Many cities worldwide are introducing bus rapid transit (BRT) into contexts where informal transport modes serve a substantial part of the public transport market. These BRT initiatives are intended, among other goals, to formalize existing transport systems and to improve accessibility. However, the extent to which BRT reforms actually improve residents' ability to reach activities remains in question. In this dissertation, I contribute to the empirical and theoretical literature on informal transport by investigating how BRT reform has impacted accessibility for residents of Cape Town, South Africa.

How have Cape Town's transport reforms affected accessibility and its distribution amongst different population groups? Why have reforms had these effects? I address these questions using three methods: (1) an accessibility index computed using a transport network model, (2) a difference-in-difference approach using intercept survey data, and (3) interviews with users and stakeholders.

The accessibility model suggested that, in this specific case, the BRT reforms slightly improved accessibility to retail, office, and hospital uses for the majority of residents. Because informal modes were only partially removed, only a small fraction of residents experienced reduced accessibility. The survey findings showed BRT was more effective as an upgrade of existing formal modes than as a replacement for informal transport. Survey respondents realized travel time benefits not by switching to BRT from informal transport, but by switching to BRT from existing formal transit -- conventional bus and train. Shifting from conventional bus to BRT was associated with an average commute time savings of 10 minutes. The BRT appears to differentially provide better accessibility to white and high-income residents, although black residents realized the greater travel time savings because they were more likely to switch from conventional bus and train.

Evidence suggests these particular outcome are best explained by changes in the institutional and incentive structures behind transport provision. The shift from informal transport to BRT involved: formalizing multiple dimensions of transport provision in multiple dimensions; expanding the scope of goals for public transport; and changing the relationship between transport providers and users. These changes in transport provision help explain why BRT reforms were more effective as an upgrade for formal transport than as a replacement for informal modes.