State / Region Estimated In-Use Vehicles in Volume of Freight carried 2009-10 (BTKM) per Annum in 2009-10 HCV LCV Total In- BTKM BTKM BTKM Use HCV LCV Total
1,98,683 78,133 67,783 1,50,309 2,025 66,128 5,63,061 34,345 14,533 13,168 18,193 4,609 38,499 1,23,347 2,33,028 92,666 80,952 1,68,502 6,634 1,04,627 6,86,408 82.35 32.38 28.09 62.30 0.84 27.41 233.38 1.84 0.78 0.70 0.97 0.25 2.06 6.59 84 33 29 63 1 29 240
Haryana Punjab Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Chandigarh Delhi North (Plains) Region Himanchal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Uttarakhand North (Hills) Region Goa Gujarat Maharashtra Dadra & Nagar Haveli Daman & Diu Lakshadweep Western Region Andhra Pradesh Karnataka
36,460 41,925 13,863 92,247
11,825 2,261 958 15,043
48,284 44,185 14,820 1,07,290
15.11 17.38 5.75 38.23
0.63 0.12 0.05 0.80
16 17 6 39
529 2,34,285 3,29,286 6,961 2,548 5,73,609
116 1,45,260 1,91,933 1,003 1,328 199 3,39,840
645 3,79,545 5,21,220 7,964 3,876 199 9,13,449
0.22 97.11 136.48 2.89 1.06 237.75
0.01 7.76 10.26 0.05 0.07 0.01 18.16
0 105 147 3 1 0 256
1,89,585 2,22,936
51,154 93,641
2,40,739 3,16,576
78.58 92.40
2.73 5.00
81 97
64
State / Region
Estimated In-Use Vehicles in Volume of Freight carried 2009-10 (BTKM) per Annum in 2009-10 HCV LCV Total In- BTKM BTKM BTKM Use HCV LCV Total
1,94,163 3,24,500 1,967 5,480 9,38,632 1,13,729 1,48,807 44 612 4,07,986 3,07,892 4,73,307 2,011 6,092 13,46,618 80.48 134.50 0.82 2.27 389.04 6.08 7.95 0.00 0.03 21.80 87 142 1 2 411
Kerala Tamilnadu Andaman & Nicobar Puducherry Southern Region Bihar Jharkhand Orissa West Bengal Eastern Region Arunachal Pradesh Assam Manipur Meghalaya Central Region All India
57,339 68,109 85,330 2,69,717 4,80,496
5,650 5,650
57,339 68,109 90,980 2,69,717 4,86,146
23.77 28.23 35.37 111.79 199.15
0.30 0.30
24 28 36 112 199
2,677 1,05,243 7,297 2,250 154777
345 11,107 1,063 183 35435
3,021 1,16,349 8,360 2,433 190212
1.11 43.62 3.02 0.93 64.15
0.02 0.59 0.06 0.01 1.89
1 44 3 1 66
29,91,851
9,47,572
39,39,423
1,240.05
50.64
1,291
5.6.2
The total volume of freight traffic handled by road has, thus, been estimated at about 1291 BTKM for 2009-10. The Western and Southern regions have accounted for the bulk of this freight movement.
65
5.6.3
Am alternative estimate based on the number of Goods Transport Vehicles of different types based on the Survey, gives and estimate of total All India Volume of fright traffic at 1227 BTKM (Annexure XI). Since the volume of traffic handled is sensitive to the number and composition of Goods Transport Vehicles, we have relied on the estimates of numbers of Goods Vehicles based on secondary data.
5.7 5.7.1
Volume of Freight by Sector An attempt has also been made to obtain a break-up of the estimated volume of freight by the type of goods carried. Based on the information collected in the survey of Goods Transport Operators, the percentage distribution of the tone-km. hauled by the type of goods has been obtained. This distribution and the resultant break-up of the total volume into various industrial sectors is given in Table 5.5.
Table 5.5: Distribution of Volume of Freight by Industrial Sector (2009-10) Sl.No. Sector of Goods Percentage Distribution of goods carried (%) 21.9 39.6 17.1 7.3 13.3 0.8 All India 100.0 Estimated Volume of Goods Carried BTKM 282.9 510.8 220.8 94.6 171.3 10.5 1291
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Agricultural Commodities Industrial/Mineral Goods Construction Material Oil and other liquid cargo Consumer & household goods Others
66
5.8 5.8.1
Limitations of the Study: Reliability of Estimates These estimates are based on the estimated total in-use vehicle population in 2009-10 obtained by projecting the in-use vehicle population in 2006 from secondary sources on the basis of the growth observed during 2004-05 & 2005-06 with suitable adjustments. A vehicle utilization factor of for each class of vehicles with an average utilization of 0.78 has been determined and used for translating owned vehicles to vehicle usage on the basis of survey findings has been applied for the all the appropriate class of vehicles, and the average annual tonne-km hauled per vehicle of each type of vehicle has been determined. The estimates of total freight are rather sensitive to the various parameters involved and high accuracy in the estimates of these parameters is therefore required. The estimation of volume of road traffic movement of goods on the above basis can be no permanent substitute for a more methodical system of data on actual movement of goods by road that needs to be established making use of modern technology.
5.8.2
All efforts were made to obtain survey data of reliable and good quality by undertaking selection of qualified personnel who were then given both classroom and field training. Pilots were conducted in cities of different sizes and a villages to train the surveyors on the methodology for locating respondents and necessary data collection. Supervision and test checks were carried out for ensuring quality control.
67
Chapter 6: Contribution of the Trucking Industry to the Economy
CHAPTER 6 CONTRIBUTION OF THE TRUCKING INDUSTRY TO THE ECONOMY
6.1 6.1.1
Concept and Method The importance of an economic sector is measured by its contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP). With the rapid development of Indian economy in the recent decades, the share of services sector in the GDP has steadily increased from about 38 percent in 1980-81 to about 55 % in 2006-07.14 Within the services sector, the road transport sector is one of the rapidly growing sub-sectors, its share in GDP having gone up from 5.7 % in 1999-2000 to 6.4 percent in 2004-05 (see Table 1.2). A significant fact is that in this growth, the road transport segment alone accounts for the entire incremental share, the other segments like railways, air and water transport segments having just maintained their relative contributions. This chapter makes an attempt to assess the share of GDP that is attributable to goods transportation by road through mechanised means, i.e., through motorised transportation.
6.1.2
In general, the share of GDP emanating from different sub-sectors of the services sector is estimated through labour input method, in which estimates of gross value added (GVA) per worker which is the same as the labour productivity, are multiplied by estimates of the total labour input in the sub-sector. The Central Statistical Organization (CSO), which is responsible for official releases on GDP and related aggregates, obtains the estimates of labour inputs in goods transport sector (as in the case of various other sub-sectors) on the basis of the quinquennial labour force surveys and the estimates of labour productivity
14
Based on data on GDP at factor cost by industrial origin given in statistical table A5, Economic Survey 2007-08, Ministry of Finance. Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
68
from the periodical enterprise surveys relating to the goods transport sector conducted by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) as a follow-up of the Economic Censuses undertaken by the CSO. The CSO has been constantly making refinements in the methodology adopted with the gradual improvement in the availability of basic data over the years. Apart from the shifting of base years of national accounts series (the latest shift being from 1999-2000 to 2004-05), the CSO has also been making improvements in the compilation of national accounts series in terms of coverage of activities, incorporation of latest datasets and latest international guidelines. The latest series 200405 as base incorporates the latest available data from various sources. 6.1.3 In the latest methodology adopted by CSO for the mechanized road transport sector, public sector (which applies mainly to passenger transport only, which is not a part of this study) GVA estimates have been compiled by analyzing the annual accounts of State Road Transport Corporations, while for private corporate and un-organised sectors, the estimates of GVA have been compiled for the base year (2004-05) as a product of GVA per worker obtained from the results of the 63 round (2006-07) of NSSO and workforce estimates based on Employment-Unemployment Survey of 61st round (2004-05) and Population Census 2001 for the respective NIC codes. The estimates of GVA per worker obtained by CSO for freight transport by mechanized transport (NIC code 60231) for the year 2004-05 came to around Rs. 1.19 lakh for the corporate sector and Rs. 0.85 lakh for the unorganized sector. The present survey provides an independent means of assessing the GVA per worker in the sub-sector under study15. 6.1.4 The net income generated in any production unit is distributed between the two factors a) capital (in the form of capital income to the owner of the capital) and b) labour (in the form of labour income to the labour employed). The labour income takes the form of either wages or salaries including commission/pensionary benefits, bonus, etc., or supplementary contribution of the employer towards payments in kind. Thus the total
rd
15
Central Statistical Organization, New Series of National Accounts Statistics Base Year (2004-05), March 2010 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
69
income generated in the form of factor shares consists of (i) wages & salaries (ii) interest, (iii) rent, (iv) dividends, (v) undistributed profits, and (vi) mixed income of self employed. 6.1.5 Goods transport industry, like other industries, receives subsidies from the government as incentives from time to time. As a matter of long-standing convention, subsidies are regarded as payments necessary to elicit factor services. Accordingly they are included in the sum of factor incomes.16. Accordingly, for obtaining GVA at factor cost, subsidies are treated as a part of the gross receipts. Indirect taxes, such as excise, VAT, etc., on the other hand, are taken as part of expenses and hence deducted from the total expenditure. If the GVA is to be computed at market prices, therefore, the GVA at factor prices has to be increased by the amount of indirect taxes and reduced by the amount of subsidies. 6.1.6 Gross Value Added is, thus, the total income of an enterprise less intermediate expenditure, subject to the above considerations. This is the approach adopted by NSSO also in their follow up enterprise surveys. For instance, in their surveys on the service sector, which included transport services, the following definitions have been used. 2.28 Operating Expenses: The total of values of raw materials, electricity, fuel, lubricants and auxiliary materials consumed, and also cost of maintenance, services purchased and other expenses incurred reference period were considered to be operating expenses 2.29 Receipts: The value of services rendered to other concerns together with the other receipts incidental to entrepreneurial activities like sale value of items manufactured or goods traded by an enterprise was considered to be total receipts during the
16
Central Statistical Organization, National Accounts Statistics-Sources and Methods, 2007
70
2.30 Gross Value Added: Value added was that part of production which was the actual contribution of an enterprise to the economy. Value added has been calculated by deducting total operating expenses from the total receipts during the reference period.17 6.1.7 The present survey collected data from various goods transport entities like transport operators, agents and brokers and vehicle owners on their total a) annual turnover (Y) with detailed break up according to various heads such as commissions, subsidies, hiring charges, etc. and expenditure according to various heads, namely, wages and salaries paid to workers on payroll (X1), payments made to persons like drivers, cleaners, etc. not on the payroll (X2), hiring charges for vehicles for goods transportation (X3), commission to brokers and agents (X4), and other expenses (X5). These expenditures, barring that on the wages and salaries paid to the regular establishment on the payroll and the net hiring charges paid to the hired personnel are treated as intermediate expenditure in the conventional approach to GVA estimation. The gross value added by the enterprise is then derived as GVA = Y (X3 + X4 + X5). 6.1.8 GVA per unit and per worker have then been derived by dividing the total GVA estimate respectively by a) the total number of units and b) the payroll employment of the enterprises together with the proprietors and other persons engaged in the activity as reported in the survey. 6.1.9 An example of GVA calculation in respect of Chattisgarh is enclosed at Annexure-XII-A & XII-B.The estimates are built from basic data collected from various operatig units in terms of revenues and expenditure and the final figures for the state are arrived at by
17
NSS Report No. 482 on Unorganised Service Sector in India, 2001-02, Section 2 Concepts, Definitions and Procedures Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
71
multiplying them with the respective multipliers. The GVA per unit and per worker is then derived as per methodology explained above. 6.2 6.2.1 Gross Value Added (GVA) by Units For all the seven Regions put together, GVA per unit in urban areas came to Rs.11.8 lakhs. The GVA per unit for Rural Areas was found to be 5.7 lakhs. Table 6.1 presents the estimates of GVA per Unit for different types of units in each of the Regions surveyed. Table 6.1: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per Unit through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Region Regions No.of units (Nos.) North (plain) North (Hills) West South East Central North East All India Rural 92159 15862 83472 682922 47160 41620 9477 972673 74774 Gross Value Added per unit Total Expenses Excluding Gross Value Receipts Indirect Taxes and Addition (Rs Cr) Salaries and Wages (Rs Cr) (Rs Cr) 59029.1 22374.3 36654.8 2103.3 46729.0 144970.4 7256.3 13943.4 3071.6 277103.2 10445.6 872.2 23884.6 101421.0 3333.3 8857.5 1499.5 162242.5 6199.7 1231.2 22844.5 43549.3 3923.0 5085.8 1572.1 114860.7 4245.9 GVA per unit (Rs Lakhs) 39.8 7.8 27.4 6.4 8.3 12.2 16.6 11.8 5.7
72
6.2.2
Some general conclusions that may drawn from the above data are: a) that the highest GVA/Unit was found to be that of North (Plains) at 39.8 lakhs per unit. Possibly because of less units and still higher receipts. B) South has the maximum number of units and hence its GVA/unit is the lowest at Rs 6.4 lakhs per unit.
6.2.3
The table 6.2 below gives the Gross Value Addition per unit by type of Goods Transportation units. The figures show that the GVA per unit are the highest for Agent and Broker, possible because they do not employ too many workers and their receipts in the form of commissions are high compared to the expenses. The GVA of Transport Operator is almost half that of the owner, because an operator is also hiring trucks and hence his hiring expenses reduce his GVA per unit. Table 6.2: Gross Value Added (Rs. Lakhs) per Unit through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Type of Unit-owner
Goods Transportation Unit
No.of units (Nos.)
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total-Urban Total-Rural
51854 514576 62793 343449 972673 74774
Gross Value Added per unit Receipts Expenses Gross excluding Excluding Value subsidies Indirect Taxes Addition (Rs Cr) and Salaries (Rs Cr) and Wages (Rs Cr) 12034.2 3916.0 8118.2 133575.2 20388.8 111105.0 277103.2 10445.6 89258.4 7852.6 61215.5 162242.5 6199.7 44316.9 12536.2 49889.4 114860.7 4245.9
GVA per unit (Rs Lakhs) 15.7 8.6 20.0 14.5 11.8 5.7
73
6.2.4
Gross Value Added per Worker As mentioned earlier, the CSO estimates GVA per worker for the goods transport sector with data from two sources. For the organized sector, it uses the annual reports of the respective organizations and for the enterprises in the unorganized sector; it uses the results of the NSSO 57th round. In either case, the method of obtaining GVA is to take gross receipts and subtract all expenditure on intermediary inputs (expenditure on salaries of hired and regular establishment excluded).
6.3.1
Estimates of GVA per worker, i.e. the labour productivity, are given in Table 6.3 for different types of Goods Transportation units. The average GVA per worker in Urban Areas is Rs 1,23,000. The GVA per worker of Rural Areas is Rs 1,13000. The highest GVA per worker was predictably that of the agents and brokers. The transport operator has GVA per worker which is lower that of the owner, once again due to higher expenses of the transport operator. The GVA per worker at Rs 1.23 lakhs compares well with the CSO estimates of GVA/Worker based on the NSSO 57th round (2004-05) survey at Rs 0.85 lakhs/worker for the unorganized sector after taking inflation into account.
Table 6.3: Gross Value Added per Worker (in Rs) through Type of Goods Transportation by Road for Each Type of Unit Goods Transportation Unit Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Gross Value Added per unit No.of Gross Value GVA per workers Addition worker (Nos.) (Rs Cr) (Rs) 264066 8118.2 307000 4600191 592725 3863478 44316.9 12536.2 49889.4 96000 212000 129000
74
Goods Transportation Unit
Total-Urban Total-Rural
Gross Value Added per unit No.of Gross Value GVA per workers Addition worker (Nos.) (Rs Cr) (Rs) 9320459 114860.7 123000 377196 4245.9 113000
6.3.2 When we look at the GVA per worker by region (Table 6.4), we find that the highest GVA per worker is that in North (Plains) at Rs 2.29 lakhs per worker. Both North East and North (Hills) also have a high GVA/worker.The lowest figure is that of South Region which seems to have the highest number of workers of all the regions. Table 6.4: Gross Value Added per worker in Rs through Goods Transportation by Road for Each Region State Gross Value Added per unit No.of workers Gross Value GVA per (Nos.) Addition worker (Rs Cr) (Rs) 1598916 36654.8 229000 66085 1246348 5482804 243616 595875 86816 1231.2 22844.5 43549.3 3923.0 5085.8 1572.1 186000 183000 79000 161000 85000 181000
North (plain) North (Hills) West South East Central North East
75
State
All India Rural
Gross Value Added per unit No.of workers Gross Value GVA per (Nos.) Addition worker (Rs Cr) (Rs) 9320459 114860.7 123000 377196 4245.9 113000
6.3
Contribution of the Industry to GDP Estimation of the total contribution of the industry to national GDP has also been estimated by dividing the overall receipts by the GDP of the country. The GDP reported in the Economic Survey of 2009-10, reported the GDP at current prices at Rs 6164178 crores. Based on our survey, we have arrived at the Gross Receipts of the Goods Transport Industry (for both Urban and Rural Areas) at Rs 119107 Cr which translates into a contribution to GDP of 1.93%. This represents the contribution of only the mechanized goods transport sector to the GDP. The estimates of the Ministry of Shipping, Transport and Highways for the whole of transport Sector including mechanized and non-mechanized transport as also passenger transport is estimated at 4.5% of the GDP.
76
Chapter 7: Economic Parameters of Trucking Industry
CHAPTER - 7 ECONOMIC PARAMETERS OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY
7.1 7.1.1
General Past studies by various organizations pointed to the low levels of productivity in the freight transport services by road. Data on some important economic parameters that have a bearing on the levels of productivity in the trucking industry such as the age of the vehicles, fuel consumption, extent of utilization of the goods transport vehicles, tonne-km covered per vehicle in a year, average turn-around time, economic cost of inter-state barriers, etc, collected through the survey are analyzed in this Chapter.
7.2 7.1.2
Characteristics of the Vehicles Fleet composition: The existing fleet composition is, as pointed out elsewhere, is heavily tilted in favour of the outmoded rigid bodied 2 axle trucks, and does not make for efficiency in freight transport. There is of late a trend towards increasing induction of multi-axle trucks and also tractor-trailer vehicles, which have the advantage of the tractor being used while the trailer unit is in the process of being loaded or unloaded. Moreover a multi-axle vehicle can haul 15 tonnes, which is almost double the capacity of a normal 9tonner, while the fuel consumption is only slightly more, giving an overall advantage.
7.1.3
Age of vehicles: One of the major variables that have a significant bearing on vehicle productivity is the age of the vehicle. Considering that domestic production of commercial vehicles has accelerated considerably during the recent years, one would expect that a significant percentage of the vehicles would be young in age. The results of
77
the main survey of goods transporting units presented in Table 7.1 would show that this is indeed so. Taking all the Regions together, about 30 % of the trucking vehicles were less than 6 years in age and another 40% were in the age bracket 6 to 9 years. The youngest fleet was predictably in the hills with 91% below 10 yrs old in North Hills and 81% in North East, as they need to have their vehicles in best condition all the time. Table 7.1: Distribution of Owned Vehicles by Age (in years) Region-wise Region Less than 6 years North (plain) North (Hills) West South East Central North East All India (Urban) Total (Urban) 28 35 31 28 30 11 35 28 1029066 Percentage of vehicles of age 6 or more 10 or more 15 All ages but less than but less years 10 years than 15 or years more 44 24 4 100 56 44 43 58 10 46 41 1534082 8 19 26 10 46 18 26 945237 1 5 3 1 34 1 5 192919 100 99 100 99 101 100 100 3701304 No. of vehicles 649653 28835 525951 2124485 86212 245230 40939 3701304
The information from the Drivers survey pointed to almost similar figures with somewhat younger vehicle population with about 31 % of the vehicles being in the age group less than 6 years (Table 7.2). However, when analyzed for different types of vehicles, it was found that the youngest fleet was that of HCVs with nearly 46% being less than 5 years in age. On the other hand almost 80% of the MCVs were in the age group of 6-9 years. As for LCVs, the maximum number was older than 10 years.
78
Table 7.2: Distribution of vehicles by type of vehicle and age of vehicle from Drivers Survey Age of Vehicle ALL 5 Years or less 6-9 10-14 15-19 Total Percentage of vehicles by type of vehicles MAV HCV MCV LCV 6.67 66.41 25.87 1.05 100.00 46.92 34.81 16.53 1.74 100.00 8.53 80.93 6.43 4.12 100.00 15.83 6.54 77.53 0.10 100.00
7.1.4
When we analyze the distribution of Age of Vehicles by size class of cities, we find that the maximum vehicles of less than 6 yrs of age were to be found in Capital Cities (33%) which is a pointer that maximum purchase of new vehicles is taking place in Capital Cities, presumably because maximum big operators are located in these cities who are conscious of the higher cost of operations of older vehicles and can afford to replace the old vehicles because of economies of scale.
Table 7.3: Distribution of Owned Vehicles by Age (in years) by Size Class of Cities Class of Cities Percentage of vehicles owned by age of vehicles(Years) Less than 6 years 33 27 28 28 1029066 6 to 9 years 40 44 40 41 1534082 10 to 14 years 24 25 26 26 945237 15 or more years 2 4 6 5 192919 All types Total 100 100 100 100 3701304 150117 1237359 2313828 3701304
Cap >1 lac <1 lac All India No. of vehicles
79
7.1.5
Fuel consumption: Information on fuel consumption in terms of km. per litre of diesel has been collected from the Drivers Survey in this study. Since the number of drivers covered were small, it is not possible to make a detailed analalysis of the data. Certain broad conclusions can, however, be drawn. On an average all commercial vehicles taken together gave about 7 kilometres per litre of fuel. The average dipped sharply from 7.1 Km / liter for new vehicles to as low as 2.6 km/litre for vehicles more than 15 yrs old. Even vehicles between 10-15 yrs of age, the fuel consumption was higher by 25%. As regards consumption by different types of vehicles, Table 7.4 would indicate that the multi-axle vehicles gave 3.5 km, the heavy vehicles 6.0 km, the medium vehicles gave 7.9 km and the light commercial vehicles gave 10.5 km per litre of fuel. These figures of Km per litre appear to be higher than what we believed, and perhaps point to the newer vehicles being far more fuel efficient than the older vehicles and also may point to an improvement in the type and quality of our highways. Table 7.4: Fuel consumption of Vehicles by Type and Age Age of vehicle (years) Average consumption of fuel in km. per litre for Multiaxle Less than 6 6 to 9 10 to 14 15 or more All 3.77 3.19 3.94 0 3.39 Heavy Medium Light All types commercial commercial commercial 6.1 6.23 5.18 3.86 6.14 8.53 7.82 4.95 2 7.93 10.87 8.25 7.96 0 10.59 7.1 6.6 5.4 2.6 6.9
80
7.2 7.2.1
Utilization of Vehicles Distance travelled: One of the facts pointed out in numerous reports on the efficiency of the Indian trucking services is that a truck in this country covers a distance of just around 70,000 km per year or about 250 km per day against nearly 150 to 200,000 km in advanced countries. Data collected from the Drivers survey indicated that the average distance covered by the vehicles in a year was 85729 km or about 7 thousand kilometres per month for all types of vehicles of all ages taken together, thus corroborating the oft quoted phenomenon as far as comparison with other countries is concerned, but showing some improvement. The average distance covered was 88,800 km for vehicles in the age group less than 6 years, about 85,000 for those in the age group 6 to 9 years, about 82,000 for those aged 10 to 14 years and 78,000 for all older vehicles (Table 7.5). The fall in the distance covered with age of the vehicle does not appear to be very steep. It must be remembered in this connection that these performances do not represent the vehicles current level of performance but only the cumulative performance over the entire period since the vehicle came out on the road. The current performances of vehicles in different age brackets would obviously be still lower.
7.2.2 Table 7.5: Average Distance Covered by Trucks per Year by Age of Vehicle Age Group Less then 6 years 6-9 10-14 15-19 All India % distribution of vehicles by age 30.9 44.4 22.6 2.1 100.0 Avg Age of vehicle in the age group 5.75 8.6 12.6 16.54 8.79 Average total distance covered per year 88812 85462 82697 78571 85730
81
7.3.3
Time-disposition of vehicles: While making a comparison of the distance covered by the trucks in India with that elsewhere, the differences in road and traffic conditions and halts en route that are not within the control of the vehicle owner or driver need to be taken into account. The present study attempted to collect information on the disposition of the total trip time into actual running time and time spent on various other activities. The results are summarised in Table 7.6. Table 7.6: Disposition of Trip Time by Activities Time spent (Hrs) on the different activities in trips of distance 1000 or All 100 to 499 500 to 999 more distances 2.87 8.14 17.55 9.28 1.38 2.01 1.26 2.38 3.77 0.68 7 21.34 33 4.81 3.09 2.73 7.2 5.17 1.33 18.65 51.12 36 8.11 4.63 6.78 14.36 8.67 2.71 47.58 110.4 43 4.57 2.95 3.44 7.81 5.59 1.56 23.7 59 40
Activity Check posts Other official stoppages Repairs en route Fuelling en route Rest and meals Traffic hurdles Other halts Running time Total average trip time (hrs.) % of running time to trip time 7.3.4
Turn-around time: The turn-around time, i.e. the total round trip time varies from about 21 hours for a trip of 100 km to 499 km to about 50 hours for a trip of 500 to 999 km and 110 hours for a trip of over 1000 km (Table 7.6). The actual running times for the same distances were found to be accounting for 33 %, 36% and 43% of the total trip times, with an overall running time of 40%. It should be our endeavour to increase this ratio in order to improve the productivity of the Goods Transport Vehicles.
82
7.3.5
Time loss due to inter-State barriers and other reasons: From Table 7.6 it may be observed that out of the total trip time, the percentage of time lost due to check-posts and other official stoppages accounted for 16 % and 8 % respectively when all types of distances are taken into consideration. However, these percentages were seen to go down with increasing distances. Thus, these delays together contribute a loss of about 24 % of the total trip time. were eliminated. Consequently the haulage would go up by this extent if these halts
7.3.6
Overloading: A common observation about the trucking operations in India is that most of the trucks carry freight in excess of the vehicles authorised tonnage. Currently, a standard 9 tonne truck is authorised to carry an axle load up to 10.2 tonnes. However, the actual load carried is observed to be much in excess and sometimes even double the authorised level. It is said that the consignors and the transport operators who engage the vehicles from vehicle owners often encourage such overloading to cut down on their transport costs/increase their profit margins. Such excess loading not only reduces the functional age of the vehicle but also causes considerable damage to the highways which are not built to such excessive loads.
7.3.7
The Drivers survey sought information on the average authorised tonnage and average tonnage actually carried by various types of vehicles. As expected not many drivers admitted that they had indulged in overloading their vehicles.
7.3.8
Drivers experience: It is sometimes contended that the low levels of literacy and skills of the truck drivers result in disregard of traffic and road safety rules, which again contribute to bottlenecks en route and cause delays. While it is true that a minimum level of education is necessary for the drivers to understand the traffic signage and rules, education by itself would not necessarily improve the driving quality of the drivers, as may be observed from the erratic and often arrogant driving behaviours of the educated drivers on the roads of Delhi. Driving experience, however, is important. Some information has been collected from the drivers about their driving experience which has
83
been summarized in the table and chart given below (Table 7.7). From the table it appears that transporters have maximum number of drivers who are well experienced of 6 years or more. New drivers are relatively small, and even though they may have a licence of 12 years, they are rarely given an independent charge of a vehicle. Table 7.7: Distribution of Drivers by Driving Experience State/Locality Total number All India 7.3 7.3.1 345053 No. of drivers by years of driving exp. Less than 1-2 3-5 6-9 one year years years years 1.9 17.0 16.6 46.8
10 years or more 17.6
Operational Costs and Profits The pattern of expenditure of goods transporting units is presented in Table 7.8 for all the seven States combined. Table 7.8: Pattern of Expenditure of Goods Transporting Units by Type of Unit Item of Expenditure Urban 40.2 6.8 4.5 12.4 15.9 0.2 0.5 2.7 0.1 83.2 Rural 38.3 8.9 4.6 9.6 14.7 2.3 0.5 1.2 0.3 80.5
DIRECT Diesel Spares Maintenance Wages Non Payroll Hiring Charges Commission Loading/unloading Other Expenditure Total OVERHEAD
84
Item of Expenditure Office Operation Legal Expenses Insurance Premium Rent on all buildings, etc. Other Rent on land Total TAXES Product specific tax Road Tax Toll Charges Total INTEREST & DEPRECIATION Interest expenditure Depreciation Bad and doubtful debts Total
Urban 0.6 0.6 3.7 0.4 0.3 0.6 6.1
Rural 1.3 0.8 5.0 0.2 1.5 0.4 9.2
1.5 2.3 1.7 5.5 4.8 0.2 0.3 5.2
2.2 2.3 1.7 6.2 3.2 0.7 0.2 4.1
ALL TOTAL Total Expenses/Annum (Rs cr) Expenses/Vehicle/Annum-(Rs Lakhs) Expenses/unit/Annum-(Rs Lakhs) No. of vehicles
100.0 242136.0 6.5 24.9 3701304
100.0 8622.0 6.3 11.5 136753
85
7.3.2
From the foregoing table, it is seen that for Urban Areas the weighted average expenditure for items under direct cost is above 80 percent. A lions share of this expenditure is consisted of diesel (around 40%) and wages (around 30% for wages and payroll). In contrast items under over heads accounts for only 6 percent of which 3.07 percent is spend towards insurance premium. Similarly weighted average expenditure for taxes shows 5.5 percent of the total expenditure and expenditure on interest and depreciation shows only 5.0 percent of the total expenditure. The patterns of expenditures of agents and brokers are similar and so is the case with that of transport operators and vehicle owners. In the case of expenditure pattern of rural units, we find the overall expenditure pattern is similar to the urban areas, except that the expenses on wages, loading unloading etc. put together are about 5% lower than in the urban areas. However, the overheads appear to be higher than in the Urban areas by almost 3 percent. In terms of absolute figures, we find that the total expenditure of trucking industry is about Rs 2.4 lakh crores in Urban area and about Rs 10,000 cr in rural areas. This translates into expenditure per truck of about Rs 7 lakhs per annum.
7.3.3
It may be observed that fuel is an important component of the operational expenditure of truck owners, and periodic increases in fuel prices erode the profit margins unless the vehicle owners increase their rates periodically. The truck freight rates for a standard 9 tonne truck for the Delhi-Mumbai stretch during 2002, 2008 and 2010 are given below, along with diesel prices.
86
Table 7.9: Changes in Delhi-Mumbai and Delhi-Kolkata Freight Rates for 9-tonne Truck and Diesel Prices (2002 to 2010) Year Distance (km) Rate per 9 tonne truck (Rs.) 12000-12600 16,000 30.0 1408 20500 28.13 1474 1474 1474 14400-15000 22500 53.1 27000 20 Rate per tonne-km (Rs.) 0.97 1.26 30.0 1.61 28.13 1.11 1.68 53.1 2.03 20 Price of diesel (Rs. per litre) in Delhi 18.34 31.76 73.2 37.71 18.81 19.72 33.92 72.0 40.02 17.98
Delhi - Mumbai Mid - 2002 2008 (Sep.) Growth percent 2010 (Oct.) Growth percent Delhi - Kolkata Mid - 2002 2008 (Sep.) Growth percent 2010 (Oct.) Growth percent 1408 1408
Source: For 2002, World Bank study, 2005. For freight rates in Sept. 2008, Economic Times, Delhi, Sept. 4, 2008. For freight rates in Oct. 2010, Economic Times, Delhi, Oct. 22, 2010.For diesel prices, www.iocl.com and Economic Times
7.3.4
It may be observed from Table 7.7 that in the case of both Delhi-Mumbai and DelhiKolkata routes, the diesel prices have increased considerably more sharply than the freight rates during 2002-08. However we note that between 2008 and 2010 the increase in freight rates have slightly higher than the increase in diesel rates. This is perhaps true of most long-distance routes in the country. The high level of competition in the trucking industry does not allow the operators to respond to cost increases by comparable increases in freight rates. Thus, the margin of profit, if any, is getting gradually eroded over the years.
87
Chapter 8: Problems Facing the Trucking Industry and Recommendations
CHAPTER - 8 PROBLEMS FACING THE TRUCKING INDUSTRY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 8.1.1
General The World Bank study observed that while Despite many remaining impediments, mainly concerning the existing infrastructure, India has achieved a highly competitive, low-cost road freight transport industry for basic services, with highway freight rates among the lowest in the world, service quality is poor, with low reliability and transit times nearly double that of developed countries.
8.1.2
The fact that the industry of goods transport by road is highly fragmented and largely unregulated has been well documented through various past studies. The present study too comes to the same conclusion. The bulk of the industry is in the hands of small individual proprietors, resulting in tough competition and limited scope for vehicle replacement and investments required for technological up-gradation. The industry, thus, operates at low productivity levels. To overcome low margins of profit arising out of the extreme competition in the industry, truck operators, often at the instance of the transport operators, resort to high levels of overloading, even though the practice has not been admitted to by any of the operators surveyed in the present study. This results in not only accelerating the vehicle decay but also in damage to the roads built for lesser axle-loads. Inter-State barriers, poor road conditions, haphazard traffic patterns, bureaucratic corruption, are some other factors contributing to the low productivity in the industry. Even though there is a plethora of regulatory mechanisms, they do not seem to have any promotional effect on the industrys efficiency. There are also large gaps in the statistical base of the industry in areas vital for policy planning. This Chapter will look into some of these problems in greater depth and seek to provide suggestions to overcome them.
88
8.2 8.2.1
International scene In general, all over the world, trucking operations are in the private sector, and the general trend in recent decades is towards deregulation of the industry. The situation in some of the countries is indicated below:
i) The United States of America 8.2.2 Trucking industry in the USA, which had been subject to entry restrictions and controls on freight rates for over three decades, underwent a sea-change with the enactment of Motor Carriers Regulatory Reform and Modernization Act, 1980, (or Motor Carriers Act) which deregulated the industry to a great degree. The Act opened entry into trucking business by reducing entry controls, prohibited the rate bureaus from interfering any carriers right to publish their own rates and authorized truckers to freely price within a zone of reasonableness (increase of decrease up to 15% goes without challenge), and eliminated most restrictions on commodities that can be carried, deregulated the routes that most carriers could use and geographical regions they could serve. This has led to a dramatic increase in the number of trucking companies made the industry highly competitive. The surface Transportation Assistance Act, 1982 established federal standards for truck weight limits, which standardized truck size and weight limits across the country for traffic on inter-state routes.
8.2.3
While the Surface Transportation Board established in 1996 adjudicates over certain economic regulatory matters, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) in the Federal Department of Transport regulates nearly all aspects of the trucking industry. It regulates truck size, weight and route designation, enforces drug and alcohol regulations, noise emission standards, motor vehicle registration and insurance, safety and fitness procedures, inspections and transportation of hazardous materials. It lays down rules for grant of commercial driving license (involving a driving skills test and a
89
written knowledge test covering the unique qualities required for driving a large heavily loaded vehicle and mechanical systems required to operate such vehicles. It lays down that the driver should maintain a logbook of his driving and rest periods and present it to authorities on demand.
8.2.4
Thus, over the recent decades, the trend has been towards economic deregulation and safety regulation. However, while inter-State movement of trucks has been deregulated to a large extent, several States have not yet done so.
ii) Japan 8.2.5 The Japanese Ministry of Transport has, since 1951, the authority to restrict entry of into the trucking business and to establish freight rates in commercial trucking. While the Railway Express Enterprises Law, 1949, laid down freight rate and entry regulations of the trucking services connected with rail shipments, the Road Transportation Law of 1951 divided the remaining truckers into two categories those licensed to serve particular routes on regular time schedules and those licensed to serve one customer at a time on consignment basis within a designated region. It is reported that the Law forbade prices that will probably cause unfair competition with other companies. Based on this, the Ministry of Transport publishes freight rate schedules applicable to each category of trucking service and updated them annually.18 However, while the Ministry of Transport exercises its authority to set trucking prices, it is reported that the standard price schedules published by it are in fact widely disregarded by commercial trucking firms.19
18 19
Flaith, David, The Japanese Economy, 2005 Flaith, David, Japanese Regulation of Truck Transport, Japanese Journal of International Economics, Vol.15, 2001 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
90
8.2.6
Restrictions on entry into trucking business had been, however, enforced strictly till the advent of parcel delivery services during the 1980s. As the existing restrictions caused an impediment to commercial trucking, the Japanese Government passed the Motor Vehicle Law in December 1989 abolishing the licensing system and replacing it by a system of permits, which are more freely given than licenses, and which authorize truckers to provide virtually unlimited services within designated regions.
iii) South Korea 8.2.7 With the passage of Vehicle Transport Business Law in 1961, regulation of trucking business began in South Korea. It divided all commercial trucking services into four categories based on the size of the regions in which the services are provided and vested in the Ministry of Transport powers to set maximum freight rates for each category. The decades of sixties, seventies and eighties were the decades of regulation to nurture and enlarge freight transport firms by establishing licensing qualifications.
8.2.8
The period 1993 to 1997 marked the partial deregulation phase. In February 1993, price control mechanism was modified from permit system to reporting system. In May 1997, the permit system in cargo contract process was similarly replaced by reporting system. The cargo district regulation and trucking business supply control were abolished.
8.2.9
Since 1997, South Korea has witnessed a process of full-scale deregulation. The Cargo Transport Business Law was enacted in August 1997 initiating market driven reforms in the trucking industry. In January 1998, price controls were abolished making way for free market competition to establish prices. In July 1999, the cargo business classification system was simplified and cargo business licensing system yielded place to reporting system. In January 2000, the minimum qualification for entering into cargo business was reduced from 25 to 5 trucks. Thus, the industry is now more or less free from entry and freight rate regulations.
91
8.3 8.3.1
The Indian industry scene - Fragmented industry structure Issue: As pointed out elsewhere, the ownership of the goods transport vehicles is skewed in favour of those with less than five trucks and often only one. This results in high levels of competition leading to low margins or even negative returns. Many of the small owners are not even members of trade associations. When a transport operator or consignor needs ten vehicles and if the owner has only two, the latter will have to find others who can join him or else forgo the opportunity. If a number of owners operate under the aegis of a single unit multiple benefits accrue to them. For instance, points out Raja Simhan, that in Namakkal, a transport town in Tamilnadu, Single-vehicle operators, who own over 90 % of trucks in Namakkal, once fought among themselves for a share of the pie. Today, they are forming groups, and approaching customers jointly for business under a single banner. Earlier, each operator went to a customer, and tried to get business on his own with a single truck. However, if the customer wanted two or more trucks, the operator was not in a position to supply them, and thereby lost the business to the fleet operator. But, today, as part of a group, a single-vehicle operator goes to a customer under a `big banner', and is prepared to supply any number of vehicles.
8.3.2
Recommendation: The small owners should be encouraged to come together and operate as a single unit. With the pooling of resources, it should be possible to invest for technological upgradation. Another advantage out of several small operators coming together is that they can better resist the pressures from the consignors and transport operators to indulge in overloading as a measure of cutting transport costs. Instead of one operator carrying 15 tonnes on a 9-tonner, two operators of the same entity can be benefited, while the damage to the vehicles and roads through overloading is eliminated.
92
8.4 8.4.1
Fleet Composition Issue: The vast majority of the vehicles found on Indian roads are rigid bodied 3-axle trucks of 9 tonne or 2-axle trucks of lower axle loads. More efficient multi-axle trucks are relatively hard to come by, though in recent years there is a tendency on the part of the goods transport vehicle owners to switch over to such vehicles. When there is no overloading, the preference shifts to multi-axle vehicles because these bigger vehicles carry almost double the load as a 9-tonner without proportionate increase in fuel consumption and hence productivity and profitability is better in the case of multi-axle vehicles.
8.4.2
Recommendations: To further encourage the use of multi-axle vehicles, suitable incentives such as lower transit tax and toll rates may be considered. The cost of such incentives would be more than paid back by way of lower levels of damage to the road system.
8.5 8.5.1
Fleet Utilization Issues: The present survey has confirmed the already known feature of the Indian trucking industry that the industry has excess capacity in the form of unused vehicles. There may be several reasons, such as the rampant practice of overloading, low rates of vehicle replacements leading to frequent break-downs of the older vehicles, higher turn-around times, and so on.
93
8.5.2
Recommendations: In order to reduce overloading and better fleet utilization, consolidation of vehicle owners into cooperatives or similar entities would lead to lower levels of overloading and better fleet utilization. Stricter enforcement of laws against overloading beyond a limit would also help.
8.6 8.6.1
Rising Costs and Dwindling Operating Margins Issues: A major component of goods transport cost is that of fuel. As mentioned in the previous Chapter, the price of diesel, even at the lower levels regulated by the government, has been rapidly increasing over the past decade as a result primarily of international market pressures. Freight rates have not kept pace (due to competitive market forces) with the rise in fuel costs leading to lower operating margins.
8.6.2
Recommendations: To contain rising cost, particularly of fuel and spares, dual pricing policy should be evolved. While lower price of diesel used for freight movement would work as a measure to check inflation the higher pricing policy should be used in the industry and the private passenger vehicles. However, one has to guard against the possibility of misuse of the duel prices and diversion of fuel purchased for freight movement to other purposes.
94
8.7 8.7.1
Overloading Issues: Even though very few of the transport operating units admitted to overloading, it is a well known that the phenomenon is rampant and could even be to the extent of double the authorized capacity. Even though the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, empowers the Transport Departments to make sure that the vehicles carry loads within the prescribed norms, this does not always happen. There are not enough weighbridges on the highways to check the weight carried. The official machinery put in place for checking such overloading is also known to look the other way for suitable bribes. Though, therefore, there are adequate legal provisions to check the practice, they are not adequately enforced. The vehicle owner is not always the real culprit, as it is the consignors who pressure him to indulge in overloading.
8.7.2
Recommendations: While overloading can be permitted to a small extent, excessive loading beyond authorized capacities should be strictly curbed to protect the road net-work. A system of penalizing the consignors instead of merely the vehicle owners for overloading may be evolved.
8.8 8.8.1
Low Productivity Issues: A fact brought out in almost every study on the goods transport industry in India is that the vehicle productivity is very low in comparison to that obtaining in advanced countries. For instance, it is pointed out that trucks in India cover a distance of merely 70,000 km per year, vehicles in advanced countries like USA do double that distance. It
95
must be appreciated in this context that the considerably lower performance levels of Indian trucks vis--vis those in other countries is the combined result of several factors such as road conditions, traffic patterns, official barriers, lack of way-side amenities and others over which the truck operator has virtually no control. Poor maintenance of the vehicles leading to frequent break-downs en route, unreasonably high loading and unloading times and the need to look for freight on the return journey are all factors attributable to the truck owner. 8.8.2 Recommendations: Use of tractor-trailer multi-axle vehicles in larger numbers would allow for greater flexibility as the tractor can be put to use while the trailer unit is being loaded or unloaded. The World Bank study20 estimated that an increase of 10 percent in the market share of tractor-trailer units would result in a reduction of transport costs of the order of Rs. 5 billion per year. Apart from such transport cost reductions, returns by way of lower road damage would also accrue.
8.9 8.9.1
Poor Roads and Traffic Patterns Issues: A major factor contributing to the overall inefficiency of the goods transport industry is the generally poor condition of the roads. As mentioned above most highways are built to tolerate axle loads of just 8-10 tonnes, a specification perfectly valid earlier. This by itself may not pose insurmountable problems. Only lip service is paid to the requirement of adequate maintenance of the roads constructed. If the poor maintenance of the roads in Delhi is a topic of everyday news, the situation in other parts of the country can be imagined. The Golden Quadrilateral and the East-West, North-South corridors projects
20
World Bank: India Road Transport Efficiency Study, 2005 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
96
have no doubt improved the arterial national highways. Proper traffic management and adequate enforcement of traffic rules is conspicuous by its absence on the Indian roads. The argument that most drivers of trucks are not educated, often illiterate, and hence display poor road behavior is only specious.
8.9.2
Recommendations: It should be remembered that national highways take care of only 40 % of the total freight movement in the country. The other highways, which are also getting increasingly cramped by high volumes of traffic, goods and passenger alike, also need to be similarly improved. While education and training are expected to contribute to decent driving, it is not always the case. Deterrent punishment of errant drivers, both passenger and goods vehicle drivers, is likely to yield better results.
8.10
Inter-State Barriers and Taxation Regime
8.10.1 Issues: The 2005 World Bank study cited elsewhere in this report estimated that truck delays at check points cost the Indian economy anywhere between Rs. 9 to 23 billion a year by way of loss of truck operating hours. The present study also found that the percentage of time spent by trucks at check posts was -7 percent of the total trip time. A separate study has been commissioned by the Department of Road Transport to look into this issue.
97
8.10.2 Recommendations: There is need to minimize these delays at the check posts by allowing uninterrupted passage to trucks which have paid a specified amount, have been checked and sealed, and a certificate issued to them by the authorities at the start of the trip. The problem, however, often occurs in the case of trucks picking up freight en route on their way back.
8.11
Fare and Entry Regulations
8.11.1 Issues: Goods transport is by and large in the private sector. Unlike some of the developed and developing countries mentioned in Paragraph 8.2 above, the Indian trucking industry has never been subject to serious entry and price regulatory system. The entry is practically unrestricted, with truckers even with one truck being eligible to operate. With the policy of liberalisation of permits ushered in 1988 through the Motors Vehicles Act, any person can apply for transport of goods and the respective road transport authority to whom the application is made is not ordinarily expected to refuse permission. 8.11.2 The Motor Vehicles Act gives powers to the State Governments to fix freight rates, but generally the State Governments desist from exercising these powers and leave the price fixation mechanism to the market forces. The system appears to work fairly well and has produced a low cost goods transportation mechanism in the country. Some of the large trucking companies publish their rates, fixed on the basis of operational economics by themselves for their operations, but most small operators might work for lower prices determined by the market competition. Some typical prices published in the Times of India dated 4 September 2008 for freight movement from Delhi to some major cities and towns, with which government has nothing to do, are given below:
98
Table 8.1: Freight Rates Delhi to Distance (km) 203 886 392 643 446 2019 741 247 2034 802 261 1490 438 1408 985 1015 1429 1005 765 1861 Freight rate for a 9-tonne truck (Rs.) 5500 9500 5500 10500 8000 30000 11000 5500 43000 13000 4500 22500 9500 16000 17000 20000 18000 10500 13500 29000 Rate per km.(Rs.) tonne3.01 1.19 1.56 1.81 1.99 1.65 1.80 2.47 2.35 1.80 1.92 1.68 2.41 1.26 1.92 2.19 1.40 1.16 1.96 1.73
Agra Ahmedabad Ajmer Allahabad Amritsar Bengaluru Bhopal Chandigarh Guwahati Jabalpur Jaipur Kolkata Lucknow Mumbai Nagpur Patna Pune Vadodara Varanasi Visakhapatnam
99
8.11.3 Recommendations The freight rates seem to be governed by the distance, popularity and frequency of usage of the route, possibility of finding cargo for the return trip and other market related factors. The rates, as pointed out by the World Bank Study, are among the lowest in the world. Thus, there seems to be no case for any fare regulation in India. In any case, as the experience of Japan shows, enforcement of officially laid down fare structures in a competitive free market would be ineffective.
8.12
Vehicle Regulatory Regime
8.12.1 Issues: The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, are the major Central legislations governing the motorised road transport in the country, freight as well as passenger. Enforcement of this Act and the Rules is the responsibility of the States. There are no quantity restrictions today, but regulation of quality of goods transport is enforced through various sections of MV Act that cover road worthiness of the vehicles, competence of the drivers, control of emissions and pollution control, inspection and maintenance programme of the vehicles, and observance of other regulations prescribed under the Act. However, implementation of the provisions, particularly those on licensing of drivers and fitness of vehicles, is often lax. So are the provisions on emission control, which were made very stringent from 2000. While the trucks manufactured in recent years according to modern technology are able to comply with these tight emission norms, the older vehicles are not. The MV Act also provides for licensing of agents or canvassers engaged in the business of collecting, forwarding or distributing goods by trucks, but it has not proved effective in regulating brokers and agents.
100
The MV Act also prescribes 8 hours as the daily working hours for drivers of transport vehicles, but the enforcement of the provision is made difficult by the uncertainty about the responsibility (whether Transport Department or Labour Department) and complicated by the fact that vehicle owners do not maintain any records of the working hours of their staff. There is no system of drivers maintaining log books of their activities in a day as in the United States of America. In any case this would be difficult given the level of education among the drivers. Traffic management and control of accidents is in the hands of police department, but again is often ineffective due to inadequacy of traffic police force, poor roads and frequent traffic snarls. 8.12.2 Recommendations By and large, the regulatory regime put in place is adequate in theory but implementation of various provisions in it has to be made effective.
8.13
Insurance Regime
8.13.1 Issues: At present the annually renewable vehicle insurances are subject to premiums determined on the basis of the claims or no claims during the previous year. As mentioned above, low levels of education and driving skills among the truck drivers, poor roads and traffic patterns and inefficient traffic management contribute to poor road safety conditions. 8.13.2 Recommendation Linking the amounts of insurance premiums to the past records of accidents caused by the vehicle, apart from the past insurance claims, might act as a deterrent and improve road safety. This, however, requires an integration of information on road accidents and vehicle insurance.
101
8.14
Need for Reliable Statistical Base
8.14.1 Issues: Finally, as pointed out by the Eleventh Plan Working Group on Road Transport, there are serious gaps in the statistical bases relating to freight transport. This makes evolving suitable policies and planning programmes extremely difficult and dependent on ad hoc studies. In so far as goods transport is concerned, there are no regular statistics on the number of vehicles in use, on the volume of goods carried, extent of overloading and other important variables.
8.14.2 Recommendations: It is essential to identify all major data gaps relating to goods transport by road and establish suitable statistical systems in place.
102
ANNEXURES
Annexure I: Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States Table I: Selection of cities and towns in Stratum I States Table II: Selection of Locations in Stratum II States
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sl. No Contents Page Nos.
ANNEXURES
Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States Table I: Selection of cities and towns in Stratum I States Table II: Selection of Locations in Stratum II States Annexure II Annexure III List of Villages (28 Villages) Region Wise Summary of Total UFS Blocks and Selected UFS Blocks JPS Transport Studies Multipliers for Estimation a) Urban Areas b) Villages Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry: Questionnaire A: Composite Questionnaire for Agents/Transport Operators/Brokers/Truck Owners Annexure VI Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry: Questionnaire B: Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry (For Truck Drivers) Annexure VII Annexure VIII Classifications Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Number and Type of Vehicles Owned Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Type of Unit and Regular Employment Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Gross Value Added (GVA) Calculations for BTKM per Vehicle & Total BTKM based on Vehicles as per Survey Basic data from Sample Cities of Orissa after application of multipliers
103 165
Annexure I
103 105
106 107 108 111
Annexure IV
112 119
Annexure V
120 129
130 134 135 136 137 141
Annexure IX Annexure X Annexure XI

Annexure XII-A
142 144 145 152 153 156 157 157
Sl. No Annexure XII-B Annexure XIII AnnexureXIV(a)
Contents Calculations for estimates for contribution of Orissa to the All India Estimates Calculations for TKM per Vehicle as per Survey Example Chattisgarh - Gross Value added by per unit and by GVA per worker
Page Nos. 158 158 159 162 163 164 165 165
AnnexureXIV(b) Example Chattisgarh-Raw Data for GVA Calculations
ANNEXURE I Selected Urban Localities (Towns) in Different Strata in the Selected States Table I: Selection of cities and towns in Stratum I States
State selected Category Total number of towns and cities Number already covered in Stratum A Number remaining (Stratum B) Number selected from (Stratum B) Names selected from Stratum B
1. Haryana
2. Himachal Pradesh
3. Maharashtra
4. Tamilnadu
5. West Bengal
6. Assam
7. Madhya Pradesh
State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total State capital Other Large Small Total
1 19 78 98 1 7 48 56 1 33 313 347 1 28 639 668 1 25 213 239 1 6 103 110 1 24 343 368
1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 3
16 78 94 6 48 54 31 313 344 26 639 665 23 213 236 5 103 108 22 343 365
1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2
Rohtak Haileymandi Chamba Kulu Solapur Chakan Tiruppur Chetpet
Raiganj Memari Tinsukia Makum Burhanpur Hoshangabad
103
Table II: Selection of Locations in Stratum II States

State Stratum Category Total number of Number cities and towns Selected State capital Large Small Total 2. Uttarakhand A B State capital Large Small Total 3. Gujarat A B State capital Large Small Total 4. Karnataka A B State capital Large Small Total 5. Orissa A B State capital Large Small Total 6. Chhattisgarh A B State capital Large Small 1 23 192 216 1 3 72 76 1 28 161 190 1 23 213 237 1 6 125 132 1 5 78 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 Raipur Durg Sakti 104 Bhubaneswar Baleswar Jharsuguda Bangalore Belgaum Karwar Gandhinagar Rajkot Kheda Dehradun Haldwani Pauri Names selected
1. Rajasthan
A B
Jaipur Jodhpur Phulera
State
Stratum
Category Total number of Number cities and towns Selected Total 84 1 3 6 10 3 1 1 1 3
Names selected
7. Meghalaya
A B
State capital Large Small Total
Shillong Tura Williamnagar
Note: Number of towns of different sizes is as per 2001 Census. Except in Himachal Pradesh, the population cut-off point to separate large and small towns is 1,00,000. In Himachal Pradesh, it is 20,000
105
Annexure II: List of Villages (28 Villages)
ANNEXURE - II List of Villages (28 Villages)

State selected Haryana District selected Mewat Mewat Block selected Nuh Nuh Villages selected 1. Bhiravati 2.Alawalpur
Rajasthan
Dholpur Dholpur
Baseri Baseri
1. Kalloopura 2. Baoripura
Himachal Pradesh
Solan Solan
Dharampur Dharampur
1. Kotbeja 2. Barotiwala
Uttarakhand
Chamoli Chamoli
Joshimath Joshimath
1. Jumna 2. Gahar
Maharashtra
Amravati Amravati
Daryapur Daryapur
1. Shikandarpur 2. Prahladpur
Gujarat
Surat surat
Choryasi Choryasi
1. Sunvali 2. Ravla alias Vaktara
Tamilnadu
Nagapattinam Nagapattinam
Maviladuthurai 1. Villiayanallur Maviladuthurai 2. Sivanaragaram
1. Kalluvidi Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga Hosanagar Hosanagar Abbigalla 2. Hirejeni 106
State selected
District selected
Block selected
Villages selected
West Bengal
S. 24 Parganas S.24 Parganas
Sonapur Sonapur
1. Nayabad 2. Atghora
Orissa
Boudh Boudh
Boudh Boudh
1. Gaundisar 2. Badapal
Madhya Pradesh Neemuch Neemuch Manasa Manasa 1. Tumda 2. Manyakhedi
Chhattisgarh
Raipur Raipur
Raipur Raipur
1. Matia 2. Barauda
Assam
Nalbari Nalbari
Pas. Nalbari Pas. Nalbari
1. Nizpokowa 2. Simalia
Meghalaya
S. Garo Hs. S. Garo Hs.
Rongara Rongara
1. Niki Watgive 2. Goabari
107
Annexure III: Region Wise Summary of Total UFS Blocks and Selected UFS Blocks
ANNEXURE - III Region Wise Summary of Total UFS Blocks and Selected UFS Blocks
S.No State / Region Town Total House Holds Total Population Total BA/IA UFS Blocks Total Total Sample Sample Sample No. RA/Ot UFS BA/IA RA / Total her Blocks Others UFS Blocks 62 423 485 12 11 23 2 80 367 112 11 634 13 35 34 0 2 15 13 27 1437 3164 1322 33 6406 42 661 145 32 32 12 106 29 1517 3531 1434 44 7040 55 696 179 32 34 27 119 1 16 73 22 2 126 3 7 7 0 1 3 3 1 36 79 33 1 161 1 17 4 1 1 1 3 108 2 52 152 55 3 287 4 24 11 1 2 4 6 3
1 Haryana 2 Haryana 3 Haryana A Rajasthan 4 Rajasthan 5 Rajasthan North (Plains) 7 Uttranchal 6 8 Uttranchal 9 Uttranchal 10 Uttranchal B Himachal 11 Himachal 12 Himachal
Rohtak Haileymandi Chandigarh MC Jaipur MC Jodhpur MC Phulera
62472 3655 221030 462175 171315 4105 924752
332166 19494 951172 2524444 915313 25597 4768186 40219 461461 136904 20115 23830 19193 87108
Dehradun Cantt Dehradun MC Haldwani-Kathgodam Pauri Chamba Kullu Shimla MC
8886 82220 23756 2647 4416 4361 21895
S.No
State / Region
Town
Total House Holds
Total Population
Total BA/IA UFS Blocks
13 North (Hills) 14 Maharasthra 15 Maharasthra 16 Maharasthra 17 Gujarat 18 Gujarat 19 Gujarat 22 West 23 Tamilnadu 24 Tamilnadu 25 Tamilnadu 26 Karnataka D Karnataka 27 Karnataka 28 Karnataka 29 South Chetpet Tiruppur Chennai MC Bangalore MC Belgaum Cantt Belgaum MC Hubli-Dharwad MC Chakan Solapur MC Greater Mumbai MC Gandhinagar Kheda Vadodara MC
148181 4354 182432 2616232 39961 4647 314466 3162092 5250 87879 1146127 868898 5706 83198 156678 2353736
788830 21910 919573 12561232 183544 25645 1635285 15347189 19865 358482 5050813 4555678 29623 462851 813373 11290685
Total Total Sample Sample Sample No. RA/Ot UFS BA/IA RA / Total her Blocks Others UFS Blocks 112 1030 1142 24 28 52 7 25 1015 16946 267 28 1975 20256 29 499 6694 6034 44 549 1099 14948 32 1154 18369 273 36 2101 21965 30 542 7177 6383 44 579 1168 15923 1 28 285 1 2 25 342 1 9 97 70 0 6 14 197 1 26 424 7 1 50 509 1 13 168 151 1 14 28 376 109 2 54 709 8 3 75 851 2 22 265 221 1 20 42 573
139 1423 6 8 126 1709 1 43 483 349 0 30 69 975
S.No
State / Region
Town
Total House Holds
Total Population
30 Westbengal 31 Westbengal 32 Westbengal E Orissa 33 Orissa 34 Orissa 35 East Madhya Pradesh Madhya 37 Pradesh 38 Madhya Pradesh Chhatisgarh F 36 39 Chhatisgarh 40 Chhatisgarh 41 Central 42 Assam
Raiganj Memari Kolkata MC Baleshwar Bhubaneswar MC Jharsuguda
34099 7499 1075756 26780 140464 15192 1299790
161720 37269 4991393 134189 671964 78615 6075150 104109 176712 1643527 251063 685481 21867 2882759 15210
Total Total Sample Sample Sample No. RA/Ot UFS BA/IA RA / Total her Blocks Others UFS Blocks 1 212 213 1 6 7 10 44 6896 175 855 86 8268 138 208 2220 365 909 35 3875 21 54 7328 175 891 97 8763 153 265 2440 406 977 36 4277 22 2 87 0 7 2 99 3 11 44 8 14 1 81 1 1 173 5 22 2 209 4 5 56 9 23 1 98 1 3 260 5 29 4 308 7 16 100 17 37 2 179 2
432 0 36 11 495 15 57 220 41 68 1 402 1
Hoshangabad Burhanpur MC Bhopal MC Durg MC Raipur MC Sakti
19161 31937 312629 47657 131254 4104 546742
Makum
3107
110
S.No
State / Region
Town
Total House Holds
Total Population
43 Assam 44 Assam 45 Meghalaya G H Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya North East All India
Tinsukia Guwahati MC Shillong Shillong Cantt Tura Willam Nagar
19689 150007 29239 1486 7581 2960 214069 8649362
113118 828529 161836 7771 46233 16180 1188877 42341676
Total Total Sample Sample Sample No. RA/Ot UFS BA/IA RA / Total her Blocks Others UFS Blocks 13 164 177 3 4 7 35 18 0 3 3 73 903 258 12 80 27 1465 56248 938 276 12 83 30 1538 60648 7 4 0 1 1 17 886 23 7 1 2 1 39 1420 30 11 1 3 2 56 2306
4400
111
Annexure IV: JPS Transport Studies Multipliers for Estimation a) Urban Areas b) Villages
ANNEXURE IV JPS TRANSPORT STUDIES - MULTIPLIERS FOR ESTIMATION a) URBAN AREAS

Region State Stratum State Selected Prob of Selection of State d Location Type No. of Locations in the Type f No. of Location Selected g Name of Location UFS Block Type i State Mltip lier J=1/ d 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 3.257 3.257 3.257 3.257 3.257 3.257 USF / Unit Multiplier Location Multiplie r L Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l
a I North (Plains)
Haryana
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.307 0.307 0.307 0.307 0.307 0.307
1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3
1 1 19 19 78 78 1 1 23 23 192 192
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Chandigarh Chandigarh Rohtak Rohtak Haileymandi Haileymandi Jaipur Jaipur Jodhpur Jodhpur Phulera Phulera
Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth
5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000
1.000 1.000 19.000 19.000 78.000 78.000 1.000 1.000 23.000 23.000 192.000 192.000
5.000 40.000 95.000 760.000 390.000 3120.000 16.287 130.293 374.593 2996.743 3127.036 25016.28 7
II
Rajasthan
II North (Hills)
Himachal Pradesh
1.000
Shimla
Ind/Bus
1.000
5.000
1.000
5.000
112
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob of Selection of State d 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Location Type
e 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3
No. of Locations in the Type f 1 7 7 48 48 1 1 3 3 72 72 1 1 33 33 313
No. of Location Selected g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Name of Location
UFS Block Type i Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus
State Mltip lier J=1/ d 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 3.802 3.802 3.802 3.802 3.802 3.802 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
USF / Unit Multiplier
Location Multiplie r L 1.000 7.000 7.000 48.000 48.000 1.000 1.000 3.000 3.000 72.000 72.000 1.000 1.000 33.000 33.000 313.000
Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l 40.000 35.000 280.000 240.000 1920.000 19.011 152.091 57.034 456.274 * 10950.57 0 5.000 40.000 165.000 1320.000 1565.000
h Shimla Chamba Chamba Kullu Kullu Dehradun Dehradun Haldwani Haldwani Pauri *1 Pauri Mumbai Mumbai Solapur Solapur Chakan
K 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 * 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000
II
Uttarakhand
0.263 0.263 0.263 0.263 0.263 0.263
III West
Maharashtra
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1.* There is no IA/BA Blocks

113
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob of Selection of State d
Location Type
No. of Locations in the Type f
No. of Location Selected g
Name of Location
UFS Block Type i
State Mltip lier J=1/ d 1.000 1.095 1.095 1.095 1.095 1.095 1.095 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 3.215
Location Multiplie r L
Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l 12520.00 0 5.476 43.812 153.341 1226.725 881.709 7053.669 5.000 40.000 140.000 1120.000 3195.000 25560.00 0 16.077
1.000 II Gujarat 0.913 0.913 0.913 0.913 0.913 0.913 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 II Karnataka 0.311
3 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 1
313 1 1 28 28 161 161 1 1 28 28 639 639 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Chakan Gandhinagar Gandhinagar Vadodara vadodara Kheda Kheda Chennai Chennai Tiruppur Tiruppur Chetpet Chetpet Bengaluru
Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus
40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000
313.000 1.000 1.000 28.000 28.000 161.000 161.000 1.000 1.000 28.000 28.000 639.000 639.000 1.000
IV South
Tamilnadu
114
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob of Selection of State d 0.311 0.311 0.311 0.311 0.311
Location Type
e 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2
No. of Locations in the Type f 1 23 23 213 213 1 1 25 25 213 213 1 1 6
No. of Location Selected g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Name of Location
UFS Block Type i Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus
State Mltip lier J=1/ d 3.215 3.215 3.215 3.215 3.215 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 2.463 2.463 2.463
Location Multiplie r L 1.000 23.000 23.000 213.000 213.000 1.000 1.000 25.000 25.000 213.000 213.000 1.000 1.000 6.000
Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l 128.617 * 2958.199 3424.437 27395.49 8 5.000 40.000 125.000 1000.000 1065.000 8520.000 12.315 98.522 *
h Bengaluru Belgaum *2 Belgaum Karwar Karwar Kolkata Kolkata Raiganj Raiganj Memari Memari Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Baleswar*3
K 40.000 * 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 *
V East
West Bengal
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.406 0.406 0.406
II
Orissa
* There is no IA/BA Blocks * There is no IA/BA Blocks
115
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob of Selection of State d 0.406 0.406 0.406
Location Type
e 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3
No. of Locations in the Type f 6 125 125 1 1 24 24 343 343 1 1 5 5 78 78
No. of Location Selected g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Name of Location
UFS Block Type i Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth
State Mltip lier J=1/ d 2.463 2.463 2.463
Location Multiplie r L 6.000 125.000 125.000 1.000 1.000 24.000 24.000 343.000 343.000 1.000 1.000 5.000 5.000 78.000 78.000
Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l 591.133 1539.409 12315.27 1 5.000 40.000 120.000 960.000 1715.000 13720.00 0 5.000 40.000 25.000 200.000 390.000 3120.000
h Baleswar Jharsuguda Jharsuguda Bhopal Bhopal Burhanpur Burhanpur Hoshangabad Hoshangabad Raipur Raipur Durg Durg Sakti Sakti
K 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000
VI Central
Madhya Pradesh
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000
II
Chhattisgarh
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
VII North East
Assam
1.000 1.000
1 1
1 1
1 1
Guwahati Guwahati
Ind/Bus Res/Oth
1.000 1.000
5.000 40.000
1.000 1.000
5.000 40.000
116
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob of Selection of State d 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Location Type
e 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 3 3
No. of Locations in the Type f 6 6 103 103 1 1 3 3 6 6
No. of Location Selected g 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
Name of Location
UFS Block Type i Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth Ind/Bus Res/Oth
State Mltip lier J=1/ d 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 6.711 6.711 6.711 6.711 6.711 6.711
Location Multiplie r L 6.000 6.000 103.000 103.000 1.000 1.000 3.000 3.000 6.000 6.000
Overall Multiplie r M=j*k*l 30.000 240.000 515.000 4120.000 * 268.456 100.671 805.369 201.342 1610.738
h Tinsukia Tinsukia Makum Makum Shillong 4* Shillong Tura Tura Williamnagar Williamnagar
K 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000 * 40.000 5.000 40.000 5.000 40.000
II
Meghalaya
0.149 0.149 0.149 0.149 0.149 0.149
b)
Region State Stratum State Selected Prob. Of Selection No. of Districts in State District Selected No. of Block in District
VILLAGES
Block Selected No. of villages in Block State Multipli er Villages Selected Village Multipli er Block Multi plier District Multipli er Overall Multipli er
O=L*M* N 6247.500 6247.500
a I North (Plains)
b I
c Haryana
d 1.000 1.000
e 21 21
f Mewat Mewat
g 5 5
h Nuh Nuh
i 119 119
J=1/d 1.000 1.000
k 1. Bhiravati 2.Alawalpur
L 59.5 59.5
M 5 5
N 21 21
* There is no IA/BA Block
117
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob. Of Selection
No. of Districts in State
District Selected
No. of Block in District
Block Selected
No. of villages in Block
State Multipli er
Villages Selected
Village Multipli er
Block Multi plier
District Multipli er
Overall Multipli er
52671.010 52671.010
II
Rajasthan
0.307 0.307
33 33 12
Dholpur Dholpur Solan
5 5 5
Baseri Baseri Dharam pur Dharam pur Joshima th Joshima th Daryap ur Daryap ur Choryas i Choryas i Mavilad uthurai Mavilad uthurai
196 196 37
3.257 3.257
1.000
1. Kalloopura 2. Baoripura 1. Kotbeja
98 98 18.5
5 5 5
33 33 12
II North (Hills)
Himachal Pradesh
1.000
1110.000
1.000
12
Solan
37
1.000
2. Barotiwala
18.5
12
1110.000
II
Uttarakhand
0.263 0.263
13 13
Chamoli Chamoli
9 9
99 99
3.802 3.802
1. Jumna 2. Gahar
49.5 49.5
9 9
13 13
22020.913 22020.913
III West
Maharashtra
1.000 1.000
35 35
Amravati Amravati
14 14
150 150
1.000 1.000
1. Shikandarpur 2. Prahladpur
75 75
14 14
35 35
36750.000 36750.000
II
Gujarat
0.913 0.913
26 26
Surat surat
14 14
67 67
1.095 1.095
1. Sunvali 2. Ravla alias Vaktara

1. Villiayanallur
33.5 33.5
14 14
55 55
28253.012 28253.012
IV South
Tamilnadu
1.000 1.000
32 32
Nagapattinam Nagapattinam
7 7
115 115
1.000 1.000
57.5 57.5
7 7
32 32
12880.000 12880.000
2. Sivanaragaram
II
Hosana 204 3.215 1. Kalluvidi 102 7 gar Abbigalla Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India Karnataka
0.311
30
Shimoga
30
68874.598
118
Region
State Stratum
State Selected
Prob. Of Selection
No. of Districts in State
District Selected
No. of Block in District
Block Selected
No. of villages in Block
State Multipli er
Villages Selected
Village Multipli er
Block Multi plier
District Multipli er
Overall Multipli er
68874.598
0.311
30
Shimoga
Hosana gar Sonapur Sonapur
204
3.215
2. Hirejeni
102
30
V East
West Bengal
1.000 1.000
19 19
S. 24 Parganas S.24 Parganas Boudh Boudh Neemuch Neemuch Raipur Raipur Nalbari
9 9
75 75
1.000 1.000
1. Nayabad 2. Atghora
37.5 37.5
9 9
19 19
6412.500 6412.500
II
Orissa
0.406 0.406
30 30 50 50 18 18 27
3 3 3 3 4 4 12
Boudh Boudh Manasa Manasa Raipur Raipur Pas. Nalbari Pas. Nalbari Rongara Rongara
289 289 283 283 119 119 48
2.463 2.463 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
1. Gaundisar 2. Badapal 1. Tumda

2. Manyakhedi
144.5 144.5 141.5 141.5 59.5 59.5 24
3 3 3 3 4 4 12
30 30 50 50 18 18 27
32032.020 32032.020
VI Central
Madhya Pradesh
1.000 1.000
21225.000 21225.000
II
Chhattisgarh
1.000 1.000
1. Matia 2. Barauda
1. Nizpokowa
4284.000 4284.000
VII North East
Assam
1.000
7776.000
1.000
27
Nalbari
12
48
1.000
2. Simalia
24
12
27
7776.000
II
Meghalaya
0.149 0.149
7 7
S. Garo Hs. S. Garo Hs.
4 4
123 123
6.711 6.711
1. Niki Watgive
61.5 61.5
4 4
7 7
11557.047 11557.047
2. Goabari
119
Annexure V: Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry - Questionnaire A: Composite Questionnaire for Agents/Transport Operators/Brokers / Truck Owners
ANNEXURE V SURVEY ON ECONOMICS OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY QUESTIONNAIRE A

(Composite Questionnaire for Agents/Transport Operators/Brokers/Truck Owners) Schedule Type (Agent 1, Transport Operator 2, Broker 3, Owner 4) Schedule Serial number SECTION I: IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS State Code Location Code Rural/Urban (Rural 1, Urban 2) List Type: (Organised Sector - A, Unorganised Sector - B) Sample Sl. No in the List SECTION II: GENERAL INFORMATION 2.1 Name: Address: City: Tel. No. 2.2 Name: Designation: Address: City: Tel No. Fax: State: e-mail: Pin: State: Fax Informants Particulars e-mail: Pin: Responding Unit
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
(If any details of the informant are same as those of the unit, write same as unit)
120
2.3 Agent
Activity status of the unit (Tick as many as are applicable to the unit Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner Driver-cumowner Other than goods transport business
2.4 Association/cooperative membership If the Unit is a member of any Associations/Trade Bodies, give names below: Association 1
Association 2
2.5
Legal Status of the Unit (Public limited company 1, Private limited company 2, Individual Proprietorship 3, Partnership 4 Whether Registered with Registrar of Companies? Yes 1, No 2 Type of Unit (Single 1, multi-establishment 2) If, multi-establishment, a) Address of the head-office
2.6 2.7 2.8
b) Sl. No
Details of branch offices (to be obtained from the Head office) Annual Turnover (Rs.) No. of Volume of Goods handled In Workers & Out (Tonne-Km)
Address
1 2 3
*Add extra sheets if the number is more than given above
121
SECTION III: OPERATIONAL DATA 3.1 Sl. No. Type and Number of Vehicles Owned (as at the end of last calendar month)-Total No. by type of No. by age of vehicles number permit (years) of National Local Less 6 11 16 vehicles than to to and 6 10 15 above
Type of Vehicles (payload in tonnes)
1 2 3
Multi-axle vehicles (15 and more) Heavy commercial vehicles (9 tonnes) Medium commercial vehicles (3.5 to 7.5 tonnes)
Light commercial vehicles (upto 3.5 tonnes
Total
3.2
Utilization of Owned Vehicles in the last calendar month Number of owned vehicles operated in the last calendar month for Not operated at all 1 to 7 days 8 to 14 days 15 21 days 22 or more days Average load carried (Tonnes) per vehicle in each trip
Type of vehicles
Multi-axle vehicles (15 and more) Heavy commercial vehicles (9 tonnes) Medium commercial vehicles (3.5 to 7.5 tonnes) Light commercial vehicles (up to 3.5 tonnes All
122
3.3
Does the unit hire goods transport vehicles? Yes 1, No 2 a) If, yes in 3.3, Number of hired vehicles used on the last working day b) Number of owned vehicles used on the last working day
3.4
Usual routes of operation (Within Locality 1, Within district 2, Within State 3, Inter-State along specific routes 4, All- India 5)
3.5
Type and Periodicity of Goods transported during 2009-10 (tick as applicable) Never Less than 3 months in the year 3 to 6 months in the year 6 to 9 months in the year 9 to 12 months in the year
Sl. No
Nature of Goods
1 Food grains 2 Vegetables and fruits 3 Forestry products (timber) 4 Industrial goods (including minerals) 5 Consumer & household Goods 6 Construction materials 7 Oil & other liquid cargo 8 Other goods (specify)
3.6 For each trip carrying goods that either commenced or completed during the last one week please give the following details (commence with the latest and go back in time) Item Date & time of departure Nature of goods transported (code)
Trip 1 (last trip) Outward Return
Trip 2 Outward Return
123
Item Route a) Origin b) Destination c) Distance (km) Volume of cargo a) Type of vehicles used b) No. of vehicles used c) Total tonnage carried Halt at destination (hrs.) Date & time of arrival Total time taken for the trip (hrs.) Time spent (hrs.) on a) check-posts b) Other stoppages by officials c) Repairs on the way d) Fuelling e) Rest and meals for crew f)Traffic hurdles/level crossings g) Other reasons (specify) Total running time (hrs.)
Trip 1 (last trip) Outward Return
(If more than 3 trips were done during the week, use additional sheets)
124
SECTION IV: DETAILS OF WORKERS 4.1 Number of employees on the payroll, working proprietors and unpaid family workers Type of Workers Total Number (as on last pay day) Employees 1. Office staff 2. Drivers 3.Cleaners 4. Labourers Others 1. Working proprietors/partners 2. Unpaid family members 3. Others if any; specify Total: SECTIONV:FINANCIALDETAILS 5.1 Expenditure in the year 2009-10 Average monthly earnings (Rs.)
5.1.1 Total Wages & Salaries paid to workers on the payroll (Rs.): (Engaged at any time during the year 2009-10) 5.1.2 Payments to persons not included in the payroll: Sl Type No 1. Drivers 2. 3. Cleaners Labourers 125
Expenditure (Rs.) during 2009-10
Sl No 4. Maintenance staff 5. 6 7 Office staff Documentation Assistants Others Total
Type
Expenditure (Rs.) during 2009-10
5.1.3 a) Hiring charges for vehicles for goods transportation (Rs.) b) Commission to brokers (Rs.)
5.1.4 Other Expenditure Sl. No. Operational Accounts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Diesels & Lubricants Spares (including tyres) Maintenance (servicing, repair etc.) Office operation & administrative expenses (including running office vehicles) Legal expenses Insurance Premium Rent on all other (including shared warehouses) items, except hiring of vehicles Other expenses Item Expenditure (Rs.)
Non-Operational Accounts 1 2 3 4 Rent on land and building (including full warehouse rentals) Interest expenses on loan Depreciation expenses Bad and doubtful debts (written off)
126
Sl. No. 5
Item Product-specific tax (service tax, excise, sales tax, export duties)
Expenditure (Rs.)
6 Other expenses a) Road tax, permit charges, traffic challans and other payments to officials i) Official ii) Unofficial b) Toll charges i) Official ii) Unofficial c) Loading/unloading i) Official ii) Unofficial d) Others Total Expenditure
6.1
Receipts in the year 2009-10 Type of activity or role % of Total Turnover Value in Rs.
A Turnover from Transport activities 1. Agent 2. Transport Operator 3. Broker 4. Vehicle owner (hiring out to others) 5. Product linked subsidies 6. Other production subsidies Total B Turnover from non-Transport activities Commercial activities other than goods transportation
127
C Non-operational income Interest, dividend, capital gains, rent from hiring land or buildings, etc. Grand Total (A+B+C) 100%
SECTION VI: WORKING RELATIONS BETWEEN OPERATING UNITS 6.1 Source of goods transport business to the operating unit (tick as many as are applicable) Operating Unit 1. Agent 2. Transport Operator 3. Broker 4. Truck owner Source of business Transport Operators
Consignor
Agent
Brokers
Truck owners
6.2
Operating systems for different units (tick as many as are applicable) Units through which business carried on Transport Brokers Truck Operators owners
Operating Unit Agents 1. Agent 2.Transport Operator 3. Broker 4. Truck owner
Others, any
if
128
SECTION VII (FOR SURVEY STAFF) 7.1 Particulars of field operations Name *Date of Survey/ Supervision Number of Visits Time taken (HH:MM) Signature
Designation
Investigator
Supervisor * The date the interview was completed and date supervision done. 7.2 Comments:
7.2.1 Investigator
7.2.2 Supervisor
7.2.2 Supervisor
129
Annexure VI: Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry: Questionnaire B: Survey on Economics of Trucking Industry (For Truck Drivers)
ANNEXURE - VI QUESTIONNAIRE B SURVEY ON ECONOMICS OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY (FOR TRUCK DRIVERS)

Schedule Serial number State Code Location Code Section I: General 1.1 1.2 Name of Driver: Place of Residence: District: . Town/Village:.Urban 1, Rural 2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Truck Driving experience (in years): No. of vehicles owned, if any Type of vehicle driven: Multi-axled 1, heavy Commercial 2, Medium commercial 3, Light Commercial 4 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 Age of the vehicle (in years) Total distance travelled by the vehicle (km.) Tonnage: (authorized capacity in tonnes) Consumption of fuel (No. of kilometres per litre of diesel) Type of permit: All-India 1, State 2 Local 3 If owner, source of business (Broker 1, Transport Operator 2, Actual User 3) (If more than one, list in the order of importance starting from extreme right) 130
Section II: General Operational Details 2.1 Routes on which operated: . Local 1, Within the State 2. Inter State on specific routes only 3, All India 4 Intensity of operation Less than 3 months in a year 1, 3 to 6 months 2, 7 to 9 months 3, More than 9 months 4 Type of goods generally carried;.. (Agricultural commodities 1, Minerals and industrial goods 2, Construction material 3, Household and consumer goods 4, oil and other liquids 5, Others 6) Average Tonnage carried in each trip: Number of round trips made in the last calendar month: Average distance covered per round trip in km. Average time taken per round trip (in days and hours) D Section- III: OPERATING CREW 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 If not the owner, average monthly emoluments (Rs.) No . of cleaners for the vehicle Average monthly emoluments (Rs.) per cleaner Number of labourers attached to the vehicle Average monthly payment (Rs.) to each labourer D H H
2.2
2.3
2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7
131
SECTION - IV: DETAILS OF TRIPS DURING LAST WEEK 4 Please give the following details for each trip undertaken during the last seven days (whether completed or not) (start with the last) Detail Trip 1 (last Trip 2 Trip 3 trip) 1. Place of origin 2. Date and time of start 3. Halt for fuel (hrs.) 4. Halt for repairs 5. Halt at toll booths/check posts a) No. of times b) Total time 6. Halt for check by police and others a) No. of times b) Total time 7. Halt for meals and rest 8. Halt for road blocks/traffic jams/level crossings, etc. 9. Delays due to bad condition of roads 10. Destination 11. Date and time of arrival 12. Distance covered (kms.) 13. halt at destination 14. Load carried a. outward trip (tonnes) b. return trip 15. Type of a. outward trip goods carried (code as in 2.3) b. return trip 16. Amount paid for fuel
132
Detail 17. Amount paid for repairs 18. Amount paid for tyres, tubes and other spares 19. Amount paid to the cleaners/labour a) Own b) locally hired 20 Personal expenses en route 21. Amount paid at toll gate/check posts a) Official b) Unofficial 22. Amount paid to police, transport and other officials a) Official b) Unofficial 23.Other expenses a) Official b)Unofficial 24. If not owner, amount received from the owner at the beginning of the trip (Rs.) 25. Balance paid to/received from the owner at the end of the trip (Rs.)
Trip trip)
(last Trip 2
Trip 3
Note: If the number of trips is more than 3, fill out another sheet
133
SECTION V: FOR SURVEY STAFF 5.1 Particulars of field operations Name *Date of Survey/ Supervision Investigator Number of Visits Time taken (HH:MM) Signature
Designation
Supervisor
* The date the interview was completed and date supervision done.
5.2
Comments:
5.2.1 Investigator
5.2.2 Supervisor
134
Annexure VII: Classifications
ANNEXURE - VII CLASSIFICATIONS

State Type of transport operating units
Assam Assam Assam Assam Agent
Transport Operator
Membership of associations
Member Not
Classifications Registration Status

Registered Not Public Ltd
Legal Status
Private Ltd
Ind.
Partnership
NR
Broker Owner
Assam
Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana Himachal Himachal
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner Total

Transport Operator
100 90 100 100 100 100 81 100 87

87
0 10 0 0 0 0 19 0 13
13
0 20 0 87 85 100 100 100 63

72
100 80 100 13 15 0 0 0 37
28
0 0 0 0 0 0 58 0 2
12
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 20 0 97 95 100 0 1 40
31
0 0 0 0 0 0 42 99 12
23
100 80 100 3 5 0 0 0 45
33
Owner
Himachal
Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
100 36 36 100 50 100 100 99 100 64 100 73 83 100 95 100 91 98 100 62 100 100
0 64 64 0 50 0 0 1 0 36 0 27 17 0 5 0 9 2 0 38 0 0
0 0 0 50 100 41 43 44 50 73 77 86 72 24 18 100 92 27 100 100 100 17
100 100 100 50 0 59 57 56 50 27 23 14 28 76 82 0 8 73 0 0 0 83
0 0 0 50 20 10 0 3 4 21 47 5 29 15 7 39 66 15 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 30 5 42 38 43 51 28 81 41 8 11 61 26 11 100 97 22 17
0 99 99 50 40 19 6 9 11 4 3 14 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 77 83
0 0 0 0 0 9 42 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
100 1 1 0 10 59 10 12 42 25 22 0 25 76 82 0 8 73 0 0 0 0
Broker Owner
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner Agent

Transport Operator
Maharasthra Total
Broker Owner
Tamilnadu
Total
Westbengal Agent Westbengal Transport Operator Westbengal Broker Westbengal Owner Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
135
State Type of transport operating units Westbengal

Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh
Membership of associations
Member Not
Classifications Registration Status

Registered Not Public Ltd
Legal Status
Private Ltd
Ind.
Partnership
NR
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Chhatisgarh
Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Gujarat
Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Karnataka
Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Meghalaya
Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Orissa
Rjasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan
Total
Agent
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Rajasthan
Uttranchal Uttranchal Uttranchal
Total
Transport Operator
Broker Owner
Uttranchal All India All India All India All India All India
Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
92 100 54 100 10 20 100 69 100 55 67 100 44 100 84 60 100 76 100 40 59 100 90 100 99 95 100 71 100 93 90 100 100 96 97 100 49 100 85 68
8 0 46 0 90 80 0 31 0 45 33 0 56 0 16 40 0 24 0 60 41 0 10 0 1 5 0 29 0 7 10 0 0 4 3 0 51 0 15 32
94 100 100 100 97 98 100 100 100 100 100 1 43 100 20 37 0 0 0 0 0 100 92 2 94 91 6 11 6 2 4 0 0 0 0 15 47 85 29 42
6 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 99 57 0 80 63 100 100 100 100 100 0 8 98 6 9 94 89 94 98 96 100 100 100 100 85 53 15 71 58
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 2 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 9 0 1
43 0 0 0 0 0 96 47 33 60 52 1 42 100 19 36 0 0 0 0 0 11 89 2 11 47 2 9 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 9 43 56 19 33
57 100 80 100 94 93 4 50 67 34 44 99 57 0 80 63 100 24 0 10 23 0 1 0 82 42 98 91 100 99 97 100 100 100 100 76 54 26 73 60
0 0 20 0 5 7 0 3 0 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 100 90 77 0 8 98 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 6 2 2
136
Annexure VIII: Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Number and Type of Vehicles Owned
ANNEXURE - VIII DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORT OPERATING UNITS BY NUMBER AND TYPE OF VEHICLES OWNED
State Type of Transport Ty operating units Multi axle Number of owners and vehicles owned by vehicle type Heavy commercial Medium commercial Light commercial All types
No. of Total no of No. of Total no No. of Total no No. of Total no No. of Total no units vehicles units of units of units of units of vehicles vehicles vehicles vehicles
Assam Assam Assam Assam Assam Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Transport Operator Owner
% % % % % % % % % %
0 10 100 5 6 0 61 1 86 75
0 3 50 7 7 0 11 0 15 14
100 100 0 13 14 100 63 100 88 84
100 72 0 44 45 57 68 100 43 49
0 80 100 1 2 100 37 0 71 61
0 25 25 0 1 43 21 0 23 22
0 0 100 88 87 0 0 0 58 43
0 0 25 48 46 0 0 0 18 15
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Himachal Himachal
% %
100 8
67 5
100 25
33 25
0 98
0 46
0 18
0 25
100 100
100 100 137
State
Type of Transport Ty operating units Multi axle
Number of owners and vehicles owned by vehicle type Heavy commercial Medium commercial Light commercial All types
Himachal
Total
26
25
97
45
18
25
100
100
Madhya Pradesh Agent Transport Madhya Pradesh Operator Madhya Pradesh Broker Madhya Pradesh Owner Madhya Pradesh Total Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner
% % % % % % % % % % % % % %
0 0 2 42 39 19 6 1 25 6 100 92 100 74
0 0 3 7 6 11 4 2 9 5 22 40 27 19
0 2 80 42 41 31 21 3 40 16 79 59 100 74
0 2 78 45 45 41 23 5 41 24 70 37 62 71
100 30 21 42 43 66 48 38 52 47 23 41 26 32
100 26 19 26 26 33 35 38 30 35 5 12 11 9
0 80 0 99 93 21 51 60 55 51 21 40 0 2
0 72 0 22 22 15 38 55 19 37 3 11 0 1
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 138
State
Tamilnadu Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat
Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
96 11 97 100 13 69 0 61 100 95 86 100 56 33 45 52
27 14 23 20 4 19 0 15 20 17 15 20 14 38 10 13
72 8 97 100 13 68 17 67 100 94 87 100 65 0 54 58
61 16 38 69 10 40 6 40 80 41 38 80 37 0 53 43
30 11 99 100 96 84 83 73 0 95 91 0 57 67 54 55
7 11 18 10 82 25 39 33 0 39 38 0 34 62 29 32
26 96 99 4 17 69 83 40 0 4 13 0 37 0 16 27
5 59 21 0 4 15 55 12 0 3 9 0 15 0 8 11
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 139
State
Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa Rajasthan
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
2 12 100 4 13 0 0 100 30 25 0 10 2 11 10 8
2 6 20 3 6 0 0 100 10 8 0 8 2 9 8 2
2 4 100 4 8 100 24 0 30 31 0 94 0 1 45 52
12 13 80 10 17 100 24 0 52 41 0 86 0 6 45 84
2 81 0 81 77 0 76 0 60 57 0 1 98 88 47 0
4 66 0 58 59 0 73 0 21 41 0 3 98 83 44 0
98 10 0 20 13 0 3 0 10 7 0 1 0 1 1 46
82 14 0 28 18 0 2 0 17 11 0 3 0 3 3 14
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 100 100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 100 100 100 100 100 140
State
Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan
Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
% % % %
68 35 33 38
15 10 14 14
69 84 42 51
77 75 75 76
5 11 4 4
2 4 2 2
23 16 54 45
6 11 9 9
100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100
Uttranchal Uttranchal Uttranchal Uttranchal
% % % %
100 0 27 39
13 0 13 13
100 100 24 37
87 100 64 74
0 0 5 4
0 0 5 3
0 0 73 61
0 0 18 11
100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100
All India All India All India All India All India
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
% % % % %
36 18 65 18 21
13 9 19 8 9
48 14 70 20 20
65 25 69 37 33
21 73 17 60 64
8 53 8 35 42
41 13 13 36 22
14 14 4 20 16
100 100 100 100 100
100 100 100 100 100
141
Annexure IX: Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Type of Unit and Regular Employment
ANNEXURE - IX DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORT OPERATING UNITS BY TYPE OF UNIT AND REGULAR EMPLOYMENT
State Rural / Urban
Assam Assam Assam Assam Assam Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana Himachal Himachal Himachal Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Transport Operator Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
Ty None
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Distribution of employment 1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 24 25 or more

100 0 0 36 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 31 100 72 81 8 9 37 21 92 10 35 1 1 3 4 1 0 0 100 4 5 0 67 99 12 23 100 9 10 0 20 4 0 0 31 52 3 18 39 17 79 32 48 37 0 5 0 3 3 100 33 1 50 46 0 22 22 0 8 7 0 0 11 1 0 19 3 70 10 53 25 50 0 95 0 57 58 0 0 0 39 31 0 38 38 0 0 7 92 90 21 26 5 53 23 12 10 12 23 12
All
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
142
State Rural / Urban

Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Uttranchal Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Transport Operator
Ty None
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %

54 0 43 1 17 0 5 0 0 1 0 2 9 2 2 97 20 0 10 17 100 0 100 24 19 100 72 100 75 74 12 1 2 7 5 0 11 2 0 80 12 9 10 0 81 65 94 34 40 23 31 1 65 100 78 71 0 100 0 12 47 0 7 0 21 13 73 29 69 18 27 0 36 95 57 12 69 0 7 100 3 3 6 37 51 18 29 1 4 0 1 3 0 0 0 64 34 0 22 0 4 13 14 28 0 10 14 0 0 2 0 7 2 91 77 0 16 31 0 27 0 58 38 1 10 0 10 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 29 65 54 100
All
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
143
State Rural / Urban

Uttranchal Uttranchal Uttranchal All India All India All India All India All India All India All India All India All India Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner
Ty None
% % % % % % % % % % % %

0 15 9 32 16 10 9 13 100 0 0 36 100 7 4 31 56 78 41 50 0 0 100 4 0 0 0 29 11 9 8 10 0 5 0 3 0 78 87 8 17 4 42 26 0 95 0 57
All
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rural
144
Annexure X: Distribution of Transport Operating Units by Gross Value Added (GVA)
ANNEXURE - X DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORT OPERATING UNITS BY GROSS VALUE ADDED (GVA)

Rural / Urban State Type of unit No of units Total receipts.000 Total Exp. Excluding In-direct Taxes .000 31466 Wages and salaries to payroll .000 Exp-excl. Payroll payment .000 GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
GVA Per Unit .000

1345
Urban
Assam Assam Assam Assam Assam Haryana Haryana Haryana
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker
40
75948
9335
22131
53817
200
269000
50 40 4750 4880
745370 361691 14257141 15440150
508435 83845 9440691 10064438
129034 24874 2124464 2287708
379401 58971 7316227 7776730
365969 302720 6940914 7663420
2325 440 46200 49165
157000 688000 150000 156000
7319 7568 1461 1570
95 2055
454515 8596525
321708 6806596
95441 2019311
226267 4787285
228248 3809240
1710 30470
133000 125000
2403 1854
765
2630162
1940863
575796
1365067
1265095
10720
118000
1654
145
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
Total Exp. Excluding In-direct Taxes .000 47194274 56263440
Wages and salaries to payroll .000
Exp-excl. Payroll payment .000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
GVA Per Unit .000

2082 2014
Haryana Haryana Himachal Himachal Himachal Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh
Owner Total Transport Operator Owner Total Agent
8430 11345
50744361 62425563
14001118 16691665
33193157 39571775
17551204 22853788
183670 226570
96000 101000
5 3005 3010
11452 5855527 5866979
5676 4204855 4210531
1684 1247454 1249137
3992 2957402 2961393
7460 2898125 2905586
35 21620 21655
213000 134000 134000
1492 964 965
1920
856680
808086
239734
568352
288328
4800
60000
150
Transport Operator Broker
410
698439
840335
249302
591033
107406
1330
81000
262
1640
2306953
738980
219234
519746
1787207
5395
331000
1090
Owner
33080 113946562 117808634 105931451 108318851 31426660 32134930 74504791 76183922 39441771 41624712 508495 520020 78000 80000 1192 1123
Total
37050
146
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
Total Exp. Excluding In-direct Taxes .000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
GVA Per Unit .000 4176 228 923 2997 1030
Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Westbengal Westbengal
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator
3235 13025 12140 795 29195
16226957 41112860 15177088 4170827 76687731
3865602 54227088 5641864 2542833 66277386
1146809 16087540 1673768 754382 19662499
2718793 38139548 3968095 1788451 46614887
13508164 2973312 11208993 2382376 30072844
19470 104335 30350 10320 164475
694000 28000 369000 231000 183000
5755 3430 230 500 9915
23476098 10048835 771636 2079538 36376106
15901423 9196343 521959 1343044 26962769
4717474 2728279 154849 398441 7999043
11183950 6468064 367109 944603 18963726
12292148 3580771 404527 1134935 17412380
88325 40780 2890 6790 138785
139000 88000 140000 167000 125000
2136 1044 1759 2270 1756
1340
1059333
757798
224816
532982
526351
4525
116000
393
3370
12792654
13271655
3937300
9334355
3458299
62535
55000
1026
147
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
GVA Per Unit .000 136 1282 414
Westbengal Westbengal Westbengal
Broker Owner Total
11090 1200 17000
8295673 3784869 25932530
9651699 3193874 26875026
2863362 947525 7973004
6788337 2246348 18902022
1507336 1538521 7030508
46385 17425 130870
32000 88000 54000
Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner
240
972770
1096763
325377
771387
201383
5480
37000
839
615 5 3710 4570
3932119 37066 16683024 21624978
2931875 22023 13567661 17618323
869799 6534 4025114 5226823
2062076 15490 9542547 12391499
1870043 21576 7140477 9233479
11475 120 58780 75855
163000 180000 121000 122000
3041 4315 1925 2020
1276 29759 3680 19562
6148336 204329098 15186997 164938218
3447644 140936849 10038562 118892038
1022812 41811715 2978137 35271687
2424832 99125133 7060424 83620351
3723504 105203965 8126573 81317867
18302 571632 42935 449003
203000 184000 189000 181000
2918 3535 2208 4157
148
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker 183000
GVA Per Unit .000 3655
Gujarat Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Orissa
Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Agent
54277
390602648
273315092
81084352
192230740
198371908
1081873
30547 428521
51518027 854747386
19184150 946165439
5691375 280698790
13492775 665466649
38025252 189280737
62588 3295402
608000 57000
1245 442
27540 186399 673007
132676042 374386034 1413327489
69976012 379723590 1415049191
20759793 112652571 419802529
49216219 267071019 995246662
83459823 107315015 418080827
385868 1600160 5344019
216000 67000 78000
3030 576 621
537 1107 268 2685 4597
366657 3693191 1602347 9613999 15276194
139052 4399793 396102 5328516 10263463
41252 1305286 117512 1580810 3044860
97799 3094507 278590 3747707 7218603
268858 598684 1323757 5866292 8057591
1342 15369 805 20134 37651
200000 39000 164400 0 291000 214000
501 541 4939 2185 1753
111 353448 44446 13186 31260 322188 222 Final Report: Study on Economics of Trucking Industry for Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India
145100
149
2903
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker 0
GVA Per Unit .000
Orissa Orissa Orissa Orissa
Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
14101 603 15345 30160
25755243 1726987 18794799 46630477
10545910 612934 9314592 20517881
3128656 181839 2763368 6087049
7417254 431095 6551223 14430833
18337989 1295892 12243576 32199644
54926 1810 55788 112746
334000 716000 219000 286000
1300 2149 798 1068
Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Uttranchal Uttranchal Uttranchal
Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Transport Operator Broker Owner
6759 15000 4772 48029 74560
18833138 121169716 23054868 279598021 442655743
10079462 57320866 11966862 140025092 219392282
2990274 17005374 3550207 41541204 65087058
7089188 40315492 8416655 98483889 154305224
11743950 80854224 14638213 181114132 288350519
57101 290749 64739 728355 1140945
206000 278000 226000 249000 253000
1738 5390 3068 3771 3867
3127 19 15960
48119612 60369 52196668
21894202 57210 28703020
6495348 16973 8515317
15398854 40238 20187703
32720758 20131 32008965
118827 266 156737
275000 76000 204000
10464 1060 2006
150
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
Uttranchal All India All India All India All India All India
Total Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total
19106
100376649
50654432
15027637
35626795
64749854
275830
235000
51854 514576 62793 343449 972673
120341907 1335752499 203887878 1111049588 2771031871
55677600 1269051061 111648915 869405531 2305783107
16517885 376467418 33122878 257250113 683358294
39159715 892583643 78526037 612155418 1622424813
81182192 443168856 125361841 498894170 1148607058
264066 4600191 592725 3863478 9320459
307000 96000 212000 129000 123000
1566 861 1996 1453 1181
Rural
Assam Assam Haryana Haryana Haryana Himachal
Owner Total Agent Owner Total Owner
15552 15552
16856424 16856424
8141223 8141223
2044435 2044435
6096788 6096788
10759636 10759636
46656 46656
231000 231000
692 692
6248 6248 12495
17065827 21492181 38558008
17704284 20087231 37791515
4445915 5044331 9490246
13258370 15042899 28301269
3807457 6449282 10256739
87465 74970 162435
44000 86000 63000
609 1032 821
2220
2248988
1566506
391760
1174746
1074242
8880
121000
484
151
Rural / Urban
State
Type of unit
No of units
Total receipts.000
GVA .000
No Of worker
GVA Per Worker
Himachal West Bengal West Bengal Chhatisgarh Chhatisgarh Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya All India All India All India All India
Total Owner Total Owner Total Broker Owner Total Agent Broker Owner Total
2220
2248988
1566506
391760
1174746
1074242
8880
121000
12825 12825
14157197 14157197
7738874 7738874
1943398 1943398
5795476 5795476
8361721 8361721
38475 38475
217000 217000
652 652
8568 8568 11557 11557 23114
11890756 11890756 7951248 12793651 20744899
11015698 11015698 8499295 8625278 17124573
2766269 2766269 2288931 2456219 4745150
8249429 8249429 6210364 6169059 12379423
3641327 3641327 1740884 6624592 8365476
51408 51408 34671 34671 69342
71000 71000 50000 191000 121000
425 425 151 573 362
6248 11557 56970 74774
17065827 7951248 79439197 104456272
17704284 8499295 57174811 83378390
4445915 2288931 14646412 21381258
13258370 6210364 42528398 61997132
3807457 1740884 36910799 42459140
87465 34671 255060 377196
44000 50000 145000 113000
609 151 648 568
152
Annexure XI: Calculations for BTKM per Vehicle & Total BTKM based on Vehicles as per Survey
ANNEXURE - XI
Calculations for BTKM per Vehicle & Total BTKM based on vehicles as per survey
State (Region & Stratum)* Type of Vehicle No of Vehicle % Vehicle Utilization Avg. Tonnage No. Of trip per month Avg Distance Covered Per round Trip Avg. No. of trip per year Avg. distance covered per year Total distance covered BTKm with vehicles Nos. as per survey
Assam (NE,S-I) Assam Assam Meghalaya (NE, S-II) Meghalaya Meghalaya Meghalaya Haryana (NP, SI) Haryana Haryana Haryana Rajasthan (NP, S-II) Rajasthan Rajasthan Rajasthan Himachal (NH, SI) Himachal Himachal Himachal Uttaranchal (NH, S-II) Uttaranchal
HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV
12165 360 12530 1074 5638 5671 1477 13350 45770 20475 14455 63160 352248 9625 39886 490 2250 4145 2235 14238 81579
72.12 94.44 83.30 81.17 78.56 85.65 80.64 53.72 66.48 61.60 53.28 88.20 86.29 80.97 73.75 50.00 83.94 88.33 61.58 75.23 80.29
9 11 2 15 11 7.18 3 14.85 9 4.6 2 15.56 9.64 5.9 3 15 9 11 2 18 9.04
10 2 15 10 2 16 16 10 10 14 15 19 10 15 20 10 12 2 20 4 8
330.17 500 384 1049.91 1920.02 250.5 150.77 489.54 353.06 326.81 192 185.56 387.5 225.96 148.91 524.31 450 550 336 1440 349.59
120 24 180 120 24 192 192 120 120 168 180 228 120 180 240 120 144 24 240 48 96
39620.40 12000.00 69120.00 125989.20 46080.48 48096.00 28947.84 58744.80 42367.20 54904.08 34560.00 42307.68 46500.00 40672.80 35738.40 62917.20 64800.00 13200.00 80640.00 69120.00 33560.64
481982166.00 4320000.00 866073600.00 135312400.80 259801746.24 272752416.00 42755959.68 784243080.00 1939146744.00 1124161038.00 499564800.00 2672153068.80 16379532000.00 391475700.00 1425461822.40 30829428.00 145800000.00 54714000.00 180230400.00 984130560.00 2737843450.56
3.13 0.04 1.44 1.65 2.24 1.68 0.10 6.26 11.60 3.19 0.53 36.67 136.24 1.87 3.15 0.23 1.10 0.53 0.22 13.33 19.87
153
Uttaranchal Uttaranchal Madhya Pradesh (C,S-I) Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Chhattisgarh (C, S-II) Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh Maharashtra (W, S-I) Maharashtra Maharashtra Maharashtra Gujarat (W, S-II) Gujarat Gujarat Gujarat Karnataka (S, SII) Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka
MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV
2947 11635 13890 98020 56980 47220 4445 11030 11145 2500 3490 16765 24685 26120 61084 196216 146681 50909 125949 348183 122307 1 375482
64.01 76.47 50.22 64.15 56.47 61.41 76.86 75.42 74.21 59.75 64.11 71.03 72.92 70.87 70.20 79.46 74.53 69.35 82.45 81.90 78.71 71.26
4.5 3 14.64 9 4.5 2 15 9 9 2.62 15.02 8.99 4.93 2.01 15.99 9 7.99 3 20 9.59 5.88 3
15 18 9 11 14 16 10 9 9 11 10 20 14 26 9 10 12 10 8 11 17 12
314.78 139.5 699.94 390.52 320 382.3 535.38 519.62 540 310.86 504.55 186.62 427.67 93.33 1099.2 345.16 397.96 288 517.9 585.73 236.34 132.26
180 216 108 132 168 192 120 108 108 132 120 240 168 312 108 120 144 120 96 132 204 144
56660.40 30132.00 75593.52 51548.64 53760.00 73401.60 64245.60 56118.96 58320.00 41033.52 60546.00 44788.80 71848.56 29118.96 118713.60 41419.20 57306.24 34560.00 49718.40 77316.36 48213.36 19045.44
166978198.80 350585820.00 1049993992.80 5052797692.80 3063244800.00 3466023552.00 285571692.00 618992128.80 649976400.00 102583800.00 211305540.00 750884232.00 1773581703.60 760587235.20 7251501542.40 8127109747.20 8405736589.44 1759415040.00 6261982761.60 26920242173.88 58968362428.56 7151219902.08
0.48 0.80 7.72 29.17 7.78 4.26 3.29 4.20 4.34 0.16 2.03 4.79 6.38 1.08 81.40 58.12 50.05 3.66 103.27 211.44 272.91 15.29
154
Tamilnadu (S, SI) Tamilnadu Tamilnadu Tamilnadu West Bengal (E, S-I) West Bengal West Bengal West Bengal Orissa (E, S-II) Orissa Orissa Orissa All India-Urban All India-Urban All India-Urban All India-Urban All India Urban All India-Rural All India-Rural All India-Rural All India-Rural All India-Rural
MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV Total MAV HCV MCV LCV Total
13920 31340 3705 2835 9035 18875 11635 7110 3227 17943 17278 1108 329377 123802 2 153840 3 595502 370130 4 0 85715 28508 22530 136753
56.86 56.02 79.39 95.81 36.08 45.75 63.06 57.88 98.35 98.34 92.55 77.28 76.54 79.32 80.57 65.02 77.73 0.00 65.89 64.87 70.25 72.33
15.2 9.23 4.3 2 15.55 8.89 5.65 2.18 18 9.57 5.85 6 16.39 9.41 5.8 2.84 8.21 0 9.63 6.6 1.23 7.61
8 9 12 15 6 7 14 16 4 18 13 17 7 11 17 14 13 0 11 17 14 13
878.96 531.91 245.04 269.56 1234.46 1394.52 330.04 229.49 1440.03 404.17 751.39 199.92 1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72 0 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72
96 108 144 180 72 84 168 192 48 216 156 204 84 132 204 168 156 0 132 204 168 156
84380.16 57446.28 35285.76 48520.80 88881.12 117139.68 55446.72 44062.08 69121.44 87300.72 117216.84 40783.68 85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32 0.00 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32
1174571827.20 1800366415.20 130733740.80 137556468.00 803040919.20 2211011460.00 645122587.20 313281388.80 223054886.88 1566436818.96 2025272561.52 45188317.44 22007659700 68991946776 77676432164 17100528106 185776566745 0.00 5522548878.00 1440822828.00 615863858.40 7579235564.40
10.15 9.31 0.45 0.26 4.51 8.99 2.30 0.40 3.95 14.74 10.97 0.21 276.08 514.97 362.97 31.58 1185.60 0.00 35.04 6.17 0.53 41.74
155
AllIndia AllIndia AllIndia AllIndia All India
MAV HCV MCV LCV Total
329377 1323737 1566911 618032 383805 7
76.54 78.32 80.24 65.16 77.52
16.4 9.4 5.8 2.8 8.2
7 11 17 14 13
1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72
84 132 204 168 156
85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32
22007659699.68 74514495653.64 79117254991.92 17716391964.00 193355802309.24
276.08 550.01 369.14 32.11 1227.34
All India estimation of Volume of goods Carried per annum in 2009-10 ( in BTKM) Region Type of Vehicle No of Vehicle % Vehicle Utilization Avg Tonnage No. Of trip per month Avg Distance Covered Per round Avg No of trip per year Avg distance covered per year Total distance covered BTKm
AllIndia AllIndia AllIndia AllIndia All India
MAV HCV MCV LCV Total
329377 1323737 1566911 618032 3838057
76.54 78.32 80.24 65.16 77.52
16.4 9.4 5.8 2.8 8.2
7 11 17 14 13
1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72
84 132 204 168 156
85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32
22007659699.68 74514495653.64 79117254991.92 17716391964.00 193355802309.24
276.08 550.01 369.14 32.11 1227.34
Note *: Abbreviations: (a) S-I: Stratum-I; (b) S-II: Stratum-II; (c) NP: North Plains; (d) NH: North Hills; (e) W: West; (f) S: South; (g) E: East; (h) NE: North East; (i) C: Central
Explanatory Note: In the above table, the state mentioned in column1 represents the entire group of states in a stratum in each region. In Stratum I
of each region, there is only one State. In Stratum II, however, there are more than one State generally, except in central region. (See pages 12 and 13 showing the selection of states in each region). The estimates of various characteristics (including the number of vehicles of each type) given in the above table are estimates in respect of entire stratum of States. For example, the data shown against Assam (NE, S-I) are estimates for StratumI (comprising Assam alone) in North eastern Region. The data shown against Meghalaya (NE, S-II) are combined estimates for all states in Stratum-II in North East Region (Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura).
156
Annexure XII-A: Basic data from Sample Cities of Orissa after Application of Multipliers
ANNEXURE-XII-A Basic data from Sample Cities of Orissa after Application of Multipliers
State City Block Type Vehicle Type Multiplier No. of Vehicles No. of vehicles after multiplier 7 591.133 98.522 98.522 98.522 98.522 98.522 12.315 12.315 12.315 12.315 1539.409 No. of trips per month 8 4 4 10 14 23 3 15 13 15 17 24 No. of trips after multiplier s 9 2364.532 394.088 985.22 1379.308 2266.006 295.566 184.725 160.095 184.725 209.355 36945.816 Average Tonnes carried in a month 10 11 18 10 6 7 5 5 4 5 6 9 Avg Tonnes per month after multiplier 11 6502.463 1773.396 985.22 591.132 689.654 492.61 61.575 49.26 61.575 73.89 13854.681 Average Distance per Trip 12 1200 1440 288 336 154 1920 432 192 384 200 106 Average Distance Per trip after multiplier 13 709359.6 141871.68 28374.336 33103.392 15172.388 189162.24 5320.08 2364.48 4728.96 2463 163177.354
1 ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA ORISSA
2 Baleshwar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Jharsuguda
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
4 HCV MAV HCV MCV MCV MCV MCV MCV MCV LCV HCV
5 591.133 98.522 98.522 98.522 98.522 98.522 12.315 12.315 12.315 12.315 1539.409
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
157
Annexure XII-B: Calculations for estimates for contribution of Orissa to the All India Estimates
Annexure-XII-B Calculations for estimates for contribution of Orissa to the All India Estimates Avg No. of Estimated Vehicles a 591 Est. Avg Tonnage No. of Avg. carried per trips/month distance per month/Vehicle per vehicle trip/vehicle b c d 11 4 1200.01 Total TKm per vehicle type '000 '000 TKm/Veh (a*b*c*d*12) (a*b*c*d*12)/a e f 374460.72 633.61
City Baleshwar Bhubaneswar MC Bhubaneswar MC Bhubaneswar MC Bhubaneswar MC Jharsuguda
Types of Vehicle HCV
MAV
98.522
18
1440.03
122579.69
1244.19
HCV
99
10
10
288.01
34215.59
345.61
MCV
333
5.85
13
751.39
228344.27
685.72
LCV HCV
12 1539
6 9
17 24
199.92 106
2936.43 422843.33
244.70 274.75
158
Annexure XIII: Calculations for TKM per Vehicle as per Survey
ANNEXURE - XIII Calculations for TKM per Vehicle as per Survey

State Type of Vehicle HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV % Vehicle Avg. Utilization Tonnage 72.12 94.44 83.30 81.17 78.56 85.65 80.64 53.72 66.48 61.60 53.28 88.20 86.29 80.97 73.75 50.00 83.94 88.33 61.58 75.23 9 11 2 15 11 7.18 3 14.85 9 4.6 2 15.56 9.64 5.9 3 15 9 11 2 18 No. Of trip per month 10 2 15 10 2 16 16 10 10 14 15 19 10 15 20 10 12 2 20 4 Avg Distance Covered Per round Trip 330.17 500 384 1049.91 1920.02 250.5 150.77 489.54 353.06 326.81 192 185.56 387.5 225.96 148.91 524.31 450 550 336 1440 Avg. No. of trip per year 120 24 180 120 24 192 192 120 120 168 180 228 120 180 240 120 144 24 240 48 Avg. distance covered per year 39620.40 12000.00 69120.00 125989.20 46080.48 48096.00 28947.84 58744.80 42367.20 54904.08 34560.00 42307.68 46500.00 40672.80 35738.40 62917.20 64800.00 13200.00 80640.00 69120.00 TKM / Vehicles ('000) 257.18 124.67 115.15 1533.95 398.19 295.78 70.03 468.61 253.49 155.57 36.83 580.60 386.79 194.31 79.07 471.88 489.56 128.25 99.31 936.03
assam assam assam meghalaya meghalaya meghalaya meghalaya haryana haryana haryana haryana rajasthan rajasthan rajasthan rajasthan himachal himachal himachal himachal uttranchal
159
State uttranchal uttranchal uttranchal Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra Maharasthra gujarat gujarat gujarat gujarat karnataka karnataka karnataka
Type of Vehicle HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV
% Vehicle Avg. Utilization Tonnage 80.29 64.01 76.47 50.22 64.15 56.47 61.41 76.86 75.42 74.21 59.75 64.11 71.03 72.92 70.87 70.20 79.46 74.53 69.35 82.45 81.90 78.71 9.04 4.5 3 14.64 9 4.5 2 15 9 9 2.62 15.02 8.99 4.93 2.01 15.99 9 7.99 3 20 9.59 5.88
No. Of trip per month
Avg Distance Avg. No. Avg. distance TKM / Covered Per of trip covered per Vehicles round Trip per year year ('000) 8 349.59 96 33560.64 243.58 15 314.78 180 56660.40 163.20 18 139.5 216 30132.00 69.13 9 11 14 16 10 9 9 11 10 20 14 26 9 10 12 10 8 11 17 699.94 390.52 320 382.3 535.38 519.62 540 310.86 504.55 186.62 427.67 93.33 1099.2 345.16 397.96 288 517.9 585.73 236.34 108 132 168 192 120 108 108 132 120 240 168 312 108 120 144 120 96 132 204 75593.52 51548.64 53760.00 73401.60 64245.60 56118.96 58320.00 41033.52 60546.00 44788.80 71848.56 29118.96 118713.60 41419.20 57306.24 34560.00 49718.40 77316.36 48213.36 555.73 297.62 136.61 90.15 740.65 380.92 389.54 64.24 583.03 285.99 258.31 41.48 1332.51 296.20 341.25 71.90 819.90 607.27 223.14
160
State karnataka tamilnadu tamilnadu tamilnadu tamilnadu westbengal westbengal westbengal westbengal orissa orissa orissa orissa All IndiaUrban All IndiaUrban All IndiaUrban All IndiaUrban All India Urban All IndiaRural All IndiaRural
Type of Vehicle LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV MAV HCV MCV LCV Total MAV HCV
% Vehicle Avg. Utilization Tonnage 71.26 56.86 56.02 79.39 95.81 36.08 45.75 63.06 57.88 98.35 98.34 92.55 77.28 76.54 79.32 80.57 65.02 77.73 0.00 65.89 3 15.2 9.23 4.3 2 15.55 8.89 5.65 2.18 18 9.57 5.85 6 16.39 9.41 5.8 2.84 8.21 0 9.63
No. Of trip per month 12 8 9 12 15 6 7 14 16 4 18 13 17 7 11 17 14 13 0 11
Avg Distance Avg. No. Avg. distance TKM / Covered Per of trip covered per Vehicles round Trip per year year ('000) 132.26 144 19045.44 40.71 878.96 96 84380.16 729.28 531.91 108 57446.28 297.05 245.04 144 35285.76 120.45 269.56 180 48520.80 92.98 1234.46 72 88881.12 498.69 1394.52 84 117139.68 476.41 330.04 168 55446.72 197.56 229.49 192 44062.08 55.59 1440.03 48 69121.44 1223.66 404.17 216 87300.72 821.60 751.39 156 117216.84 634.65 199.92 204 40783.68 189.10 1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72 0 488.1 84 132 204 168 156 0 132 85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32 0.00 64429.20 1068.39 480.91 236.17 50.47 424.83 0.00 408.81
161
State All IndiaRural All IndiaRural All IndiaRural All India All India All India All India All India
Type of Vehicle MCV LCV Total MAV HCV MCV LCV Total
% Vehicle Avg. Utilization Tonnage 64.87 70.25 72.33 76.54 78.32 80.24 65.16 77.52 6.6 1.23 7.61 16.4 9.4 5.8 2.8 8.2
No. Of trip per month 17 14 13 7 11 17 14 13
Avg Distance Covered Per round Trip 247.75 162.71 426.72 1013.88 488.1 247.75 162.71 426.72
Avg. No. of trip per year 204 168 156 84 132 204 168 156
Avg. distance covered per year 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32 85165.92 64429.20 50541.00 27335.28 66568.32
TKM / Vehicles ('000) 216.37 23.62 366.62 1068.39 475.57 235.81 49.54 422.55
162
Annexure XIV (a): Example Chattisgarh - Gross Value added by per unit and by GVA per worker
Annexure - XIV (a)
Example Chattisgarh - Gross Value added by per unit and by GVA per worker
State Rural / Urban City Type of unit Ty No units of Total receipts Product .000 linked subsidies .000 Receipt excl. Total Product linked .000 subsidy .000 Exp. Wages and Exp exxl. GVA .000 salaries to Payroll payroll .000 payment .000 No worker Per Gva Per Unit Of Gva Worker .000
Urban
chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Durg MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC
Agent N N Transport O N Broker N Owner Total N Agent N Total N N Transport O N Transport O Total N N Owner N Owner Total N Agent N Total N N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O N Transport O Total N N Broker Total N N Owner N Owner N Owner N Owner N Owner
240 615 5 3710 4570 200 200 200 200 400 25 25 50 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 5 5 5 215 5 5 40 40 40 40 40
Urban
972770 0 972770 1096763 3932119 2000 3932119 2931875 37066 0 37066 22023 16683024 0 16683024 13567661 21624978 2000 21624978 17618323 Chhatisgarh By Case Calculation 791750 0 791750 1010852 791750 0 791750 1010852 156950 0 156950 300102 2200950 0 2200950 1486844 2357900 0 2357900 1786946 586281 0 586281 374220 0 0 0 5759 586281 0 586281 379979 181020 0 181020 85911 181020 0 181020 85911 188315 2000 188315 187156 647800 0 647800 301481 292730 0 292730 261930 182500 0 182500 143924 158779 0 158779 172225 32213 0 32213 26996 32446 0 32446 16379 39436 0 39436 34838 1574219 2000 1574219 1144929 37066 0 37066 22023 37066 0 37066 22023 97180 0 97180 51462 142825 0 142825 86458 436535 0 436535 198893 171915 0 171915 118386 627800 0 627800 291829
325377 771387 869799 2062076 6534 15490 4025114 9542547 5226823 12391499 299889 299889 89031 441102 530133 111020 1708 112728 25487 25487 55524 89440 77707 42698 51094 8009 4859 10335 339666 6534 6534 15267 25650 59005 35122 86577 710962 710962 211071 1045742 1256813 263200 4050 267251 60424 60424 131633 212040 184223 101226 121131 18987 11520 24503 805263 15490 15490 36195 60809 139887 83265 205252
201383 1870043 21576 7140477 9233479 80788 80788 -54121 1155208 1101087 323081 -4050 319030 120596 120596 56682 435760 108507 81274 37648 13226 20926 14933 768956 21576 21576 60985 82016 296648 88650 422548
5480 11475 120 58780 75855 5000 5000 600 6000 6600 1775 50 1825 480 480 560 1440 1400 640 560 115 90 70 4875 120 120 280 480 920 560 1440
37000 163000 180000 121000 122000 16000 16000 -90000 193000 167000 182000 -81000 175000 251000 251000 101000 303000 78000 127000 67000 115000 233000 213000 158000 180000 180000 218000 171000 322000 158000 293000
839 3041 4315 1925 2020 404 404 -271 5776 2753 12923 -162 6381 3015 3015 1417 10894 2713 2032 941 2645 4185 2987 3577 4315 4315 1525 2050 7416 2216 10564
163
State Rural / Urban
City
Type of unit Ty
No units
of Total receipts Product .000 linked subsidies .000
Receipt excl. Total Product linked .000 subsidy .000
Exp. Wages and Exp exxl. GVA .000 salaries to Payroll payroll .000 payment .000
No worker
Per Gva Per Unit Of Gva Worker .000
chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh chhatisgarh
Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC Raipur MC
Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Owner Total
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 5 5 5 5 540
292730 197465 59860 102025 1326160 102025 177550 124830 21489 18213 50673 19248 3968523
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
292730 197465 59860 102025 1326160 102025 177550 124830 21489 18213 50673 19248 3968523
341582 145420 43036 169567 970963 121669 147232 158382 12542 14846 22317 12591 2907173
101337 43142 12767 50305 288055 36095 43679 46987 3721 4404 6621 3735 862471
240245 102278 30268 119262 682907 85573 103553 111395 8821 10442 15696 8855 2044703
52485 95187 29592 -17237 643253 16452 73997 13435 12668 7771 34977 10393 1923820
1400 640 120 560 4920 560 560 560 70 60 75 70 13275
37000 149000 247000 -31000 131000 29000 132000 24000 181000 130000 466000 148000 145000
1312 2380 740 -431 16081 411 1850 336 2534 1554 6995 2079 3563
164
Annexure XIV (b): Example Chattisgarh - Raw Data for GVA Calculations
ExampleChattisgarhRawDataforGVACalculations
City CityName Block Multiplier Ward block IV sch_ty TotalReceipt Product Subsidies Receipt excl. Product linked subsidy 2-Jan 3 3958750 784750 11004750 23451250 0 2429500 3570620 10913365 4708475 4297875 16195000 15695000 7318250 7318250 4936625 4562500 1496500 8550620 34153995 13890620 4525500 4438750 3120750 3969475 4297875 5242620 6442615 10134620 3849625 6489125 7887250 7413125 3887250 TotalExp SalaryExp Exp exxl. Payroll payment
AnnexureXIV(b)
GVA No Of worker
22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24
DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC Sakti
Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Residential/Other
200 200 200 25 25 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3120
23 21 18 3 38 28 6 3 38 49 25 39 6 21 34 46 26 11 7 10 6 7 18 15 15 15 51 14 50 15 45 10
24 14 4 8 18 3 6 1 2 19 12 4 11 11 16 19 14 18 2 11 15 13 18 15 12 18 13 1 22 4 17 11 7
13 4 3 10 15 4 39 37 29 33 24 30 39 2 6 43 42 50 19 16 1 39 16 22 40 40 40 10 40 33 40 43 1
1 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 2 2 3 4
1 3958750 784750 11004750 23451250 0 2429500 3570620 10913365 4758475 4297875 16195000 15695000 7318250 7318250 4936625 4562500 1496500 8550620 34153995 13890620 4525500 4438750 3120750 3969475 4297875 5242620 6442615 10134620 3849625 6489125 7887250 7413125 3887250
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 5054258 1500511 7434218 14968799 230350 1286546 2161454 4972313 4678907 2959657 7537013 7295730 8539558 6548251 3635503 3598089 1075891 4239172 24274070 3041718 2147786 3680805 3959544 4305623 2508334 2969181 5399292 4463323 2518139 3275788 6967676 4404678 3295035
5 1499446 445156 2205508 4440791 68337 381679 641238 1475135 1388091 878041 2236004 2164424 2533429 1942668 1078544 1067444 319185 1257634 7201384 902386 637183 1091984 1174677 1277348 744147 880867 1601807 1324134 747056 971828 2067099 1306735 977537
5-Apr 6 3554812 1055355 5228710 10528008 162013 904867 1520216 3497178 3290816 2081616 5301009 5131306 6006129 4605583 2556959 2530645 756706 2981538 17072686 2139332 1510603 2588821 2784867 3028275 1764187 2088314 3797485 3139189 1771083 2303960 4900577 3097943 2317498
6Mar 7 403938 270605 5776040 12923242 162013 1524633 2050404 7416187 1417659 2216259 10893991 10563694 1312121 2712667 2379666 2031855 739794 5569082 17081309 11751288 3014897 1849929 335883 941200 2533688 3154306 2645130 6995431 2078542 4185165 2986673 4315182 1569752
8 25 3 30 71 2 7 12 23 14 14 36 36 35 35 16 16 3 14 123 14 12 14 14 14 14 12 23 15 14 18 14 24 14
165
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A) 1.
Objectives and Methodology This Report relates to a study on the economics of transportation of goods by road. The study is one of three transport sector studies assigned by the Department of Road Transport in the Ministry of Shipping and Road Transport and Highways, Government of India (GOI) to JPS Associates Ltd New Delhi.
2.
The Terms of Reference of the study covered a) identification of the structure of the goods transport by road industry, b) study of the organization of the industry, c) estimating the volume of goods transported by road, sector-wise / States-wise, d) estimation of the contribution of the goods transport by road industry to national economy, e) estimation of various economic parameters relating to productivity and efficiency in the industry, and f) making suggestions for improving the performance of the industry.
3.
The study made use of the results of a sample survey of goods transport units carried out by JPS Associates, as well as secondary data available from various sources. In addition to the sample survey of goods transport units, a small sample study of truck drivers was also undertaken.
4.
The sampling methodology adopted is one of stratified multi-stage random sampling of States, urban locations and villages within the States and Blocks within the urban locations, as described below: The country is divided into seven regions for the purpose of selecting the states within them. The seven regions are as follows: (i) Northern (Plains) Region (Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Chandigarh)
E-I
(ii)
Northern (Hills) Region (Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Jammu & Kashmir)
(iii)
Western Region (Maharashtra, Gujarat, Goa, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Diu & Daman and Lakshadweep)
(iv)
Southern Region (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamilnadu, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Pondicherry)
(v) (vi)
Eastern Region (Orissa, West Bengal, Jharkand and Bihar) North Eastern Region (Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland and Sikkim)
(vii)
5.
In each of the seven regions, two strata of States have been formed the first stratum comprising the State with the largest number of registered mechanized goods transportation vehicles (used as a proxy for the number of mechanized goods transportation units), and the second stratum comprising all other States in the region. While the State in the first stratum is invariably selected, the second stratum has been covered on a sample basis with one State selected with probability proportional to the size measured by the number of registered goods vehicles in the State. Thus a total of 14 states were selected for the sample survey.
6.
In each state, 3 cities were selected. The Capital city was invariably selected and from the balance cities, on city of above I lac population and another of less than 1 lac population were selected on a random basis. Thus a total of 42 cities were selected.
7.
While it was felt that the goods transport units in villages may not be substantial, it was decided to cover a few villages on a sample basis. Two villages per state were selected randomly.
E-II
8.
Sampling within the selected locations was carried out by selecting randomly from the NSSO urban frame blocks categorized as Business/Industrial Blocks and Residential/other blocks. For the survey 20% of the Business/Industrial blocks were selected and 2.5% of the Residential/Other blocks were selected. Thus a total of 2306 blocks were selected from a total of 60648 blocks.
9.
In each of the sampled blocks, listing of all goods transport units was done and all such units were covered on a census basis. In this manner a total of 1212 goods transport units were covered and a total of 754 drivers were covered.
10. For estimation of various parameters the results will be combined to get estimates of each location. Multipliers were derived for each location to extrapolate these results for the state and then the region. The summation of all region gave us the All India Estimates. 11. The Volume of Goods Traffic was estimated by using the survey results to arrive at the Tonne Kilometres per vehicle. This was then multiplied by the estimated number of goods vehicles in-use derived from secondary data to estimate the total Volume of Goods Traffic for ALL INDIA. 12. For estimation of GVA, data was collected on all the items relating to transport sector in the NSSO schedules used in 63rd round and CVA estimated as per block 4.2 of the NSSO schedules.
B)
Current Trends in Goods Transport Industry
13. Estimates made by the Eleventh Plan Working Group on Road Transport indicated that the share of road transport in movement of goods by railways and road taken together, which was just 13.8 % in 1950-51, has grown enormously to 61.3 % of the freight traffic by 2004-05. 14. Statistics on the number of goods vehicles registered with the appropriate State Transport Departments indicate that during the first five years of the current
E-III
century the annual growth rate has been 10.2 against 7.4 over the period 19512001. 15. Projections made by the Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan showed that the demand for goods transport by road is expected to grow from 844 BTKM (billion tonne kilometers) in 2007-08 to 1,231 BTKM by the end of the Plan period (2011-12) under the 9 % overall GDP growth scenario, or by 10.8 % per year. 16. Road transport of goods is almost entirely is a private sector operation. It is also characterized by operations of a very large number of individual truck-owners and several layers of intermediaries like agents, brokers and transport operators. 17. Bad roads, aged vehicles, inter-State barriers and other interfaces with officialdom, result in losses in efficiencies of operation and productivity. Transit times are found to be nearly double those of developed countries. Equipment utilization rates for the Indian trucking fleet, which average 60,000 km to 100,000 km per truck-year, are less than a quarter of those in developed economies. Despite many such impediments, India has achieved a highly competitive low-cost road freight transport industry, with highway freight rates among the lowest in the world.
C)
Structure of Goods Transport by Road
18. Barring some captive freight movement operations of the government and some public sector enterprises, the entire goods transportation by road is in private sector. An important aspect of the trucking industry is the existence of a chain of intermediary transport entities. Between the actual consignor and the consignee, the ultimate receiver of goods, there exist a series of links in the form of transport booking agents, transport operators, brokers and the vehicle owners, though not all the entities of this chain may be present in all operations.
E-IV
19. Of the 1212 units covered in the main part of the survey, 5% were agents, 53% operators, 6% brokers and 35% vehicle owners. The classification boundaries are often blurred as many units classified as of one type also perform the roles of units of other types. Thus, the industry is characterized by considerable extent of informality. 20. About two-third (60%) of the units were individual proprietorships and one-third (34%) were private/public companies. Partnerships are rather rare, being only to the extent of just 3%. 21. About two-third of the units (68%) were members of the goods transporters associations (local or national). 22. About 13 % of the units employed between 1 to 5 employees and about 50 % employed between 6 to 15 employees.
D)
Ownership Pattern
23. The trucking industry continues to be dominated by small players. 24. Among the units classified as vehicle owners, about 83% had between 1 to 5 trucks. Of these 41 %t had just one truck, 42 % had between 2 to 5 trucks. Another 6% owned fleets of size between 6 and 9. 25. Apart from the units classified as vehicle owners, many units (about threefourths) classified as transport operators also had their own fleets. 26. About 52 % of the vehicles had national permits. 27. Analysis by type of vehicle showed that about 9 % of the vehicles owned were multi-axle vehicles (MAVs), 33 % were heavy commercial vehicles (HCVs), 42% were medium commercial vehicles (MCVs) and 16 % were light commercial vehicles (LCVs).
E-V
28. The Drivers survey conducted as a part of this study also threw up a similar vehicle mix.
E)
Nature and volume of goods carried
29. The study attempted an estimate of the total volume of freight in terms of billion tonne kilometers (BTKM) carried by mechanized road transport during 2009-10 making use of the data on per vehicle annual distance and tonnage hauled collected through the survey. 30. According to these estimates, the Volume of Goods hauled has been estimated at 1291 BTKM per annum for 2009-10. The Working Group on Road Transport Sector for the Eleventh Plan projected the likely demand for goods transport by road at 844 BTKM in 2007-08 and estimated a growth rate of 10.8 percent per year. On this basis our estimate is close to that of the working group upon adding the projected growth. 31. Of the total freight carried, industrial products accounted for 40 %, and Agricultural Commodities accounted for 22 %. About 17 % of the freight was made up of construction materials. 32. These above mentioned estimates of freight carried are sensitive to the estimated total in-use vehicle population. We have estimated it for 2009-10 by projecting the in-use vehicle population in 2006 from secondary sources. A vehicle utilization factor of 0.78 has been determined based on the survey and has been used for estimating the freight hauled per vehicle per annum. 33. The estimation of volume of road traffic movement of goods on the above basis can be no permanent substitute for a more methodical system of data on actual movement of goods by road that needs to be established.
E-VI
F)
Contribution of the Industry to the Economy
34. Gross Value Added (GVA) by trucking units surveyed has been derived, in accordance with the Factor approach, as the excess of total receipts over expenses less indirect taxes and wages and salaries to the pay roll and nonpayroll staff and income of proprietors and unpaid family members. 35. Based on the total GVA by the surveyed units, estimates of GVA per unit and GVA per worker have been derived. For all the locations in the seven States put together, GVA per unit came to Rs.11.8 lakhs and GVA per worker to Rs 123000. 36. Total contribution of the goods transport industry as a percentage of the national GDP has been estimated at 1.93% on current money basis. The ministry estimates for the entire transport sector (mechanized and non-mechanized) including passenger transport is 4.5%. G) Productivity and other parameters associated with the Industry
37. About 69% of all goods carrying vehicles were less than 10 years in age. About 30% were less than 6 years old. On the other hand, about 31% of the vehicles were over 10 years of age. 38. In the category of vehicles below six years of age, the vehicles were covering an average distance of 88800 kms. per year. Those which are 6 to 9 years in age had done 85000 kms per year, those vehicle which are 10 to 14 years covered 82000 kms. while those aged 15 years or more had done 78000 kms. per year cumulatively. 39. On an average, a commercial vehicle gave 7 kms. per liter of diesel. The consumption rate was 3.5 kms for MAVs, 6 kms. for HCVs, 7.9 kms. for MCVs and 10.5 kms. for LCVs. This appears higher than general belief, but may be reflecting the improved efficiency of modern goods vehicles.
E-VII
40. On an average, goods carrying vehicles were utilized to the extent of 76 per cent. 41. The total turn-around time was 21 hrs for trips of less than 500 km, 50 hrs for trips involving a distance of 500 to 999 km, and 110 hrs for distances longer than 1000 km. Of this total trip times, actual running times accounted for 33 % for trips of less than 500 km, 36 % for trips of distance 500 to 999 kms and 43 % for longer distances. 42. Check-post halts accounted for about 16 % of the total trip time and other official delays for another 8 %. 43. Overloading has not been admitted to by the respondents, even though the practice appears to be rampant. 44. From the drivers surveyed it appears that maximum number of drivers are well experienced with 6 years or more experience. 45. It is seen that direct costs account for more than 80 percent. A lions share of this expenditure is consisted of diesel (around 40%) and wages (around 30% for wages and payroll). 46. Similarly expenditure for taxes shows 5.5 percent of the total expenditure and expenditure on interest and depreciation shows only 5.0 percent of the total. 47. Fuel is an important component of the operational expenditure of truck owners, and periodic increases in fuel prices erode the profit margins unless the vehicle owners increase their rates periodically. The truck freight rates for a standard 9 tonne truck for the Delhi-Mumbai stretch during 2002- 2010 are increased by 28 % and for Delhi-Kolkata stretch during same period are increased by 20%.
E-VIII
H)
Problems and Suggestions
48. Small owners should be encouraged to come together in cooperatives and operate as a single unit. With the pooling of resources, it should be possible to invest for technological up-gradation. Another advantage out of several small operators coming together is that they can better resist the pressures from the consignors and transport operators to indulge in overloading as a measure of cutting transport costs. That will also result in better utilization of available vehicles. 49. More efficient multi-axle trucks are relatively hard to come by, though in recent years there is a tendency on the part of the goods transport vehicle owners to switch over to such vehicles. To further encourage the use of multi-axle
vehicles, suitable incentives such as lower transit tax and toll rates may be considered. The cost of such incentives would be more than paid back by way of lower levels of damage to the road system. 50. Rising fuel costs and competition preventing corresponding hikes in freight rates has been cutting into the margins of the transport operators. To ease the
problem, a policy of dual pricing of diesel favouring goods transportation could be thought of, at the same time taking appropriate steps to prevent misuse of the benefits. 51. There does not seem to be any need or justification for a regime to regulate freight rates as there is enough competition in the industry to drive the freight rates to reasonable levels. 52. Overloading trucks is a common problem, though not brought out by the present study, and affects the quality of roads that have been built for lesser axle loads. A system of penalizing for overloading is installed to discourage overloading but it is not effectively implemented 53. An insurance regime linking premium to past performance could be devised to promote road safety.
E-IX
54. Halts at check-posts result in loss of about 16 % of the trip time. Simplification of procedures, paper work and installing green channel system for movement of specified vehicles would result in better performance. 55. Rationalization of taxation regime could also result in speedier passage of trucks along the roads and improve the services. 56. Road transport of goods sector suffers from the absence of a sound statistical collection system. Apart from periodical special surveys on different aspects of the industry, it is necessary to put in place regular automated data collection systems on goods movement at least on national and state highways to begin with. An accurate and up-to-date data base on vehicle owners will also help in planning and executing sample surveys more efficiently.
E-X
Summary of Findings and Recommendations at a Glance

A. I.
Findings
Organizational Structure Vehicle owner : Transport Operators: Agents: Brokers: 35% 53% 5% 6%
II.
Ownership Pattern Single truck owner 2 5 trucks 6 -9 trucks > 10 trucks 41% 42% 6% 6%
III. Volume of goods transported Estimated No. of goods vehicles in use (2009-10) Estimated volume of freight 39.4 lakhs 1291(BTKM)
IV. Contribution of trucking industry to the economy V. Share of Transport in GDP Gross value added per unit of transporters Gross value added per worker in transport sector 4.38% Rs.11.8 lakh Rs. 1,23,000
Economic Parameters of Trucking Industry Vehicles of age below 6 yrs Vehicles of age 6 10 yrs. Average fuel consumption 30% 41% 7kms./Ltr
E-XI
Average distance covered /yr. Total average trip time Exp. on fuel, maintenance & wages
85000 kms.. (7083 km./month) 59 hrs. 80%
B.
Recommendations
In view of fragmented structure of the trucking industry, it is suggested that small owners should be encouraged to come together and operate as a single unit (like cluster concept being propagated in the case of MSMEs) To encourage the use of MAVs, which are more cost effective, introduction of incentives such as low transit tax and toll tax may be considered. In order to achieve better fleet utilization, consolidation of vehicle owners into co-operatives or similar entities should be considered so that loads can be easily distributed. Excessive overloading should be strictly curbed to protect the road network since very often the consignors indulge in pressurizing the truck owners to overload. A system of penalizing the consigner in addition to the vehicle owner for overloading may be evolved. Greater use of tractor trailer multi axle vehicles will improve turn-around times and reduce costs. World Bank estimates that a 10% increase in the usage of such vehicles could reduce transport cost by Rs. 5 billion /Yr. Introduction of lower excise and toll and permit charges for such vehicles could encourage increased usage. The time lost at the check posts can be reduced by having a system of a certification and sealing of trucks at point of origin and the certificate acting as a through pass.
E-XII
There is a need to improve the statistical base to monitor the performance of this highly fragmented sector. It is suggested that all states should set up a monitoring unit in the transport department and provide regular feedback to impact policy initiatives.
To contain rising cost, particularly of fuel and spares, dual pricing policy should be evolved. While lower price of diesel used for freight movement would work as a measure to check inflation the higher pricing policy should be used in the industry and the private passenger vehicles. However, one has to guard against the possibility of misuse of the duel prices and diversion of fuel purchased for freight movement to other purposes.
Lnking the amounts of insurance premiums to the past records of accidents caused by the vehicle, apart from the past insurance claims, might act as a deterrent and improve road safety. This, however, requires an integration of information on road accidents and vehicle insurance.
It is essential to identify all major data gaps relating to goods transport by road and establish suitable statistical systems in place.
E-XIII
ExampleChattisgarhRawDataforGVACalculations
City CityName Block Multiplier Ward block IV sch_ty TotalReceipt Product Subsidies Receipt excl. Product linked subsidy 2-Jan 3 3958750 784750 11004750 23451250 0 2429500 3570620 10913365 4708475 4297875 16195000 15695000 7318250 7318250 4936625 4562500 1496500 8550620 34153995 13890620 4525500 4438750 3120750 3969475 4297875 5242620 6442615 10134620 3849625 6489125 7887250 7413125 3887250 TotalExp SalaryExp Exp exxl. Payroll payment
AnnexureXIV(b)
GVA No Of worker
22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24
DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC DurgMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC RaipurMC Sakti
Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Residential/Other Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Industrial/Bus Residential/Other
200 200 200 25 25 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3120
23 21 18 3 38 28 6 3 38 49 25 39 6 21 34 46 26 11 7 10 6 7 18 15 15 15 51 14 50 15 45 10
24 14 4 8 18 3 6 1 2 19 12 4 11 11 16 19 14 18 2 11 15 13 18 15 12 18 13 1 22 4 17 11 7
13 4 3 10 15 4 39 37 29 33 24 30 39 2 6 43 42 50 19 16 1 39 16 22 40 40 40 10 40 33 40 43 1
1 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 4 2 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 2 2 3 4
1 3958750 784750 11004750 23451250 0 2429500 3570620 10913365 4758475 4297875 16195000 15695000 7318250 7318250 4936625 4562500 1496500 8550620 34153995 13890620 4525500 4438750 3120750 3969475 4297875 5242620 6442615 10134620 3849625 6489125 7887250 7413125 3887250
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 5054258 1500511 7434218 14968799 230350 1286546 2161454 4972313 4678907 2959657 7537013 7295730 8539558 6548251 3635503 3598089 1075891 4239172 24274070 3041718 2147786 3680805 3959544 4305623 2508334 2969181 5399292 4463323 2518139 3275788 6967676 4404678 3295035
5 1499446 445156 2205508 4440791 68337 381679 641238 1475135 1388091 878041 2236004 2164424 2533429 1942668 1078544 1067444 319185 1257634 7201384 902386 637183 1091984 1174677 1277348 744147 880867 1601807 1324134 747056 971828 2067099 1306735 977537
5-Apr 6 3554812 1055355 5228710 10528008 162013 904867 1520216 3497178 3290816 2081616 5301009 5131306 6006129 4605583 2556959 2530645 756706 2981538 17072686 2139332 1510603 2588821 2784867 3028275 1764187 2088314 3797485 3139189 1771083 2303960 4900577 3097943 2317498
6Mar 7 403938 270605 5776040 12923242 162013 1524633 2050404 7416187 1417659 2216259 10893991 10563694 1312121 2712667 2379666 2031855 739794 5569082 17081309 11751288 3014897 1849929 335883 941200 2533688 3154306 2645130 6995431 2078542 4185165 2986673 4315182 1569752
8 25 3 30 71 2 7 12 23 14 14 36 36 35 35 16 16 3 14 123 14 12 14 14 14 14 12 23 15 14 18 14 24 14
165

Study On Economic Cost of Inter-State Barriers in Goods Traffic

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Study On Economic Cost of Inter-State Barriers in Goods Traffic

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

FINAL REPORT

STUDY ON ECONOMICS OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY

JPS ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.

106 107 108 111

Sl. No Annexure VII Annexure VIII Classifications

Page Nos. 135 136 137 141

Annexure IX Annexure X Annexure XI

Annexure XII-B Annexure XIII AnnexureXIV(a)

AnnexureXIV(b) Example Chattisgarh-Raw Data for GVA Calculations

33. 34. 35.

47. 48. 49.

Central Region (Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

Current Trends in Goods Transport Industry

Structure of Goods Transport by Road

Nature and volume of goods carried

Contribution of the Industry to the Economy

Problems and Suggestions

Summary of Findings and Recommendations at a Glance

85000 kms.. (7083 km./month) 59 hrs. 80%

Road Transport of Goods3

Trend in shares of railways and road transport in movement of goods

Chapter 2: Scope, Approach & Methodology

CHAPTER 2 SCOPE, APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

Central Region (Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

North (Hills) West

(between 1 and Karnataka 617) (0.311) 258

East North East

Automatically Chhattisgarh selected, as (1.000)

Stratum II 4 Rajasthan Uttarakhand Gujarat Karnataka Orissa Chhattisgarh Meghalaya

Estimate of the parameter total for the sampled locality k is given by

Estimate for the selected state as a whole is obtained by

Location 1 B1 (business) and R1 (residential) Location 2 B2 and R2 Location 3 B3 and R3

Normally, estimates are built up as follows.

This is the same as

(1/p*n2*5){x(b3} + (1/p*n2*40) { x(r3)}

Chapter 3: Organizational Structure of the Trucking Industry

CHAPTER 3 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE TRUCKING INDUSTRY

51855 514576 62794 343449

No. of reporting units 972672

No. of reporting units

Type of transport operating units

Membership of associations Member Not

Registration Status Registered Not Pub. Ltd. Pvt. Ltd.

Legal Status Ind. Partnership NR

Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total

Agent Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner

Agent Transport Operator Broker Vehicle Owner

Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Total (Nos.)

264066 4600191 592725 3863478 9320459

Cap >1 lac <1 lac Total Total

Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Total Total (Nos.)

264066 4600191 592725 3863478 9320459 9320460

Chapter 4: Ownership Pattern of Trucking Industry in India

CHAPTER 4 OWNERSHIP PATTERN OF TRUCKING INDUSTRY IN INDIA

Percentage of Vehicle Owners with Fleets of 2 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 49 50 to 99 32 8 47 47 6 10 62 24 42 15 2 8 5 9 0 9 0 6 13 3 14 2 3 34 0 0 5 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0

100 & above 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Agent Transport Operator Broker Owner Rural All India

All Types 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Capital Cities Pop>1 lac Pop<1 lac Total Rural 4.3.6

100 100 100 100 100

Chapter 5: Nature and Volume of Goods Transported

CHAPTER 5 NATURE AND VOLUME OF GOODS TRANSPORTED

Methodology with Example for Estimation of Tonn Kms. Of Goods

(1/pn25){x(b3} + (1/pn240) { x(r3)}