Ketahanan Jaringan Transportasi Publik Surabaya: Redundansi Rute, Fragmentasi Tata Kelola, dan Tekanan Digital Publik dalam Fenomena “Jumat Horor”

ani yuni Setyowati

doi:10.33701/jiwbp.v16i1.6324

Authors

ani yuni Setyowati Universitas Airlangga

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33701/jiwbp.v16i1.6324

Keywords:

transit network redundancy; transportation governance; digital vigilantism; mobility policy; netnography Surabaya

Abstract

Surabaya's congestion in the "Friday of Horror" phenomenon dismantles the fundamental constraint of city mobility, namely the zero redundancy of the network. Public transportation is stuck rigidly in arterial corridors with no alternative routes. This research evaluates how the weaknesses of the route design collide with the stuttering of institutions responding to citizens' digital protests. Through an exploratory qualitative approach, data were dissected from two fronts: netnography of 855 comments on @tfsurabaya advocacy accounts, then cross-validated with in-depth interviews of 50 regular commuters (N1-N50). Thefindings of the study show the limitations of policy assumptions that have been oriented towards increasing capacity. All informants proved systemic redundancy failure, namely large capacity buses automatically paralyzed when the main road is blocked. The architecture of the route is too linear. WiraWiri's fleet of feeders, which was designed to be agile, actually rotated back to the center of the congestion. Institutionally, the fragmentation of authority between the City Government, the Provincial Government, and KAI triggers an artificial service response. Authorities fail to read digital vigilantism as a demand for real accountability, and still treat it as a random complaint. Fleet additions without changes in network structure have the potential to result in limited effectiveness. Surabaya urges the activation of emergency routes across second-class roads, a total overhaul of bus stop priorities, and the establishment of the Greater Surabaya Transportation Authority to cut the sectoral impasse.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Birkinshaw, M., and P. Taraporevala. 2023. “Social Media as E-Governance Digital Lives of Indian Municipal Bodies and Smart Cities.” doi: 10.4000/SAMAJ.8855.

Candelieri, Antonio, Bruno G. Galuzzi, Ilaria Giordani, and Francesco Archetti. 2019. “Vulnerability of Public Transportation Networks against Directed Attacks and Cascading Failures.” Public Transport 11(1):27–49. doi: 10.1007/s12469-018-00193-7.

Coulombel, N., V. Boutueil, L. Liu, V. Viguié, and B. Yin. 2019. “Substantial Rebound Effects in Urban Ridesharing: Simulating Travel Decisions in Paris, France.” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 71:110–26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.12.006.

Ferranti, E., L. Andres, S. P. Denoon-Stevens, L. Melgaço, D. Oberling, and A. Quinn. 2020. “Operational Challenges and Mega Sporting Events Legacy: The Case of BRT Systems in the Global South.” Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(4). doi: 10.3390/su12041609.

Fransiska, Belia, and Nursakti Adhi Pratomoatmojo. 2019. “Prediksi Perkembangan Permukiman Berbasis Cellular Automata Dan Perspektif Developer Di Sebagian Wilayah Kabupaten Sidoarjo.” Jurnal Teknik ITS 8(2). doi: 10.12962/j23373539.v8i2.46289.

Iliopoulou, Christina, Michail A. Makridis, and Anastasios Kouvelas. 2025. “Improving Transit Network Resilience against Disruptions through Path redundancy.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 100:102228. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2025.102228.

Jenelius, Erik, and Oded Cats. 2015. “The Value of New Public Transport Links for Network Robustness and Redundancy.” Transportmetrica A: Transport Science 11(9):819–35. doi: 10.1080/23249935.2015.1087232.

Kumar, Megha, Seema Singh, Akshima T. Ghate, Sarbojit Pal, and Sangeetha Ann Wilson. 2016. “Informal Public Transport Modes in India: A Case Study of Five City Regions.” IATSS Research 39(2):102–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iatssr.2016.01.001.

Li, Jin-Yang, Jing Teng, and Hui Wang. 2024. “Measuring Route diversity in Spatial and Spatial-Temporal Public Transport Networks.” Transport Policy 146:42–58. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.11.008.

Mathews, Shane, Jenny Hou, Tan Yigitcanlar, Fahimeh Golbabaei, Nayomi Kankanamge, Adam Downie, and Alexander Paz. 2025. “From Social Media to Policy: Public Insights on Transport Communication and Services in Queensland.” Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 29:101324. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101324.

Peng, Ran, Keyu Yao, Keyuan Ding, Yan Zhang, Xu Zhou, Feiyang Liu, Yanru Zhu, and Yehao Liu. 2026. “Evaluating the Vulnerability and Impact Zones of Urban River-Crossing Corridors: A Case Study of Wuhan, China.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development 152(2):5026018. doi: 10.1061/JUPDDM.UPENG-5688.

Serdar, Mohammad Zaher, Muammer Koç, and Sami G. Al-Ghamdi. 2022. “Urban Transportation Networks Resilience: Indicators, Disturbances, and Assessment Methods.” Sustainable Cities and Society 76:103452. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103452.

Sheppard, Gail, and Matthias Beck. 2016. “The Evolution of Public-Private Partnership in Ireland: A Sustainable Pathway?” International Review of Administrative Sciences 84. doi: 10.1177/0020852316641494.

Trottier, Daniel. 2017. “Digital Vigilantism as Weaponisation of Visibility.” Philosophy & Technology 30(1):55–72. doi: 10.1007/s13347-016-0216-4.

Yin, R. K. 2017. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications.

Yue, Liying, Michał A. Niedzielski, and Morton E. O’Kelly. 2024. “Modal Disparity in Commuting Efficiency: A Comparison across Educational Worker Subgroups in Shanghai.” Cities 147:104790. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.104790.

Zhang, Lin, Min Xu, and Shuaian Wang. 2024. “Improving Robustness of Large-Scale Bus Transit Networks against Cascading Failures: A Preventive Control or an Emergency Control?” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 162:104602. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2024.104602.