Delhi, a bustling megacity of over 33 million people, struggles with crippling traffic congestion, air pollution, and overburdened urban infrastructure. In this report, we critically examine Delhi's current state of infrastructure, benchmark it against global cities, and propose congestion pricing as a solution to its urban mobility crisis. Drawing on data from six analytical dimensions, we outline the challenges and potential of implementing congestion pricing in Delhi.
1. Introduction
Delhi is at a tipping point. With a vehicle density of 8,092 per sq km and air quality consistently breaching safe levels continuously, the city urgently needs solutions to reduce congestion and promote sustainable urban mobility. While cities like Singapore, London, and Stockholm have successfully implemented congestion pricing, Delhi’s unique socio-economic and infrastructural conditions demand a tailored approach.
This report weaves together insights from six key domains—population and income, public transport usage, private vehicle ownership, road density, and more—to explore how congestion pricing could reshape Delhi's urban future.
This report compares data for Delhi with other cities for 2023-24 and not the years when those cities introduced congestion pricing. Historical data for other cities was inconsistent and excluded to maintain comparability.
Political analysis and city budgetary evaluations are beyond the scope of this report. While important, this report focuses on initial benchmarking of Delhi's urban transport performance.
The report does not delve into the operational implementation of proposed solutions.
This analysis excludes the historical urban development of Delhi and neighboring mega cities. A detailed evaluation of public transport infrastructure in the larger NCR region is pending.
The data presented should be interpreted as indicative trends rather than absolute facts.
2. Where Delhi Stands Today
2.1. Population and Density
Delhi has a staggering population density of 22,252 people per sq km, far exceeding benchmarks like Singapore (8,062) and London (5,642).
With 33 million residents, Delhi's urban sprawl creates immense pressure on its infrastructure.
2.2. Economic Indicators
Delhi’s GDP per capita is just $5,500, compared to Singapore’s $22,000 (in 1998) and London’s $51,000.
With average monthly incomes of $442, the cost of living consumes 68% of income, leaving little room for additional toll costs without improved public services.
2.3. Public Transport Infrastructure
Despite having 390 metro stations, Delhi’s network lacks adequate first- and last-mile connectivity.
Bus density is just 5.18 buses per sq km, compared to 11.4 buses per sq km in Stockholm.
Table 1: Comparative Metrics of Key Cities
Metric | Delhi | Singapore | London | Stockholm |
Population Density | 22,252/sq km | 8,062/sq km | 5,642/sq km | 9,149/sq km |
GDP Per Capita (USD) | $5,500 | $22,000 | $51,000 | $54,000 |
Vehicle Density | 8,092/sq km | 1,366/sq km | 2,290/sq km | 2,819/sq km |
Metro Stations | 390 | 130 | 272 | 100 |
Bus Density (per sq km) | 5.18 | 7.9 | 5.9 | 11.4 |
3. Lessons from Global Cities
3.1. Singapore
First to implement congestion pricing in 1975.
Reduced traffic volume in restricted zones by 45%.
Transitioned to Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) in 1998, achieving 10-15% further reductions.
3.2. London
Introduced congestion charges in 2003.
Generated £270 million annually, reinvested into public transport and cycling infrastructure.
Achieved 15% reduction in traffic and 16% reduction in emissions.
3.3. Stockholm
Trialed congestion pricing in 2006.
Traffic in the city center dropped by 20-25%, with emissions reducing by 12%.
Public acceptance rose from 25% to 70% after visible improvements.
Table 2: Key Outcomes from Global Cities
City | Traffic Reduction (%) | Emission Reduction (%) | Revenue (Annually) |
Singapore | 45 | N/A | Reinvested locally |
London | 15 | 16 | £270 million |
Stockholm | 25 | 12 | Reinvested locally |
4. Challenges for Delhi
4.1. Political and Social Resistance
Public opposition to additional costs, particularly from middle- and lower-income groups.
Politically sensitive policy requiring careful framing and communication.
4.2. Infrastructure Deficits
Poor road conditions and insufficient public transport alternatives.
Overcrowding in buses and metros deters usage.
4.3. Technological Barriers
Lack of advanced tolling systems like Singapore’s ERP.
Inefficient traffic enforcement complicates compliance.
5. Analysis of Transit, Vehicle and Population data for Delhi
While cities like Singapore, London, and Stockholm have successfully implemented congestion pricing, Delhi’s complex socio-economic and infrastructural conditions demand a tailored approach. Let us look at the data-driven analyses from six key domains—GDP, population, transport ridership, vehicle density, and road infrastructure—to assess Delhi’s challenges and opportunities.
5.1. City GDP, Living Cost, and Travel
GDP Per Capita: Delhi’s GDP per capita is $5,500, significantly lower than Singapore ($22,000) and London ($51,000).
Cost of Living as Percentage of Income: At 68%, Delhi’s living costs consume a large share of income, limiting affordability for congestion pricing without infrastructure improvements.
Vehicle Ownership: Delhi has high private vehicle ownership at 36%, emphasizing reliance on personal transport.
Daily Journeys as Percentage of Population: Reflects Delhi’s low utilization of public transport relative to population size.
5.1.1. GDP Per Capita Comparison: Highlights the economic disparity between Delhi and benchmark cities.
5.1.2. Cost of Living as a Percentage of Income: Shows the financial strain faced by Delhi residents.
5.1.3. Vehicle Ownership as Percentage of Population: Demonstrates Delhi’s reliance on private vehicles. (Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.1.4. Daily Journeys as Percentage of Population: Highlights gaps in public transit accessibility.
5.2. Population and Income
Population Density: Delhi’s density is 22,252 people per sq km, far exceeding benchmarks like Singapore (8,062) and London (5,642).
Mean Income: Delhi lags significantly, with an average monthly income of $442 compared to Singapore ($5,350) and London ($4,850).
Financial Strain: High living costs relative to income exacerbate affordability challenges.
Key Findings
Data on income and living costs shows that average living costs relative to income are higher in India compared to global benchmarks. This highlights the need for congestion pricing to be targeted at wealthier vehicle owners.
Delhi’s vehicle density per area is five times that of London and double that of New York, indicating severe spatial congestion.
However, when analyzed as a percentage of population, vehicle ownership in Delhi is comparable to or even lower than in London. This suggests that Delhi's congestion is more a population problem than just a vehicle density issue.
5.2.1.Population Density Comparison: Highlights Delhi’s overpopulation challenge.
5.2.2. Mean Income Comparison: Illustrates income disparities.
5.2.3. Mean Income vs. Cost of Living: Shows the financial strain faced by Delhi residents.
5.3. Buses and Metro
Bus Density: Delhi’s density is 5.18 buses per sq km, significantly lower than Stockholm (11.4) and Singapore (7.9).
Metro Station Density: Each metro station in Delhi serves 3.8 sq km, compared to 1.8 sq km in Stockholm.
Key Findings
Globally, cities with efficient transit systems have 1 bus for every 700-1400 people, while Delhi has 1 bus for every 4200 people, indicating a severe shortage.
Delhi would require an astronomical increase in its bus fleet to achieve even a minimal standard, necessitating a fleet of 23,000 to 30,000 buses to meet future demands.
Assuming a fleet of 30,000 buses in future, Delhi’s bus density would reach 20 buses per sq km, significantly higher than global benchmarks.
This would require simultaneous restrictions on private vehicle use in core areas, making it a challenging policy objective.
Delhi’s metro coverage appears better than in other cities, assuming stations are evenly distributed along metro lines.
Even if the metro station count is reduced from 390 to 300, Delhi’s coverage still surpasses other cities.
5.3.1. Comparison of Public Bus Availability: Shows the total number of buses, with Delhi lagging behind.
5.3.2. Comparison of Population Served by Each Bus Across Cities: Delhi lagging behind.
5.3.3. Bus Density Across Cities: Highlights gaps in Delhi’s public bus infrastructure.
5.3.4. Comparison of Metro Stations: Depicts the extent of metro infrastructure across cities.
5.3.5. Metro Station Density Across Cities: Reflects disparities in metro accessibility.
5.4. Private Vehicles
Registered Vehicles: Delhi has 12 million registered vehicles, with a density of 8,092 per sq km, far exceeding Singapore’s 1,366.
Vehicle Ownership: Highlights reliance on personal transport, a key driver of congestion.
Delhi’s vehicle density per area is five times that of London and double that of New York, indicating severe spatial congestion.
However, when analyzed as a percentage of population, vehicle ownership in Delhi is comparable to or even lower than in London. This suggests that Delhi's congestion is more a population problem than just a vehicle density issue.
5.4.1. Registered Vehicles Today: Highlights Delhi’s disproportionately high numbers. (Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.4.2. Vehicle Density Across Cities: Reflects the overwhelming dominance of private vehicles.(Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.4.3. Vehicle Ownership as Percentage of Population: Shows private vehicle reliance. (Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.5. Road and Metro Density
Road Network: Delhi’s road network spans 26,000 km, with a density of 17.5 km per sq km.
Delhi has better road density compared to many cities
5.5.1. Comparison of Road Network Length: Highlights the scale of Delhi’s road infrastructure. (Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.5.2. Road Density Across Cities: Reflects disparities in urban planning.(Data for Stockholm city not available)
5.6. Daily Public Transport Ridership
Daily Journeys: Delhi records 9.3 million public transport journeys daily, one of the highest globally.
Utilization Rates: Only 28% of the population uses public transit, highlighting inefficiencies in infrastructure and accessibility.
Key Findings
Despite decent metro and bus infrastructure, ridership as a percentage of population remains significantly lower compared to other cities.
A better road network in addition to undersupply of public transit vis a vis the population, shifts people to use private vehicles
Delhi’s high population contributes to overcrowding of buses and metro systems. The daily journeys data underscores the pressure on public transit infrastructure.
This highlights reliance on private vehicles, autos, and e-rickshaws for last-mile connectivity.
Public transport journey data provides an indicative trend but may not capture unique passengers or repeat journeys, requiring careful interpretation.
5.6.1. Comparison of Daily Public Transport Journeys: Highlights Delhi’s high absolute numbers.
5.6.2. Daily Journeys as Percentage of Population: Reflects under-utilization of transit systems.
6. Key Observations and Questions
Impact on Low-Income Groups:
Will congestion pricing disproportionately impact poorer populations?
Data on income and living costs shows that average living costs relative to income are higher in India compared to global benchmarks. This highlights the need for congestion pricing to be targeted at wealthier vehicle owners.
Vehicle Density vs. Population:
Delhi’s vehicle density per area is five times that of London and double that of New York, indicating severe spatial congestion.
However, when analyzed as a percentage of population, vehicle ownership in Delhi is comparable to or even lower than in London. This suggests that Delhi's congestion is more a population problem than just a vehicle density issue.
Public Transport Utilization:
Delhi’s high population contributes to overcrowding of buses and metro systems. The daily journeys data underscores the pressure on public transit infrastructure.
Need for Complementary Measures:
While congestion pricing can discourage unnecessary travel, it must be supported by:
Improved bus services.
Car parking spaces for park-and-ride scenarios.
Expansion of private sector shuttle services.
Bus-to-Population Ratio:
Globally, cities with efficient transit systems have 1 bus for every 700-1400 people, while Delhi has 1 bus for every 4200 people, indicating a severe shortage.
Delhi would require an astronomical increase in its bus fleet to achieve even a minimal standard, necessitating a fleet of 23,000 to 30,000 buses to meet future demands.
Feasibility of Bus Expansion:
With a fleet of 30,000 buses, Delhi’s bus density would reach 20 buses per sq km, significantly higher than global benchmarks.
This would require simultaneous restrictions on private vehicle use in core areas, making it a challenging policy objective.
Regional Employment and Population Impact:
Delhi’s high population density is partly due to inadequate employment opportunities in nearby states, contributing to migration.
A steady increase in public buses and restrictions on private traffic in key zones are essential to manage this dynamic.
Private Bus Contributions:
Current data does not fully account for private buses operating in Delhi. How much can they supplement public transport capacity?
Journey Data as a Trend:
Public transport journey data provides an indicative trend but may not capture unique passengers or repeat journeys, requiring careful interpretation.
Road and Metro Infrastructure:
Delhi has better road density compared to many cities, offering potential for efficient transit systems.
Delhi’s metro coverage appears better than in other cities, assuming stations are evenly distributed along metro lines.
Even if the metro station count is reduced from 390 to 300, Delhi’s coverage still surpasses other cities.
Metro Ridership and Private Transport:
Despite robust metro infrastructure, ridership remains significantly lower compared to other cities. This highlights reliance on private vehicles, autos, and e-rickshaws for last-mile connectivity.
Focus on Present Data:
The analysis primarily uses current data, as historical data was less accessible and less relevant given increased awareness and investments in public transport in recent years.
Public Policy Insights:
Richer cities like Singapore and London prioritize bus systems with 1 bus per 700-1400 people.
New York, despite being wealthier, operates with 1 bus per 1400 people, indicating the minimum standard Delhi should aim for if not adopting Singapore’s bus-centric approach.
Integrated Policy Challenges:
Achieving a balance between expanding bus services and managing private vehicle restrictions is critical for sustainable urban mobility in Delhi.
7. Possible Actions
Design congestion pricing policies that target luxury vehicles and high-income groups to avoid overburdening low-income populations.
Expand the bus fleet to meet a ratio of at least 1 bus per 2800 people, which translates to 12,000-15,000 buses for Delhi.
Improve existing and develop an integrated park-and-ride system to complement metro networks and improve first- and last-mile connectivity.
Address migration-driven population pressure by fostering employment opportunities in surrounding states.
Collaborate with the private sector to introduce shuttle and feeder services that supplement public transit capacity.
This report does not delve into the operational implementation of proposed solutions.
8. Recommendations
Phased Implementation:
Begin with high-traffic zones like Connaught Place and Chandni Chowk.
Collect data to refine the system before city-wide rollout.
Public Engagement:
Conduct awareness campaigns to highlight benefits.
Run pilot trials to address public concerns and demonstrate effectiveness.
Infrastructure Investments:
Use revenue to expand metro connectivity and improve bus services.
Enhance first- and last-mile connectivity.
Technological Integration:
Deploy electronic toll collection systems with real-time traffic monitoring.
Integrate toll payments with public transport fare systems for seamless usage.
Policy Support:
Offer subsidies for public transport to encourage a modal shift.
Restrict private vehicle registrations in high-density areas.
9. References
For a comprehensive list of data points and references used in this analysis, please refer to the accompanying Excel file.
This format enables convenient filtering and editing for further analysis.
For further inquiries or additional details, contact us at info@neuralcity.in.
Key references:
Macrotrends
Statista
World Bank (Stockholm's per capita GDP is approximately ~20% higher than Sweden’s GDP)
US Census Bureau
Business Standard
London Assembly - Transport Committee
Department of Transportation (DOT)
LTA DataMall (Singapore Land Transport Authority)
Urban Transport Factbook
ScienceDirect
10. Disclaimer
This report compares data for Delhi with other cities for 2023-24 and not the years when those cities introduced congestion pricing. Historical data for other cities was inconsistent and excluded to maintain comparability.
Political analysis and city budgetary evaluations are beyond the scope of this report. While important, this report focuses on initial benchmarking of Delhi's urban transport performance.
The report does not delve into the operational implementation of proposed solutions.
This analysis excludes the historical urban development of Delhi and neighboring mega cities. A detailed evaluation of public transport infrastructure in the larger NCR region is pending.
The data presented should be interpreted as indicative trends rather than absolute facts.
Comments