# Urban Mobility in Brazil: An Comparison Overview in Thirteen State Capitais

João Reis, Gabriel Santos Rodrigues, Sivanilza Teixeira Machado

► To cite this version:

João Reis, Gabriel Santos Rodrigues, Sivanilza Teixeira Machado. Urban Mobility in Brazil: An Comparison Overview in Thirteen State Capitais. IFIP International Conference on Advances in Pro- duction Management Systems (APMS), Sep 2022, Gyeongju, South Korea. pp.601-608, 10.1007/978- 3-031-16407-1_70 . hal-05386132

HAL Id: hal-05386132

https://inria.hal.science/hal-05386132v1

Submitted on 27 Nov 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# Urban Mobility in Brazil: An Comparison
Overview in Thirteen State Capitais

João Gilberto Mendes dos Reis<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" /> ID, Gabriel Santos Rodrigues<fnref n="1" /> ID,
and Sivanilza Teixeira Machado<fnref n="3" />(✉) ID

**Abstract.** Urban mobility is related to public transport system planning, geographic city size, economic power, and the ability to manage the resources of each city. In Brazil, cities are obliged by law to create an urban mobility plan, but they really work? How Brazilian state capitals are acting to face the challenges to provide an efficient urban mobility plan? This paper aims to evaluate urban mobility considering infrastructure, quality of services, cost and fares, accessibility, environment and safety in Brazilian cities. To do so, we selected a sample of thirteen state capitals and data were collected from Urban Mobility Information System. The analysis was made using graphs and cross-tabulation. Our results show that the sample cities prioritize road transport systems, the fleet of vehicles requires modernization, and it is missing investment in dedicated bus lanes to have a more agile and efficient transport system.

**Keywords:** Brazilian state capitals · Public transport · Urban mobility

## 1 Introduction

Urban mobility has been advanced in the last two decades in Brazilian cities due to government actions to control and improve traffic in cities [1,2]. However, even the guidelines created for the development of an Urban Mobility Plan, cities fail to deal with socioeconomic inequality [1,3,4].

Indeed, the cities' have grown without planning which generates many issues for local governments regarding basic sanitation, education, health, security, and mobility. Urban mobility cope with urban space and displacements carried out

<footnote n="1">¹ RESUP - Research Group in Supply Chain Management, Postgraduate Program in Production Engineering, Universidade Paulista - UNIP, R. Dr. Bacelar, 1212-4fl, São Paulo 04026002, Brazil
joao.reis@docente.unip.br</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Centro de Ciências Sociais Aplicadas, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil
joao.reis@mackenzie.br</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ NAPOLE - Research Group, Federal Institute of São Paulo - IFSP, Mogi das Cruzes. 1501, Suzano SP 08673010, Brazil
sivanilzamachado@ifsp.edu.br</footnote>
by people and loads inside the cities. In Brazil, the Urban Mobility Plan is an obligation established by Law 12,587 in January 2012. This law has five main objectives, and we highlighted three most important: (i) reduction of inequalities and promotion of social inclusion; (ii) promotion of the improvement of urban conditions for the population concerning accessibility and mobility; and (iii) sustainable development with the environmental liability reduction [5]).

Urban mobility can be evaluated by many factors, such as the city's transport and traffic infrastructure, information systems, between physical and payment systems, etc. The lack of infrastructure and quality in public transport services has a straight impact on people's lives and causes immobility [2,3]. The evidence of traffic immobility should be analyzed by congestion rate and the average operational speed at peak times. For instance, São Paulo in 2019 had an average operating speed of 17.93 km/h in the morning and 15.08 km/h in the afternoon [6].

Quality of services, infrastructure, cost and fares, accessibility, and sustainability in urban mobility is related to public transport system planning, geographic city size, the economic power of each city and its ability to manage resources and apply public policies to promote the well-being of the inhabitants. In this study, we established the following research question: How Brazilian state capitals are acting in the face of the urban mobility plan required by Law?

Brazil is a multicultural country with five distinct regions, 27 states and 5,568 cities [4]. Political, economic, and social inequality are presented in all cities. Thus, analyzing the urban mobility policy of each city allows us to reflect on the behaviour of collective spaces, and how the city develops in terms of transport infrastructure, integrated transport system, accessibility, public safety, and contributes to the economic activity of the municipality.

This paper aims to evaluate urban mobility in thirteen Brazilian state capitals considering infrastructure, quality of services, cost and fares, accessibility, environment and safety.

## 2 Methodology

The data in this research was obtained from the Urban Mobility Information System [UMIS] (2020) database that compares urban mobility plans among main Brazilian state capitals. Table 1 shows the thirteen capitals that we consider in the study.

The variables compared in this study are (1) **Infrastructure**: the public transport services offered by the city, physical integration, number of terminals, stations and embark and disembark points, fleet, exclusive lanes for public transport, and active mobility; (2) **Quality of services**: operational speed of the public transport system in the municipality, the average age of the fleet, information system for users, and user satisfaction; (3) **Costs and fares**: the current and previous fare, gratuity transportation level, and fare for transportation integration; (4) **Accessibility**: actions carried out by the municipality to promote mobility, specific legislation, special transport services; (5) **Environment**: use
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Population and GDP per capita information</caption><thead><tr><td>Region Capital/State</td><td>Population+</td><td>GPD Per capita (USD*)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Palmas/TO</td><td>0.31</td><td>7,464.46</td></tr><tr><td>João Pessoa/PB</td><td>0.83</td><td>5,506.00</td></tr><tr><td>Campo Grande/MS</td><td>0.92</td><td>7,210.47</td></tr><tr><td>Porto Alegre/RS</td><td>1.49</td><td>11,870.81</td></tr><tr><td>Goiânia/GO</td><td>1.56</td><td>7,457.55</td></tr><tr><td>Recife/PE</td><td>1.66</td><td>7,100.91</td></tr><tr><td>Curitiba/PR</td><td>1.96</td><td>10,621.08</td></tr><tr><td>Manaus/AM</td><td>2.26</td><td>8,307.84</td></tr><tr><td>Belo Horizonte/MG</td><td>2.53</td><td>8,268.23</td></tr><tr><td>Fortaleza/CE</td><td>2.70</td><td>5,396.25</td></tr><tr><td>Salvador/BA</td><td>2.90</td><td>4,746.42</td></tr><tr><td>Brasília/DF</td><td>3.09</td><td>19,389.48</td></tr><tr><td>Rio de Janeiro/RJ</td><td>6.78</td><td>11,289.16</td></tr></tbody></table>

of less polluting energy sources in public transportation or taxi, carrying out environmental vehicle inspection by the municipality; and (6) **Safety**: traffic control and inspection, number of traffic agents and inspection equipment, and traffic ticket collected in 2019.

Data were organized in an MS Excel spreadsheet, tabulated, and analyzed using graphs and cross-tabulation. We calculated the mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum values for quantitative variables.

# 3 Results and Discussion

## 3.1 Public Transportation Service and Infrastructure

Transport services are managed by the municipal, state, and federal levels and by a public consortium or a cooperation agreement. Of the 13 Brazilian state capitals, Recife/PE is the only one that does not offer transport services operated by municipal buses.

We observed that cities with a population of fewer than 2 million inhabitants prioritize road transport systems. This result is a reflection of Brazilian transportation policy over the years [3].

Regarding rail transport, Fortaleza/CE offers the same types of services as Rio de Janeiro/RJ with 2.2 times less population (Train, Subway, Light Rail). While Salvador/BA and Brasilia/DF have a population of 2.90 and 3.09 million people, respectively, only offer the Subway system (Fig. 1).

João Pessoa/PB and Porto Alegre/RS cities offer Train service that is managed by the Federal Government. In addition, the Subway service provided in

<footnote>* USD = 4.68 (april 13, 2022); +Value in Million;</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Distribution of transportation modo service by population of the capital</figcaption></figure>

Recife/PE and Belo Horizonte/MG, Salvador/BA and Palmas/TO do not offer intercity transport services, while the other cities do. However, the system transport management is the responsibility of the State or the Federal government.

The average of age of bus fleet of vehicles is old and should be modernized to meet demand for passenger transport. Mainly, in cities with over 2 million inhabitants, that should acquire articulated and bi-articulated vehicles.

The fleet of vehicles in cities with populations from 100 to 1 million inhabitants are conventional buses, taxis, bike taxis and school buses. The main difference between cities with up to 500 and 1 million inhabitants was the number of vehicles. On the other hand, cities up to 2 million inhabitants added in fleet of vehicles Articulated bus, Bi-articulated bus, Mini bus, and Charter for passenger transport, as well as, cities above 2 million inhabitants also added other modes of transport, such as Subway (composition), Boat and Light Rail (composition).

Regarding the physical integration among different modes of urban transport, nine cities have information over "paracycles or bicycle racks, public bicycle stations in terminals and urban collective public transport stations", five "multimodal integration terminal, such as between the Bus, Metro, Rail or Waterway system" and three "Car parking at terminals and urban collective public transport stations". However, João Pes-soa/PB, Curitiba/PR and Manaus/AM reported not having any type of physical integration.

Considering all cities studied, of the total bus terminals (231), around 80% have an accessible ramp for people with disabilities but only 32.5% are accessible with information for people with visual impairments. Also, around 40% of the terminals have physical integration, and 48% of the embark and disembark points have no shelter for the user, Table 2.

Regarding the transport infrastructure (Table 2), Salvador/BA reported that it has 87 bus terminals in the municipality, João Pessoa/PB, Campo Grande/MS, and Manaus/AM reported that having only one bus terminal for attending the population. Observing the urban mobility infrastructure to promote the public passenger transport, Curtibita is a reference Brazilian city in bus rapid transit
<table><caption>**Table 2.** Description statistical of number of terminals, stations, and embarkation/disembar-kation point</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Average</th><th>SD</th><th>Maximum</th><th>Minimum</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Number of bus terminals</td><td>17.77</td><td>22.94</td><td>87</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Number of accessible bus terminals with ramps and boarding platforms</td><td>15.25</td><td>24.71</td><td>87</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of accessible bus terminals with information for people with visual impairments</td><td>6.25</td><td>7.55</td><td>21</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of bus terminals with physical integration</td><td>7.67</td><td>7.62</td><td>21</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of metro-railway stations</td><td>11.25</td><td>12.57</td><td>30</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of accessible metro-rail stations with ramps and boarding platforms</td><td>11.17</td><td>12.60</td><td>30</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of accessible metro-rail stations with information for visually impaired people</td><td>5.78</td><td>10.84</td><td>30</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Number of metro-railway stations with physical integration</td><td>7.45</td><td>10.43</td><td>29</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Total of modes transport stops*</td><td>4,533.83</td><td>2,648.84</td><td>9,919</td><td>766</td></tr><tr><td>Total of modes transport stops with shelter for users*</td><td>2,343.25</td><td>1,494.60</td><td>5,424</td><td>433</td></tr></tbody></table>

[BRT] with 72.2 Km, followed by Brasília (30 Km). Almost 85% of Brazilian capitals have dedicated bus lanes, such as Brasília (135 Km), Fortaleza (106 Km), Rio de Janeiro (56 Km), Belo Horizonte and Recife, both with 40 Km approximately.

## 3.2 Service Quality, Costs and Tariffs

The average operating speed (km/h) in the city's exclusive bus lanes at peak hours was 24.5 km/h. Brasília showed the maximum speed (40 km/h) and João Pessoa the minimum speed (18.6 km/h). In comparison, the average operational speed (km/h) of the collective public transport system on mixed-traffic roads at peak times were lower (18.7 km/h), and the maximum and minimum speed was 27.9 km/h and 14 km/h, respectively related Palmas and Fortaleza cities. This reflects the inefficiency of public transport and that affects the quality of life of users [2].

The average number of modes of transport stops with information to users about itineraries is 999.5, and the city with the highest number of modes of transport stops was Curitiba (2,829), and the lowest was Manaus (five bus stops). Likewise, the average of modes of transport stops with information to users about timetables was 687, with the city of Campo Grande being the largest (1,500) and Manaus being the smallest (five modes of transport stops).

In addition, the average of modes of transport stops with information to the users about fares was 379.57. Salvador has the highest (1,100 modes of transport stops) and Manaus with the lowest information system with five. The average of modes of transport stops with information to users about modes of interaction with other transportation modes was 1,035.67, and Campo Grande showed a maximum of 1,500 modes of transport stops and Belo Horizonte a minimum of 507.

<footnote>* all modes of transport; SD = standard deviation</footnote>
Palmas, Campo Grande, Curitiba, and Rio de Janeiro responded that they do not apply user satisfaction surveys. However, among cities that carry out, Brasília is the municipality with the longest time (2013) and Manaus (2014), while Goiana, Fortaleza, and Salvador were recently carried out (2020).

The average adjustment in fare transport was 6.17% from the last to the current one, and the largest adjustment was made by the Manaus city (13.16%) and the smallest by Rio de Janeiro (2.47%), Fig. 2.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. Average variation in the transport fare from different Brazilian capital</figcaption></figure>

Regarding the payment system integration, João Pessoa, Campo Grande, and Rio de Janeiro only use fare integration over time. Goiana uses the terminals' physical integration and Curitiba applies both integrations (terminals and time). Most Brazilian cities use integration by time and number of integrations between urban transportation modes.

Analyzing gratuities and discounts on public transport, 92% of cities serve students, with the exception of Campo Grande; 77% serve people with disabilities and reduced mobility, and 46% serve people aged 60 to 65.

## 3.3 Accessibility, Environment and Safety

All cities stated that they had a Master Plan and Zoning or Land Use and Occupation Law, with Goiana being the oldest (2007) and Belo Horizonte being the most recent. But according to the database, Palmas, Goiana, Recife, and Fortaleza cities responded that it is being prepared the Urban Mobility Plan, whereas João Pessoa prepared the Mobility Plan in 2020, and it was not approved yet. Other cities have already implemented the Urban Mobility Plan, the oldest Plan was the Curitiba (2008) and the most recent was the Belo Horizonte and Rio de Janeiro (2019).

Around 89% of the cities reported that they were not covered by the Urban Mobility Plans of Metropolitan Regions, except for Fortaleza and Brasília. The government adopted some actions to promote accessibility in cities. So, we
observed that most cities have public works inaccessible areas, followed by public projects and specific municipal legislation on accessibility. Moreover, it appears that about 50 to 60% of municipalities have the budget resources to promote accessibility, carry out accessibility campaigns and have plans to adapt the existing infrastructure, Fig. 3. Despite actions aimed at accessibility, only 23% of municipalities reported that they have free transport for people with disabilities. Historically, accessibility has been a challenge for public transport in Brazil (3).

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3. Government actions to promote accessibility in cities</figcaption></figure>

Concerning the impact of mobility on the urban environment, when asked about the use of vehicular technology or alternative energy sources, Goiana, Curitiba, and Brasília responded positively, however, Goiana did not highlight any of the actions taken and also informed that it did not perform an environmental vehicle inspection.

Curitiba reported that 2.8% of the fleet uses biodiesel as an energy source, 2.2% of the fleet uses hybrid energy (electricity + diesel). Moreover, 98.08% of the taxi fleet uses ethanol as an energy source and 16.70% uses natural gas as an energy source. In addition, the city also carries out periodic environmental vehicle inspections on buses.

Brasília reported that 0.2% of the fleet uses electricity as a source of energy, 19% of the fleet that uses biodiesel as a source of energy, and carries out environmental vehicle inspections in cars, taxis and buses.

When asked about traffic control measures, the municipalities presented the following result: the average number of traffic agents in the cities was 381.33, with the Brasília city having the highest number of agents and Campo Grande with the lowest number; the average speed inspection equipment was 290.67 and Brasília is the most equipped municipality (1,325) against Palmas with 22 equipment.

All cities use physical speed reduction devices (undulation, plateau, sounder, and baffles). Although, most cities use electronic devices to control speed and establish a speed limit of 30 km/h (Zone 30), except for Manaus. Another measure adopted by most cities is changing the geometry of the road by narrowing
or changing the alignment, and almost 50% of them use pavement differentiation to reduce car speed.

These actions are important for traffic safety in cities, however, there is still a high number of traffic tickets. Brazil shows a high victim traffic accident index [1]. Regarding the traffic tickets collected in 2019, Salvador, Brasília, and Rio de Janeiro did not inform the values. We noted that Fortaleza was the municipality that collected the most in traffic tickets (160.96 million), followed by Belo Horizonte (130 million), and Curitiba (129.99 million). The municipality with the lowest collection of traffic tickets was Palmas (11.76 million).

Carrying out the analysis of the rate of traffic tickets per inhabitant, Curitiba is in the lead with 66.2 traffic tickets/inhabitant, Fortaleza, and Recife with 59.54 and 59.13 respectively, Porto Alegre with 54.08 and Belo Horizonte with 51.37 traffic tickets /inhabitant. The municipality with the lowest number of traffic tickets /inhabitants was Manaus with 12.97.

## 4 Conclusion

Thirteen Brazilian capitals were compared in terms of the infrastructure, quality of services, costs and tariffs, accessibility, environment, and safety. Our analysis indicated that the road transportation is prioritized, but it is a necessity for the modernization of the fleet of vehicles.

There are many capitals with dedicated bus lanes, however, the operational speed is very low, reaffirming the inefficiency of the transport system. Furthermore, the infrastructure and vehicles of the capital attended few aspects of accessible and environmental urban transportation systems, but it is far from being considered an accessible and environmentally friendly city.

## References

1. Rubim, B., Leitão, S.: O plano de mobilidade urbana e o futuro das cidades. Estudos Avançados **27**(79), 55-66 (2013)

2. Rolnik, R., Klintowitz, D.: Mobilidade na cidade de São Paulo. Estudos Avançados **25**(71), 89-108 (2011)

3. Ramos, D.V., Chicati, M.L., Machado, A.F., Deimling, K.A.D.S., De Mello, W.B.: A evolução do transporte público de passageiros por ônibus: uma revisão da literatura. Synergismus scyentifica UTFPR **12**(1), 254-261 (2017)

4. IBGE-Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística: Panorama: Cidades (2018). https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/sp

5. BRASIL (2012). http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2012/lei/l12587.htm

6. Companhia de Engenharia de Tráfego: Mobilidade no Sistema Viário Principal: Volumes e Velocidades (2019)