Kigali’s buses are improving - services are more predictable, waiting times are shorter, and the system feels more organized. This progress reflects deliberate policy efforts and deserves recognition. But it also raises an important question: can these gains be sustained without stronger financial foundations beyond passenger fares? ALSO READ: Public ownership could end Kigali’s bus delays, build inclusive transport system As Kigali grows, public transport is no longer optional but the backbone of mobility and economic competitiveness. The system must remain reliable, accessible, and able to expand. ALSO READ: Kigali rolls out extended bus lanes on four routes Recent reforms, structured operations and dedicated bus lanes, are improving performance. But lasting progress depends on steady, long-term investment. Reliance on fares alone remains a constraint. ALSO READ: Emergency, high-occupancy vehicles allowed to use bus lanes Even in developed economies, fare revenue typically covers only a portion of operating costs. In large U.S. transit systems, buses recover roughly 38% of their costs on average, based on recent transport research. This creates a difficult trade-off. Raising fares affects affordability, while keeping them low can limit the quality needed to compete with private cars. Who really benefits when the bus runs? Public transport supports far more than the people who ride it. When it works efficiently, it encourages a shift from private cars to public transport, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and benefiting the entire city. Residents gain reliable mobility without a car, cutting costs, stress, and pollution exposure. Employers benefit from a more dependable workforce with fewer delays and less absenteeism. Businesses run more efficiently, with faster deliveries, lower fuel costs, and improved customer access to services. Even drivers benefit. Less traffic means shorter travel times, safer roads, and reduced congestion. Fewer vehicles cut emissions, noise, and pressure to expand roads and parking. For the city, the gains are significant: lower infrastructure costs, less maintenance, and more land freed for housing, business, and public space. Public transport creates value far beyond fares. That is why many cities are moving from a “user pays” model to a “beneficiary pays” approach, where funding reflects everyone who benefits - not just riders. How other cities fund what buses deliver Cities that build strong public transport systems do not rely on fares alone. They rely on mixed revenue sources. In Europe and North America, funding is often linked to land and property values. As accessibility improves, property values rise, and tools such as development charges, land value capture levies, and property taxes reinvest those gains in cities such as London, Paris, and New York. Other cities link funding to economic activity. In France, employer payroll contributions provide stable urban transport funding, while parts of the United States use income and sales taxes, recognizing that mobility underpins jobs and productivity. Some cities manage road use directly. Congestion pricing in London and Singapore cuts traffic while funding public transport. Chicago and Toronto use on parking and vehicle charges, while Vancouver applies fuel levies. Together, these approaches show a simple principle: public transport is funded not only by passengers, but by all who benefit from it. What does this mean for Kigali? For Kigali, the challenge is not to replicate global models, but to choose what fits its reality. Public budgets remain essential, especially for basic services, but they cannot sustain transport alone without competing with priorities such as health and education. The real task is to build a funding approach that matches the city’s growth and secures its transport future. Kigali has already shown that progress is possible. The question now is whether that progress is sustained, or allowed to fade. The writer is a transportation engineering researcher who holds a PhD in the field.
