Global Carbon Budget 2016

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere &ndash; the &ldquo;global carbon budget&rdquo; &ndash; is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates and consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2&nbsp;emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in&nbsp;SOCEAN&nbsp;is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2&nbsp;measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2&nbsp;sink (SLAND) &nbsp;is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models. We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as &plusmn;1&sigma;, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2006&ndash;2015),&nbsp;EFF was 9.3 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1,&nbsp;ELUC 1.0 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1,&nbsp;GATM 4.5 &plusmn; 0.1 GtC yr-1,&nbsp;SOCEAN&nbsp;2.6 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1, and&nbsp;SLAND 3.1 &plusmn; 0.9 GtC yr-1. For year 2015 alone, the growth in&nbsp;EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1, showing a slowdown in growth of these emissions compared to the average growth of 1.8 % yr-1 that took place during 2006&ndash;2015. Also, for 2015,&nbsp;ELUC was 1.3 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1,&nbsp;GATM&nbsp;was 6.3 &plusmn; 0.2 GtC yr-1,&nbsp;SOCEAN&nbsp;was 3.0 &plusmn; 0.5 GtC yr-1, and&nbsp;SLAND was 1.9 &plusmn; 0.9 GtC yr-1.&nbsp;GATM&nbsp;was higher in 2015 compared to the past decade (2006&ndash;2015), reflecting a smaller&nbsp;SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2&nbsp;concentration reached 399.4 &plusmn; 0.1 ppm averaged over 2015. For 2016, preliminary data indicate the continuation of low growth in&nbsp;EFF with +0.2 % (range of &minus;1.0 to +1.8 %) based on national emissions projections for China and USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. In spite of the low growth of&nbsp;EFF in 2016, the growth rate in atmospheric CO2&nbsp;concentration is expected to be relatively high because of the persistence of the smaller residual terrestrial sink (SLAND) in response to El Ni&ntilde;o conditions of 2015&ndash;2016. From this projection of&nbsp;EFF and assumed constant&nbsp;ELUC for 2016, cumulative emissions of CO2&nbsp;will reach 565 &plusmn; 55 GtC (2075 &plusmn; 205 GtCO2) for 1870&ndash;2016, about 75 % from&nbsp;EFF and 25 % from&nbsp;ELUC . This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Qu&eacute;r&eacute; et al., 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2016).</p

To what extent can behaviour change techniques be identified within an adaptable implementation package for primary care? A prospective directed content analysis

Interpreting evaluations of complex interventions can be difficult without sufficient description of key intervention content. We aimed to develop an implementation package for primary care which could be delivered using typically available resources and could be adapted to target determinants of behaviour for each of four quality indicators: diabetes control, blood pressure control, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation and risky prescribing. We describe the development and prospective verification of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) embedded within the adaptable implementation packages

Global carbon budget 2022

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2021, EFOS increased by 5.1% relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1±0.5GtCyr-1 (9.9±0.5GtCyr-1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.1±0.7GtCyr-1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9±0.8GtCyr-1 (40.0±2.9GtCO2). Also, for 2021, GATM was 5.2±0.2GtCyr-1 (2.5±0.1ppmyr-1), SOCEAN was 2.9 ±0.4GtCyr-1, and SLAND was 3.5±0.9GtCyr-1, with a BIM of -0.6GtCyr-1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71±0.1ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2021 of +1.0% (0.1% to 1.9%) globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 417.2ppm, more than 50% above pre-industrial levels (around 278ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959-2021, but discrepancies of up to 1GtCyr-1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at 10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b)

Global carbon budget 2019

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the “global carbon budget” – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) and terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2009–2018), EFF was 9.5±0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.9±0.02 GtC yr−1 (2.3±0.01 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN 2.5±0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.2±0.6 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of 0.4 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2018 alone, the growth in EFF was about 2.1 % and fossil emissions increased to 10.0±0.5 GtC yr−1, reaching 10 GtC yr−1 for the first time in history, ELUC was 1.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, for total anthropogenic CO2 emissions of 11.5±0.9 GtC yr−1 (42.5±3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2018, GATM was 5.1±0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.4±0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.6±0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 407.38±0.1 ppm averaged over 2018. For 2019, preliminary data for the first 6–10 months indicate a reduced growth in EFF of +0.6 % (range of −0.2 % to 1.5 %) based on national emissions projections for China, the USA, the EU, and India and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. Overall, the mean and trend in the five components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2018, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparison among individual estimates and the introduction of a broad range of observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2 variability by ocean models outside the tropics. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018a, b, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). The data generated by this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2019 (Friedlingstein et al., 2019)

Global Carbon Budget 2022

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO$_2$) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO$_2$ emissions (E$_{FOS}$) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (E$_{LUC}$), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO$_2$ concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (G$_{ATM}$) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO$_2$ sink (S$_{OCEAN}$) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO$_2$ sink (S$_{LAND}$) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (B$_{IM}$), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2021, E$_{FOS}$ increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr$^{−1}$ (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr$^{−1}$ when the cement carbonation sink is included), and E$_{LUC}$ was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr$^{−1}$, for a total anthropogenic CO$_2$ emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr$^{−1}$ (40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO$_2$). Also, for 2021, G$_{ATM}$ was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr$^{−1}$ (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr$^{−1}$), S$_{OCEAN}$ was 2.9  ± 0.4 GtC yr$^{−1}$, and S$_{LAND}$ was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr$^{−1}$, with a B$_{IM}$ of −0.6 GtC yr$^{−1}$ (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO$_2$ concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in E$_{FOS}$ relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO$_2$ concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, more than 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr$^{−1}$ persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO$_2$ fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO$_2$ flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b)

AD51B in Familial Breast Cancer

Common variation on 14q24.1, close to RAD51B, has been associated with breast cancer: rs999737 and rs2588809 with the risk of female breast cancer and rs1314913 with the risk of male breast cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of RAD51B variants in breast cancer predisposition, particularly in the context of familial breast cancer in Finland. We sequenced the coding region of RAD51B in 168 Finnish breast cancer patients from the Helsinki region for identification of possible recurrent founder mutations. In addition, we studied the known rs999737, rs2588809, and rs1314913 SNPs and RAD51B haplotypes in 44,791 breast cancer cases and 43,583 controls from 40 studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) that were genotyped on a custom chip (iCOGS). We identified one putatively pathogenic missense mutation c.541C&gt;T among the Finnish cancer patients and subsequently genotyped the mutation in additional breast cancer cases (n = 5259) and population controls (n = 3586) from Finland and Belarus. No significant association with breast cancer risk was seen in the meta-analysis of the Finnish datasets or in the large BCAC dataset. The association with previously identified risk variants rs999737, rs2588809, and rs1314913 was replicated among all breast cancer cases and also among familial cases in the BCAC dataset. The most significant association was observed for the haplotype carrying the risk-alleles of all the three SNPs both among all cases (odds ratio (OR): 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11–1.19, P = 8.88 x 10−16) and among familial cases (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.16–1.32, P = 6.19 x 10−11), compared to the haplotype with the respective protective alleles. Our results suggest that loss-of-function mutations in RAD51B are rare, but common variation at the RAD51B region is significantly associated with familial breast cancer risk

Global Carbon Budget 2023

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land-use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based f CO2 products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence on land and ocean sinks are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, and Earth system models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2022, EFOS increased by 0.9 % relative to 2021, with fossil emissions at 9.9 ± 0.5 Gt C yr−1 (10.2 ± 0.5 Gt C yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is not included), and ELUC was 1.2 ± 0.7 Gt C yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 11.1 ± 0.8 Gt C yr−1 (40.7±3.2 Gt CO2 yr−1). Also, for 2022, GATM was 4.6±0.2 Gt C yr−1 (2.18±0.1 ppm yr−1; ppm denotes parts per million), SOCEAN was 2.8 ± 0.4 Gt C yr−1, and SLAND was 3.8 ± 0.8 Gt C yr−1, with a BIM of −0.1 Gt C yr−1 (i.e. total estimated sources marginally too low or sinks marginally too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2022 reached 417.1 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2023 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2022 of +1.1 % (0.0 % to 2.1 %) globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 419.3 ppm, 51 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean of and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2022, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 Gt C yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows the following: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living-data update documents changes in methods and data sets applied to this most recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2023 (Friedlingstein et al., 2023)

The Go-Jek problem: Congestion, Informality and Innovation in Urban Transport in Indonesia

Belum lama ini muncul sebuah terobosan baru dalam hal transportasi umum, yaitu ojek online yang bisa dipesan melalui ponsel pintar kita. Ojek online ini sangat berbeda dengan sistem ojek tradisional yang sudah ada sejak tahun 1960an. Pada ojek tradisional, harga harus disepakati antara penumpang dan pengemudi. Namun, ojek online menawarkan penggunaan tarif sesuai dengan jarak tempuh. Sejak diperkenalkannya aplikasi ojek online “Go-Jek” pada tahun 2014, perusahaan ini mendominasi pasar ojek di perkotaan. Hal tersebut dipengaruhi dengan layanan dengan tarif relatif murah dan pengendara yang terdaftar. Para pelanggan dapat memesan ojek dan layanan lainnya melalui aplikasi di ponsel pintar mereka. Menurut Go-Jek (2017), saat ini ada sekitar 300 ribu supir Go-Jek, di kota-kota besar di Jawa dan Bali. Keberadaan Go-Jek dan perusahaan aplikasi transportasi lain sejenis, seperti GrabBike Bike dan Uber di kota-kota besar cukup menimbulkan kontroversi. Masalah yang timbul, misalnya, perdebatan sampai kalangan pejabat tinggi yang sempat menyebabkan dibatalkannya salah satu peraturan Menteri Perhubungan terkait pelarangan aplikasi transportasi online yang disebabkan pemerintah belum mampu menyediakan transportasi massal yang cepat dan layak bagi warga. Alasan lain yang menjadi perdebatan, seperti penyerapan tenaga kerja juga digunakan walau banyak pendapat yang menyatakan bahwa pelanggan moda transportasi baru ini hanyalah pindahan dari penyedia transportasi publik yang sudah stabil ke penyedia yang lebih tidak teregulasi. Terkait fenomena tersebut, terdapat penelitian dari Robbie Peters (antropolog dari University of Sydney) yang dilakukan pada awal tahun 2016 di beberapa kantong kemiskinan di Jakarta dan Surabaya. Penelitian tersebut menunjukkan bahwa banyak diantara laki-laki berusia antara usia 18-60 tahun yang sebelumnya menganggur dan setengah menganggur telah menjadi pengemudi Go-Jek dalam enam bulan terakhir. Meskipun wajar bagi pekerja sektor informal untuk berganti-ganti pekerjaan ketika kesempatan yang lebih baik muncul, fenomena menjadi pengemudi Go-Jek cukup signifikan dilihat dari skala pergeseran dan waktu yang sangat cepat serta guncangan politik yang disebabkannya. Perkumpulan Prakarsa juga telah melakukan survei cepat di wilayah sekitar Jabodetabek pada bulan Mei 2016 terhadap 250 responden pengemudi ojek online untuk menggambarkan profil mereka yang bekerja di sektor ini. Hasil sementara dari survei ini menunjukkan bahwa mereka yang tergabung menjadi pengemudi ojek online adalah laki-laki berusia 20 sampai 60 tahun dengan latarbelakang pendidikan mayoritas SMA, serta sebelumnya bekerja sebagai pekerja sektor informal dan formal yang sedang mencari pendapatan lebih baik. Berdasarkan penelitian sebelumnya tersebut, peneliti University of Sydney, Perkumpulan Prakarsa dan Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia (LIPI) berupaya melakukan penelitian mengenai para pekerja di sektor transportasi online di Jakarta dan Surabaya pada awal tahun 2017. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memahami bagaimana isu perkembangan layanan ojek online sehubungan dengan isu ketenagakerjaan di kota- kota besar, seperti Jakarta dan Surabaya. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga ingin melihat persepsi warga komuter yang menggunakan jasa mereka. Diharapkan hasil penelitian ini akan memberikan argumen untuk mendorong kebijakan berbasis bukti dengan melihat tren transportasi online di Jakarta dan Surabaya. Penelitian ini menghasilkan studi-studi kasus yang dilakukan dengan beberapa metode. Metode tersebut, antara lain wawancara, survei dan pengamatan terhadap pengemudi ojek, serta perbandingan praktik dan kondisi pekerja transportasi online yang sedang merebak. Penelitian ini juga dilakukan dengan mewawancarai konsumen transportasi tentang persepsi mereka mengenai penggunaan jasa transportasi ini serta wawancara dengan beberapa narasumber kunci yang penting.Online ojek has appeared recently as a new breakthrough in terms of public transportation, which can be booked through our smart phone. This online ojek is very different from the conventional ojek system that already existed since the 1960s. In conventional ojek, prices must be agreed between passengers and drivers. However, online ojek offers the use of fares in accordance with mileage. Since the introduction of online ojek application "Go-Jek" in 2014, this company dominates the ojek market in urban areas. This is influenced by services with relatively cheap tariffs and registered riders. Customers can order ojek and other services through applications on their smartphones. According to Go-Jek (2017), there are currently about 300,000 Go-Jek drivers, in major cities in Java and Bali. The existence of Go-Jek and other similar transportation application companies, such as GrabBike and Uber in major cities are causing controversy. Problems arising on the high official level, for example, through the cancellation of one of the Minister of Transportation regulations related to the prohibition of online transportation applications. The cancellation is due to the inability the government to provide fast and decent mass transportation for public. Others argue with the contribution to labor absorption despite many opinions stating that these costumers of the new transportation mode are merely moving from a stable public transport provider to a more unregulated provider. Related to the phenomenon, a research from Robbie Peters (anthropologist from the University of Sydney) conducted in early 2016 in several pockets of poverty in Jakarta and Surabaya shows that many of the men aged between 18-60 years old who were previously unemployed and underemployed have been Go-Jek's drivers in the past six months. While it is natural for informal sector workers to switch jobs when better opportunities arise, the phenomenon of being a Go-Jek driver is significant in terms of the scale of the shift and the rapid time and the political shocks it causes. Perkumpulan Prakarsa has also conducted a quick survey in the area around Jabodetabek in May 2016 to 250 respondents of online ojek drivers to illustrate the profile of those working in this sector. The current findings from this survey indicate that those who are working as online ojek drivers are men aged 20 to 60 with a majority of high school education background and previously worked as informal and formal sector workers looking for better income. Based on the previous research, University of Sydney researchers, Perkumpulan Prakarsa and the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia, LIPI) attempted to conduct research on workers in the online transportation sector in Jakarta and Surabaya in early 2017. It aims to understand the issue of the development of online ojek service in relation to labor issues in big cities, such as Jakarta and Surabaya. In addition, this study also seeks the perception of commuting citizens who use their services. It is hoped that the results of this study will provide arguments to encourage evidence-based policies by looking at online transportation trends in Jakarta and Surabaya. This study uses case studies conducted with several methods. These methods include interviews, surveys and observations of ojek drivers, as well as a comparison of the prevailing practices and conditions of online transport workers. This study was also conducted by interviewing transport consumers about their perceptions of the use of these transport services as well as interviews with key informants