This is IB's fault

Seatlessness is the condition of being willing and able to find a seat on the bus, actively searching for a seat, and being ready to occupy a vacant seat within the next 2 minutes. The rate of seatlessness is the percentage of the passenger force that is seatless. Seatlessness is an undesirable economic scenario because it means the bus is not operating at a capacity where it maximises the comfort of each passenger. Furthermore, the welfare of seatless individuals is compromised as they are both physically discomfited and mentally disturbed by the propensity of falling over if the bus suddenly applies its brakes. It is a contributor to happiness inequality.

There are two main types of seatlessness. One; involuntary seatlessness occurs when an individual is able and willing to occupy a seat but there are no available seats at the prevailing rate of comfort. Two; voluntary seatlessness occurs when an individual is contented to be a member of the passenger force at the prevailing level of comfort, but unwilling to occupy a seat. Just as workers are paid wages as returns for filling a particular vocation, so passengers receive "comfort" in exchange for occupying a seat. The first form of seatlessness, when there is a surfeit of passengers relative to the number of available seats, occurs when the level of comfort is artificially set above the clearing level of comfort.

It is recommended that bus operators attempt demand-side policies to cope with involuntary seatlessness - since there is no lack of supply of passengers. One such policy would be to increase the number of seats available per unit time, either through increasing the frequency of the service such that fewer passengers board each individual bus or by enlarging the capacity of each bus by investing in Bendy-Buses or doubledeckers. With more seats demanding to be filled, seatlessness will be reduced. However, the downside of this policy is that, considering governmental legislation that public articles be left in use for minimally 7 years, it would take a long time before the bus fleet is overhauled. This time lag perpetuates the seatlessness problem to an extent that by the time it completes its extension in 7 years' time, it could be high time for another. Evidently another policy is required.

Involuntary seatlessness encompasses real-comfort seatlessness. This means that comfort levels are simply too high and bus companies are hard-pressed to incorporate enough of them on buses. For example, large legrooms and wider seats compromise on the number of seats that can be accommodated within the confines of the bus. Removing these luxuries might involve opposing or even banning those associations like GEMS attempting to maintain high service standards in the country, but ultimately there will be more room for seats that demand occupancy by passengers.

The variations within the category "voluntary seatlessness" demand that we adopt a myriad of different supply-side policies. Frictional seatlessness refers to the time spent in the midst of changing seats, or that spent actively looking for another seat. This 'time lag' is often a result of information imperfections and perhaps the solution is to install screens all over the bus with an electronic display informing all passengers where the vacant seats are. When people know what is on offer, they are less likely to have to walk around looking for the "best deal". Also, since passengers spend too much time walking between seats, chaperones should be hired to guide passengers from one seat to another. Again, this policy has its drawbacks. Hiring extra staff and installing those 99-gigapixel screens are expensive moves. This takes its toll on the finances of the bus operator, who then will pass these costs on to their passengers. When the inevitable fallout over the price hike hits, then operators might end up looking to cut back on other public or merit provisions (such as the use and maintenance of safety headlights, or ensuring the cleanliness of exhaust systems). This will negatively impact the welfare of passengers aboard.

Structural seatlessness is caused in part by passengers being geographically and occupationally immobile. For example, some passengers are so accustomed to occupying seats that face the direction of the bus' motion. They evidently need to acquire the new skill of travelling forwards while facing backwards (and not going dizzy) in order for full occupancy to result. Other passengers have occupied seats in one part of the bus for too long a time; they begin to develop social ties to features common to that portion of the bus (they must occupy a seat in the last row which is on "high ground", or must sit right behind the driver to peep at him) also mean passengers are happy to go seatless than accept a seat in an unfamiliar location or of an unfamiliar nature. While the policy of retraining them to adjust their mindsets is time-consuming and highly difficult to implement, perhaps the crux of the matter lies in their willingness to be unseated. This means we should look to remove any benefits they get for not actually occupying a seat. While the handrails they hold may not be as comfortable as a seat, they do provide a degree of satisfaction that sometimes prevents full seat occupancy. As such, bus operators should look to remove them. When faced with the risk of falling down when the bus jerks, people will naturally be able and willing to occupy a seat at the prevailing comfort rate.

Whether to apply demand-side or supply-side policies hence is heavily dependent on the time of seatlessness we are dealing with. However, it is often the case that in our complex lives we face a combination of both these problems that necessitates familiarity with both these sets of solutions.