From chris at mailnet.rdc.cl Tue Sep 2 07:35:08 1997 From: chris at mailnet.rdc.cl (Christopher Zegras) Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 18:35:08 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Accidents in Urban Areas Message-ID: <199709012235.SAA16590@mailnet.rdc.cl> Hello, I am looking for data on traffic accidents in urban areas of both developing and industrialized countries. Any leads, references, personal papers, data on this topic would be most appreciated. Please excuse any cross-postings. Warm regards, Christopher Zegras Christopher Zegras http://www.iiec.org /\ /^\ Instituto Internacional para la Conservacion de Energia /^\ /_o\ / \ General Flores 150, Providencia, Santiago, CHILE /^^^/_\< /^^^^^\ Tel: (56 2) 236 9232 Fax: 236 9233 / (*)/(*) \ From wcox at publicpurpose.com Wed Sep 3 21:44:16 1997 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox ) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 07:44:16 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial Message-ID: <199709031244.HAA24420@mail1.i1.net> This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an editorial on urban public transport: "Getting There." Them is competitive tendering (competitive contracting) and failure of the US federal subsidy program to increase public transport ridership. Available at the following address to subscribers --- 2 week free trial is available. https://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/articles/SB873237388293645500.htm Entry to the site is at http://www.wsj.com Best regards, Wendell Cox WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal http://www.publicpurpose.com Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA From pendakur at unixg.ubc.ca Wed Sep 3 23:36:38 1997 From: pendakur at unixg.ubc.ca (Dr. V. S. Pendakur) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 07:36:38 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial Message-ID: There is susstantial experience ( number of systems and number of years ) in this regardamong the smaller transit systems in British Columbia here. There are sevral success stories and also several complex experiences. Success stories,generally, combine compatible land use planning within the transit corridors. Complex ones involve competetive bidding by new comers essentiaslly offering lower wages and benefits to new employees a la Wall Mart. There are some major questions of social policy in this context unlike say in the US where these questions are noty considered important or significant in the transit field. cheers. **************************************************** Dr. V. Setty Pendakur School of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 1-604-822-3394-voice, 1-604-822-3787-fax *************************************************** ---------- > From: Wendell Cox > To: Jon Caldara ; Hil Hornung ; Jerry Schneider ; Bill Barton ; Steve Buckstein ; George Watts ; Steve Excell ; Don Shoup ; Gen Giuliano ; Harry Richardson ; James Moore ; John Kain ; Charles Lave ; Martin Wachs ; Mel Webber ; Peter Gordon ; Greg Schwann Schwann ; Ken Small ; Victor Regnier ; pickrell@volpe1.dot.gov; MWACHS@UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU; Catherine G. Burke ; utsg@mailbase.ac.uk; sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial > Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 5:44 AM > > This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an editorial on urban public > transport: "Getting There." Them is competitive tendering (competitive > contracting) and failure of the US federal subsidy program to increase > public transport ridership. > > Available at the following address to subscribers --- 2 week free trial is > available. > > https://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/articles/SB873237388293645500.ht m > > Entry to the site is at > > http://www.wsj.com > > Best regards, > Wendell Cox > WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY > International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning > The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal > http://www.publicpurpose.com > Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 > P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA > From tkpb at barter.pc.my Thu Sep 4 20:27:00 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 19:27:00 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Accidents in Urban Areas Message-ID: Here is an interesting response to Chris Zegras' request which was posted in the alt-transp list. Paul. From: Peter Jacobsen Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 00:30:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: alt-transp Re: Accidents in Urban Areas Christopher Zegras wrote: > I am looking for data on traffic accidents in urban areas of both > developing and industrialized countries. Any leads, references, personal > papers, data on this topic would be most appreciated. I strongly encourage you to read about Smeed's Law. Smeed determined in 1949 that the number of deaths per 10,000 registered motor vehicles and numbers of vehicles per person were related by the formula: D 0.0003 ~~~~ = ~~~~~~~~ N (N/P)^2/3 Smeed showed this relationship worked with 20 different countries. John Adams (1987) then showed this relationship worked in a variety of countries, throughout time (e.g. Great Britain, 1909 to 1973). Adams also showed it worked for 62 countries. Adam (1995) graphes the data. The point is that "accident statistics do not measure safety or danger; as traffic increases, the death toll is contained, and sometimes reduced, by behaviour that avoids danger rather than removing it." (Adams, 1995) Even modern, "safe" vehicles driven in third world countries generate a death rate that can be predicted by Smeed's law. It isn't safe vehicles nor safe roads that reduce the death rate -- it's just people adjusting to the dangers of motor vehicles. Peter Jacobsen Pasadena, California References: Smeed 1949. Some statistical aspects of road safety reserach. Royal Statistical Society, Journal (A) CXII (Part I, series 4). 1-24. Adams 1987. Smeeds Law: some further thoughts. Traffic Engineering and Control (Feb) 70-73. Adams 1995. Risk. London, UCL Press From raad at unixg.ubc.ca Fri Sep 5 03:28:23 1997 From: raad at unixg.ubc.ca (Tamim Raad) Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 11:28:23 -0700 Subject: [sustran] re: accidents in urban areas In-Reply-To: <199709021940.EAA03404@mail.jca.ax.apc.org> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970904112823.006c644c@pop.unixg.ubc.ca> There was quite a long feature article on road deaths/accidents in New Scientist magazine in 1996. It looked particularly the alarming death rate in rapidly motorizing developing cities. I could tell you the exact issue of NC it was in later next week if you are interested. If anyone apart from Christopher is interested, drop me an email and I'll send you the details personally. Tamim ------------------ Tamim Raad Point Grey R.P.O. Box 39150 Vancouver, B.C. V6R 4P1 CANADA Tel: (604) 877-1861 (until Aug. 31) (604) 739-2146 (as of Sept. 1) From zilan.moura at quasar.com.br Thu Sep 4 01:29:48 1997 From: zilan.moura at quasar.com.br (zilan.moura@quasar.com.br) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 19:29:48 +0300 Subject: [sustran] Accidents in Urban Areas Message-ID: SU>Hello, SU>I am looking for data on traffic accidents in urban areas of both developing SU>and industrialized countries. SU>Any leads, references, personal papers, data on this topic would be most SU>appreciated. SU>Christopher Zegras Below I send you some data that i found about acidents on a book published in Brasil : Title : Transporte Urbano nos Paises em Desenvolvimento Author : Eduardo A. Vasconcelos 1996 Death in transit Selected countries Country death/year death/10.000 vehicles USA (1) 44.241 3 France (1) 11.685 6 Germany (1) 10.199 4 Japan (1) 9.262 2 Brasil (2) 34.000 20 India (3) 40.300 39 China (4) 50.441 48 Nigeria 8.936 141 (1) - 1984, OECD (1986 Table I-1), Deaths/10.000 vehicles are approximated. (2) - 1986 CET (1992); estimated added 35% to the accidents reported on site to compensate not reported deaths afterwards. (3) - 1986: Button (1993) (4) - 1989; Navin, Bergen and Qi (1994) (5) - 1980: Barett (1988) Urban Deaths in selected cities City Deaths/10.000 Vehicles Fortaleza (Brasil) 18.9 Salvador (Brasil) 18.1 Bombai (India) 11.6 Recife (Brasil) 8.3 Sao Paulo (Brasil) 7.9 Chicago (USA) 2.2 New York (USA) 1.6 Los Angeles (USA) 1.6 Tokyo (Japan) 1.1 Ref.: UNCHS, 1992, CET 1992 and Denatran 1995 Death causes in development countries Cause Cases (%) Diareia 42.3 Tuberculosis 18.5 Acidents 17.7 Infections 13.3 Malaria 4.2 others 4.0 Ref.: Punyahotra (1979) Hope this data will help. Zilan Moura From j.whitelegg at lancaster.ac.uk Fri Sep 5 17:41:48 1997 From: j.whitelegg at lancaster.ac.uk (JOHN WHITELEGG) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:41:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: [sustran] Accidents in Urban Areas In-Reply-To: from "zilan.moura@quasar.com.br" at Sep 3, 97 07:29:48 pm Message-ID: <199709050841.JAA27491@unixb.lancs.ac.uk> Re accidents in urban areas have a look at the following two books. Both are very interesting: Reducing traffic injury: a global challenge G W Trinca et al, Royal Australian College of Surgeons ISBN 0 909844 20 8, melbourne, 1988 Death on the streets RObert Davis, Leading Edge Press, ISBN 0 948135 46 8, 1993 Whitelegg, J "Transport for a sustainable Future: the case for Europe" Wiley, 1993, ISBN 1 85293 145 0, especially Chapter 6 Good luck and best wishes John Whitelegg From j.whitelegg at lancaster.ac.uk Fri Sep 5 17:49:21 1997 From: j.whitelegg at lancaster.ac.uk (JOHN WHITELEGG) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 09:49:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Accidents in Urban Areas In-Reply-To: from "Paul Barter" at Sep 4, 97 07:27:00 pm Message-ID: <199709050849.JAA27944@unixb.lancs.ac.uk> more on accidents in urban areas John Adams is good avlue on all these things. His latest book is Risk John Adams, UCL Press, London, ISBN 1 85728 067 9, 1995 but also see Mayer Hillman, John Adams and John Whitelegg One false move: a study of children's independent mobility Policy Studies Institute, London, ISBN 0 85374 494 7, 1990 The one false move study shows that most road traffic accident data is useless simply because it has nothing to do with perceived danger and the response of those threatend with this danger to absent themselves from streets and footpaths. "Excellent" road safety figures often mean no more than intense danger, terrified pedestrians and no-one daring to walk or cycle. Is this the final end-state of a successful raod "safety" policy? best wishes John Whitelegg From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Fri Sep 5 23:16:58 1997 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:16:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] Follow up to Dr. Pendakur's comments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dr. Pendakur gets to what is often the unspoken difference in viewpoints for the debate on contracting. We can often agree that contracting saves money, but it is ultimately a value question whether we want to push wages as low as they can be driven just because we have the power to do it. My personal viewpoint is that I am often at odds with some unions in the US over their work rules and perhaps overly generous compensation in some cases. But it is because this means that we receive less service under inadequate public service budgets and that people at the very bottom often get hurt. It is not because I begrudge workers a middle class income. In a country where 50 percent of the population receive only 20 percent of the income, I support unionization as a matter of social equity. The prevailing political opinion and many transportation professionals obviously disagrees with me. Eric Bruun On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Dr. V. S. Pendakur wrote: > > There is susstantial experience ( number of systems and number of years ) > in this regardamong the smaller transit systems in British Columbia here. > There are sevral success stories and also several complex experiences. > Success stories,generally, combine compatible land use planning within the > transit corridors. Complex ones involve competetive bidding by new comers > essentiaslly offering lower wages and benefits to new employees a la Wall > Mart. There are some major questions of social policy in this context > unlike say in the US where these questions are noty considered important or > significant in the transit field. > > cheers. > **************************************************** > Dr. V. Setty Pendakur > School of Community and Regional Planning > University of British Columbia > Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 > 1-604-822-3394-voice, 1-604-822-3787-fax > *************************************************** > > ---------- > > From: Wendell Cox > > To: Jon Caldara ; Hil Hornung ; > Jerry Schneider ; Bill Barton ; > Steve Buckstein ; George Watts ; > Steve Excell ; Don Shoup ; Gen Giuliano > ; Harry Richardson ; James Moore > ; John Kain ; Charles > Lave ; Martin Wachs > ; Mel Webber ; Peter > Gordon ; Greg Schwann Schwann > ; Ken Small ; Victor Regnier > ; pickrell@volpe1.dot.gov; MWACHS@UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU; > Catherine G. Burke ; utsg@mailbase.ac.uk; > sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > > Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial > > Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 5:44 AM > > > > This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an editorial on urban public > > transport: "Getting There." Them is competitive tendering (competitive > > contracting) and failure of the US federal subsidy program to increase > > public transport ridership. > > > > Available at the following address to subscribers --- 2 week free trial > is > > available. > > > > > https://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/articles/SB873237388293645500.ht > m > > > > Entry to the site is at > > > > http://www.wsj.com > > > > Best regards, > > Wendell Cox > > WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY > > International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic > Planning > > The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal > > http://www.publicpurpose.com > > Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 > > P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA > > > From wcox at publicpurpose.com Sat Sep 6 00:53:47 1997 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox ) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 10:53:47 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [sustran] Follow up to Dr. Pendakur's comments Message-ID: <199709051553.KAA16765@mail1.i1.net> Did I miss Dr. Pendakur's comment? Not sure what you are referring to.... But you have it "right on" in terms of the impacts of higher than market labor costs on the very people we are trying to serve. Issue isnt unionization --- I have no problem with unionization --- my problem is that in a non-competitive environment unionizatoin tends to raise costs above market, through higher labor costs and ineffective work rules. I know that there is a tendency to believe that this increase is paid for by owners, but it is not --- it is paid for by consumers and taxpayers, who for the most part have their wages and work conditions established in the market. US experience in competitive industries is clear --- unions have little impact on the level of employee compensatoin or even on work rules. US competitive tendering examples show this, where the same unions that represent public agency employees represent private employees --- in the private sector, however, market compensation seems sufficient to satisfy unions (since they really have no choice). Best example is in Seattle.. though there are others. The fundamental question is this.... Does public transport exist for the purpose of providing mobility (and an alternative to the auto) or does it exist for the benefit of the workers. If it is the latter, then there is no public purpoe in its being subsidized, and anyway subsidies will largely be used to benefit labor, not the public (which of course has happened). As public transport gears up for greater subsidy support, the real question is whether there will be value for the new money --- if there is not then all of the talk of moving auto trips to public transport will be of no greater value than the periodic recitation of the ten commandments. Best regards, Wendell Cox > >Dr. Pendakur gets to what is often the unspoken difference in >viewpoints for the debate on contracting. We can often agree that >contracting saves money, but it is ultimately a value question >whether we want to push wages as low as they can be driven >just because we have the power to do it. > >My personal viewpoint is that I am often at odds with some >unions in the US over their work rules and perhaps overly generous >compensation in some cases. But it is because this means that we receive >less service under inadequate public service budgets and that people at >the very bottom often get hurt. It is not because I begrudge workers a >middle class income. In a country where 50 percent of the population >receive only 20 percent of the income, I support unionization >as a matter of social equity. The prevailing political opinion >and many transportation professionals obviously disagrees with me. > >Eric Bruun > > > >On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Dr. V. S. Pendakur wrote: > >> >> There is susstantial experience ( number of systems and number of years ) >> in this regardamong the smaller transit systems in British Columbia here. >> There are sevral success stories and also several complex experiences. >> Success stories,generally, combine compatible land use planning within the >> transit corridors. Complex ones involve competetive bidding by new comers >> essentiaslly offering lower wages and benefits to new employees a la Wall >> Mart. There are some major questions of social policy in this context >> unlike say in the US where these questions are noty considered important or >> significant in the transit field. >> >> cheers. >> **************************************************** >> Dr. V. Setty Pendakur >> School of Community and Regional Planning >> University of British Columbia >> Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 >> 1-604-822-3394-voice, 1-604-822-3787-fax >> *************************************************** >> >> ---------- >> > From: Wendell Cox >> > To: Jon Caldara ; Hil Hornung ; >> Jerry Schneider ; Bill Barton ; >> Steve Buckstein ; George Watts ; >> Steve Excell ; Don Shoup ; Gen Giuliano >> ; Harry Richardson ; James Moore >> ; John Kain ; Charles >> Lave ; Martin Wachs >> ; Mel Webber ; Peter >> Gordon ; Greg Schwann Schwann >> ; Ken Small ; Victor Regnier >> ; pickrell@volpe1.dot.gov; MWACHS@UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU; >> Catherine G. Burke ; utsg@mailbase.ac.uk; >> sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >> > Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial >> > Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 5:44 AM >> > >> > This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an editorial on urban public >> > transport: "Getting There." Them is competitive tendering (competitive >> > contracting) and failure of the US federal subsidy program to increase >> > public transport ridership. >> > >> > Available at the following address to subscribers --- 2 week free trial >> is >> > available. >> > >> > >> https://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/articles/SB873237388293645500.ht >> m >> > >> > Entry to the site is at >> > >> > http://www.wsj.com >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Wendell Cox >> > WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY >> > International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic >> Planning >> > The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal >> > http://www.publicpurpose.com >> > Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 >> > P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA >> > >> > > > WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal http://www.publicpurpose.com Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Sat Sep 6 04:22:48 1997 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 15:22:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] More follow up to Dr. Pendakur's comments In-Reply-To: <199709051553.KAA16765@mail1.i1.net> Message-ID: Dr. Pendakur's posting was in response to Wendell Cox' posting about the Wall Street Journal editorial. It was dated 3 September. It is also attached to the bottom of my posting on labor costs in case you never received it or misplaced it. Like I said, I obviously disagree with many peoples opinions on this issue. Eric From tkpb at barter.pc.my Tue Sep 9 15:10:23 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 14:10:23 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] road safety and speed Message-ID: The following item from Bruce Robinson of the Bicycle Federation of Australia was passed along to me. It is relevent to the road safety issue. >> >>I thought you might be interested in using or reprinting some of this. >> >> >>40 km/h example. >> >>The following example was given by Hon. Barbara Scott, MLC, at an >>Australian College of Road Safety >>forum on "Urban Speed Management" in Perth recently (20th August 1997). >>Mrs Scott chaired the WA Ministerial Task Force on Traffic Calming which >>recommended amongst other things in 1995 that 40km/h speed limits be >>introduced on local roads and local distributors. >> >>I feel the example is very powerful and moving. >>Others think it is a bit overdone. The road-transport lobby rep at the >>seminar criticised it as "emotive", but didn't win many points for being so >>callous. >>It seems one very effective way to communicate the choice the community has. >> >>The idea can be adapted to suit other conditions and preferences. It has >>references to current WA >>recommendations etc, which I have not altered. Mrs Scott has given her >>permission for the article to be >>reprinted and distributed to the media and elsewhere. By removing the WA >>focus, it will become more >>generally applicable. >> >>Bruce >> >>The example Mrs Scott gave follows. >> >>*********************************************************** >> The Choice is Yours. >> >>It is 3:30 on a fine Friday afternoon, Jodie has just finished Grade 3, the >>school holidays are here. Seeing >>her mother at the bottom of the hill, pushing her baby brother in his pram, >>she runs across the road to meet >>them. She does not see the car coming down the hill. >> >>Scenario 1: It is 1995, the car is travelling at 65 km/h, a very >>conservative interpretation of the 60 km/h >>speed limit. Jodie is one of the 8 out of 10 children who are killed in >>such a confrontation; she dies in her >>mother's arms. >> >>Scenario 2. It is 1997, the 40 km/h school speed zones as recommended by >>the Scott Task Force in 1995 >>have been introduced. The car is travelling at 50 km/h, the defacto speed >>limit due to Police Enforcement at >>12 km/h above the limits set by Government. Jodie is lucky, she is not one >>of the 4 out of 10 children killed >>in this situation, but two vertebrae in the lumbar region are smashed. She >>does not walk again. >> >>Scenario 3. It is 2005, the 40 km/h residential area speed limits, as >>recommended by the Scott Task Force >>in 1995 have applied for nearly seven years; public understanding of speed >>limits has improved >>considerably, often drivers travel below the limits in sensitive areas. >>The car is travelling at 35 km/h, the >>driver, now having a very broad cone of vision, sees Jodie and brakes hard, >>her mother screams, Jodie >>continues her journey across the road; eleven years later she is called >>upon by the Basketball Federation of >>Australia to represent her country at the Olympic Games. >> >>The choice is yours. >> >>**************************************************** >> >> >> --- __ o __~o __ o >> ---- _`\<, _`\<, _`\<, >> --- ( )/( ) ( )/( ) ( )/( ) >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>| Bruce Robinson |e-mail: B.Robinson@per.dem.csiro.au | >>| Vice-President | ,-_|\ | >>| Bicycle Federation of Australia | / BFA \ | A. Rahman Paul Barter The Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (SUSTRAN) is dedicated to promoting transport policies and investments which foster accessibility for all; social equity; ecological sustainability; health and safety; public participation; and high quality of life. From vapec at ibm.net Wed Sep 10 14:44:42 1997 From: vapec at ibm.net (Apec-Transport Virtual Center) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 12:44:42 +0700 Subject: [sustran] APEC-Transport Virtual Centre Message-ID: <341633C9.BD31D0AB@ibm.net> Dear friends, We are now conducting a study related to the formation of APEC Virtual Centre on Transport Research and Education, with the objective to share information amongst the member countries on the state of art and state of practice in the transport field. As each member country has a different advanced on that field, and it was thought that it might be good to first collect some related data concerning the existing transport research and education institution within the member countries in order to find out the profile of activities therein. There are 17 member countries including Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and USA. If your institution located in one of the above mentioned countries, we really appreciate if you could spend some time to fill in the questionnaire, which is available at http://www.sistelindo.net.id/personal/halubis/index.htm It has been designed as simple as possible for you to fill in. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Kindly regards, Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis Department of Civil Engineering INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia Tel/Fax. : 62-22-2502350 From hartman at tac-atc.ca Thu Sep 11 07:21:20 1997 From: hartman at tac-atc.ca (John Hartman) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 15:21:20 -0700 Subject: [sustran] APEC-Transport Virtual Centre References: <341633C9.BD31D0AB@ibm.net> Message-ID: <34171D60.3BEC@tac-atc.ca> Apec-Transport Virtual Center wrote: > > Dear friends, > > We are now conducting a study related to the formation of APEC Virtual > Centre on > Transport Research and Education, with the objective to share > information > amongst the member countries on the state of art and state of practice > in the > transport field. As each member country has a different advanced on that > field, > and it was thought that it might be good to first collect some related > data > concerning the existing transport research and education institution > within the > member countries in order to find out the profile of activities therein. > > There are 17 member countries including Australia, Brunei, Canada, > Chile, China, > Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, > Philippines, > Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and USA. > > If your institution located in one of the above mentioned countries, we > really > appreciate if you could spend some time to fill in the questionnaire, > which is > available at http://www.sistelindo.net.id/personal/halubis/index.htm > It has been designed as simple as possible for you to fill in. > > Thank you in advance for your cooperation. > > Kindly regards, > > Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis > Department of Civil Engineering > INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG > Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia > Tel/Fax. : 62-22-2502350 I was not able to download the survey. Do you know if anyone had problems too? John Hartman From tjb at pc.jaring.my Fri Sep 12 00:06:21 1997 From: tjb at pc.jaring.my (Tony Barry) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:06:21 +0800 Subject: [sustran] APEC-Transport Virtual Centre In-Reply-To: <34171D60.3BEC@tac-atc.ca> References: <341633C9.BD31D0AB@ibm.net> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19970911230621.006e41f8@pop3.jaring.my> At 15:21 10/09/97 -0700, John Hartman wrote: >Apec-Transport Virtual Center wrote: >> >> Dear friends, >> snip >> Kindly regards, >> >> Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis >> Department of Civil Engineering >> INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG >> Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia >> Tel/Fax. : 62-22-2502350 > >I was not able to download the survey. Do you know if anyone had >problems too? > >John Hartman > No problem: but try skipping the welcome message and go straight to Tony Barry TRE Transportation Research, Kuala Lumpur From skchang at ccms.ntu.edu.tw Fri Sep 12 00:58:10 1997 From: skchang at ccms.ntu.edu.tw (Shyue Koong Chang) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 23:58:10 +0800 (CST) Subject: [sustran] APEC-Transport Virtual Centre Message-ID: <199709111558.XAA16747@ccms.ntu.edu.tw> In message <3.0.3.32.19970911230621.006e41f8@pop3.jaring.my> writes: > At 15:21 10/09/97 -0700, John Hartman wrote: > >Apec-Transport Virtual Center wrote: > >> > >> Dear friends, > >> > snip > >> Kindly regards, > >> > >> Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis > >> Department of Civil Engineering > >> INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG > >> Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia > >> Tel/Fax. : 62-22-2502350 > > > >I was not able to download the survey. Do you know if anyone had > >problems too? > > > >John Hartman > > > > No problem: but try skipping the welcome message and go straight to > > > > Tony Barry > TRE Transportation Research, Kuala Lumpur > Yes, I have no problem to do so. Jason ------------------------------------------------------------ Shyue-Koong (Jason) Chang, Ph.D. Professor of Transportation Systems Department of Civil Engineering National Taiwan University Taipei, Taiwan 10617 Phone:+886-2-3625920 ext 304 Fax:+886-2-3639990 or 3631558 skchang@ccms.ntu.edu.tw From tkpb at barter.pc.my Fri Sep 12 20:10:25 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 19:10:25 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] SUSTRAN News Flash #26 Message-ID: Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (SUSTRAN) c/o Asia Pacific 2000, PO Box 12544, 50782 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: +603 2559122 ext 2240, Fax: +603 253 2361, E-mail: SUSTRAN NEWS FLASH #26 12 September 1997 CONTENTS 1. Expanding our contacts list 2. Report slams Trans-Israel Highway plan 3. Calcutta rickshaw ban 4. Developing countries curbing global warming gas emissions 5. CANSEA training workshop 6. Save Bombay committee on transport in Mumbai/Bombay 7. Proposed APEC virtual centre on transport research and education 8. Seoul congestion pricing success 9. Malaysian Highland Highway Shelved 10. Resources 11. Quick facts. We rely on you, the participants in the network, for our news. Thank you to everyone who has sent material. We welcome news, comments and announcements from all over the world. SUSTRAN News Flashes go to more than three hundred NGOs, academics, government officials, staff of international organisations, and interested individuals all over the world. 1. EXPANDING OUR CONTACTS LIST We in the SUSTRAN Secretariat are eager to expand our list of contacts. Do you currently forward our material to anyone else? If so, please let us know and we can add them directly to our list. Any other suggestions of organisations or individuals for the SUSTRAN Network's mailing list would be most welcome. Please send contact details. This will also assist us in preparing a contacts directory for the region. Of course, we would like to know of any transport-related organisations in Asia or the Pacific. In addition, we are also keen to make contact with many other kinds of organisations, including: transport-related research organisations or individuals, environmental organisations of all kinds; urban resource centres; advocates for various disadvantaged social groups; housing rights advocates; built heritage advocates; consumers' organisations; etc. "Watchdog" organisations, which monitor aid flows, multi-lateral organisations, and large corporations, are also relevant to SUSTRAN's mission. 2. REPORT SLAMS TRANS-ISRAEL HIGHWAY PLAN Israel, like many developing countries, is experiencing rapid motorisation. The government there recently approved a plan to build a massive (up to 12 lanes) highway through the country. Proponents claim that it will be self-supporting through tolls and still provide benefits many times higher than its costs, but a recent study by the Floersheimer Institute challenges many of the assumptions used to evaluate it. The report finds that the project contradicts national transportation and land use goals and criteria. The cost-benefit analysis ignored virtually all environmental and social costs, including air pollution, accident injuries, severance and community disruption, traffic noise, visual intrusion, and loss of recreational, cultural and heritage amenities. The benefit-cost analysis ignored the effects of generated traffic. This significantly overvalues the net benefits of highway capacity expansion (the report gives an excellent summary of recent research on generated traffic). Project traffic demand modeling was based on no toll, but the project is intended to be tolled. The cost of land that will be used for the highway was calculated based on its restricted use (agriculture), although its market price would be 10x or more higher. The highway project was presented to decision makers without any alternatives. The Floersheimer report argues that these omissions and distortions in the analysis have greatly overstated the net benefits of the project, and that this project (and the lack of support for travel alternatives) creates a self-fulfilling prophesy of increased motorisation and automobile dependency. [The report is: Yaakov Garb, "The Trans-Israel Highway: Do We Know Enough To Proceed?", Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies, Jerusalem, April 1997. It is available for US$25 from the Floersheimer Institute, 9A Diskin Street, Jerusalem, 9/6440, Israel; . Also, for more information contact the author, Yaacov Garb ]. 3. CALCUTTA RICKSHAW BAN The State of West Bengal has announced that it intends to ban cycle rickshaws, hand-pulled rickshaws and hand-pulled carts in a wide area of central Calcutta. In addition, the Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA) has proposed and arranged financing for six new flyovers to "relieve congestion" at crowded intersections. The Government also intends to close a number of sections of tram route which traverse congested streets. All of this can be summarised as the exact opposite of sustainable transport. This lurch in the direction of a Western model of development deprives many of the poorest of their livelihood and adds to the pollution for those who spend most of their time on the streets. The abolition of cycle rickshaws and hand-pulled carts would add about another 200,000 to the ranks of those without income and livelihood. Calcutta has an excellent tram system which is starved of funds and carries only 20% of the passengers that it is capable of, with zero pollution. Calcutta's tram, metro and waterway possibilities make it potentially one of the most sustainable cities in the world. Calcutta could become a role model for the rest of the world, but it is about to become the latest victim of motorisation and the destruction of architecture, heritage and culture. [Source: Extracted from an article "Rickshaws Banned in Calcutta", by John Whitelegg, in Auto Free Times, Issue #12, Late Summer 1997, p. 40. Contacts: John Whitelegg: ; Auto Free Times: c/o Fossil Fuels Policy Action Institute, PO Box 4347, Arcata, CA 95518, USA. E-mail: , Web: ]. Postscript: The next issue of the journal World Transport Policy and Practice (volume 3, no 3) is a special issue on Calcutta with 5 articles written by Calcuttans active in the transport/environment policy debate there. It will be out in the third week of October. Requests for subscriptions should go to the subscription manager (Pascal Desmond) at . 4. DEVELOPING COUNTRIES CURBING GLOBAL WARMING GAS EMISSIONS A report by the World Resources Institute in Washington, DC, suggests that developing countries may be doing relatively better than developed countries in containing their emissions of greenhouse gases. WRI cites examples including: China's fuel price rises in the 1980s, which led to a 20% reduction of carbon emissions from expected levels; energy efficiency standards and subsidies for renewable energy in Brazil, Mexico, and India; and reduced fossil fuel subsidies in 14 major developing countries have led to lowered rates of carbon emission growth. [Such price rises are not without controversy, however. Fuel price rises have led to political strife and/or strikes in India, Bangladesh and the Philippines recently. Ed.]. [For more information, contact: Shirley Geer, World Resources Institute, Fax: +1 202 638 0036, e-mail: ]. 5. CANSEA TRAINING WORKSHOP The Climate Action Network-Southeast Asia (CANSEA) held a workshop in early June to train its members to analyse and criticise the "National Communications" of their respective countries to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. These national communications document the national inventories of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases by source. Five participants each from Indonesia, Philippines and Malaysia attended the workshop. The transport sector was one of the sectors discussed and one of the resource persons was John Ernst, sustainable transport program coordinator in the Asia regional office of the International Institute for Energy Conservation (IIEC) in Bangkok. [Contact: Gurmit Singh or Rabin Jacob, CANSEA Regional Secretariat, c/o CETDEM, PO Box 382, 46740 Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. Tel: +60 3 775 7767, Fax: + 60 3 775 4039, e-mail: ]. 6. SAVE BOMBAY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT IN MUMBAI/BOMBAY The World Bank has now withdrawn from the huge Mumbai Urban Transport Project II (MUTP II), although it says it will consider funding aspects of the project if it is broken up into smaller projects. The withdrawal has caused recriminations and soul searching in the city. A coalition of NGOs, the Save Bombay Committee has become involved in debate over where this leaves the transport agenda there. In a recent feature article, the group's president, Kisan Mehta, outlined a number of criticisms and suggestions, including: * criticising existing policies that from national to local level are targeted towards increasing car ownership; * easy finance is denied to buy bicycles but is readily available to aspiring car owners; * the state government charges dismally low levels of vehicle registration tax (the wheel tax for a Fiat has not risen in 60 years); * the government programme to construct 50 flyovers and overbridges through privatisation is aimed at providing faster movement to the small number of car owners; * the time has come to curb the movement and parking of private cars in congested areas through measures such as, congestion and area pricing, higher parking charges (at least to cover the full cost of land and construction); * the proposal for the 36.6 km long Western Relief Road from Searock Hotel to Dahisar will cause serious environmental degradation and should be abandoned; * the main priority must be to improve public transport and more efforts must be made to improve bus services. [Source: "MUTP-II: Where do we go from here?" by Kisan Mehta, The Times of India, Mumbai, Mon. June 23, 1997, p.18 (sent to us by Lakshmi Menon). [Contacts: SUSTRAN Participants, SPARC and YUVA, are both members of the Save Bombay Committee. Sheela Patel, SPARC, PO Box 9389, Mumbai 400 026, India. Tel. +91 22 3096730, Fax.+91 22 4950505, e-mail: ; Nasreen Contractor, YUVA, 8 Gr. Fl. 33/L Mhatre Bldg., Mugbhat Cross Lane, Mumbai 400 004, India. Tel. +91 22 414 3498/4155250, Fax. +91 22 385 3139, e-mail: ]. 7. PROPOSED APEC VIRTUAL CENTRE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH AND EDUCATION Harun Lubis of the Institute of Technology in Bandung is conducting a study on the formation of an APEC Virtual Centre on Transport Research and Education, with the objective to share information on the state of the art in the transport field. They hope first to collect information on existing transport research and education institutions within the APEC member countries. Transport-related institutions in APEC countries are being invited to fill in a questionnaire which is available at: http://www.sistelindo.net.id/personal/halubis/index.htm. The APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum) members are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and USA. [Contact: Harun al-Rasyid S. Lubis, Department of Civil Engineering, INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia. Tel/Fax. : +62-22-2502350, e-mail: ]. 8. SEOUL CONGESTION PRICING SUCCESS In Seoul...passenger vehicles occupy 65% of all road space, but transport only 15% of the population. So, from a cost-benefit perspective, it has been necessary to reduce the use of passenger cars for individual commuting purposes. In November 1996, the city government of Seoul introduced economic incentive policies regarding traffic and transport demand management. A particularly effective policy measure has been the congestion charge of W2,000 (approx. US$2.10) levied on private cars entering two of the Namsan Tunnels leading to the center of Seoul. This charge is in effect on weekdays for every vehicle carrying fewer than three people during rush hours. Results of the charge include a reduction of traffic [on the effected routes?, ed.] by 26%, an increase in average car speed in the tunnels, and an increase in the use of public transport. The number of passengers using car pools for more than 3 persons during rush hours has increased by 76% [on the effected routes?, ed.]. The feasibility of introducing a citywide congestion charge in Seoul is under study. More generally, a system of tolls is being studied to reduce the number of cars entering heavily congested areas at peak times. The Seoul municipal government plans to use the returns from the Traffic Congestion Charge System to enhance the transport infrastructure as an incentive for citizens to continue using responsible and sustainable transport options." [Source: The APEC Clean Cities Web Site which includes useful contacts and case studies of innovations in improving the environment in APEC cities. There are a number of transport examples. The item above is a brief excerpt from the case study on Seoul's Congestion Pricing. The site address is: http://www.cleancities.com]. 9. MALAYSIAN HIGHLAND HIGHWAY SHELVED The proposed Highland Highway in Malaysia is opposed by a number of Malaysian environmental groups and was highlighted in a previous SUSTRAN news flash (#21, 24 April 1997). The Federal Works Minister announced on Thursday that the project had been shelved as part of the Government's effort to cut spending in the economy and restore investor confidence. However, the Environmental Impact Assessment, which is half completed, is to continue. Other major projects which have been put on hold include the Bakun Dam, the Linear City in Kuala Lumpur, and the second phase of the new administrative centre, Putra Jaya. These decisions are part of the fallout from the recent currency crisis in Southeast Asia. 10. RESOURCES a. Mumbai/Bombay Activists' Website The Mumbai Nagrik Vikas Manch, a citizens' action group, which represents ten social groups in the city, has launched a website on their fights against urban decay and the social and environmental effects of major infrastructure and development projects. Topics include the controversial proposed new airport at Mandwa-Rewas ("we question why this project is being pushed through despite low feasibility, gross violation of human rights, no transparency, with total disregard for the environment and against all common sense."). [The site address is: http://www.mafatlal.co.in/guests/MNVM/default.html]. b. New Book on Transport and Urban Health "Health at the Crossroads: Transport Policy and Urban Health", edited by Tony Fletcher and Anthony McMichael is based on the proceedings of the Fifth Annual Public Health Forum at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. There are 28 chapters with sections on Pollution and Health, Traffic and Injury, Wider Public Health, City Case Studies, and Transport Policies. Contributions of particular relevance to this region include ones on road safety in the developing world by D. Jacobs of TRL, on Bangkok in international perspective by Jeff Kenworthy, and on safety in Delhi by Geetam Tiwari. [Publisher: John Wiley and Sons, Baffins Lane, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1UD, UK. Tel. +44 1243 779777, e-mail: ]. c. Transport Demand Management Examples "Commuting in the Greenhouse: Automobile Trip Reduction Programs for Municipal Employees". This Policy & Practice Manual provides local governments with advice and examples on Trip Reduction Programs for employees. Published by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives in 1996. 33 pages. US$20. Along with other transport-related case studies, this can be ordered through http://www.iclei.org. [Contact: ICLEI Secretariat: 8th Floor, East Tower, City Hall, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5H 2N2, Fax: +1 416 392 1478, email: or Matt Nichols in ICLEI's U.S. Projects Office, within the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign-U.S. ]. d. ESCAP newsletter on Rural Infrastructure REORIENT is a new newsletter from ESCAP's Transport, Communications and Tourism Division. It is on Participatory Planning of Rural Infrastructure. The two editions so far have concentrated on the pilot project in Laos, which is an initiative of several United Nations and other agencies. There is also news of a UNDP initiative to provide funding to ESCAP to undertake best practice studies of "Transport Interventions and Poverty Alleviation" in five countries (Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, and the Philippines). [For more information contact: Nasreen A. Khan, Transport, Communications and Tourism Division, ESCAP, United Nations Building, Rajdamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand. E-mail: ] 11. QUICK FACTS The production of a typical US car requires more than 50 times its weight in water. [Source: A.R. Lubis, Coordinator, Water Watch Asia, 120 Armenian Street, 10200 Penang, Malaysia. Tel: +60 4 262 0123, Fax: +60 4 263 3970, e-mail: ]. Former Chrysler Corp chairman, Lee Iacocca, has now started a new company to develop and market light electric transportation (electric-assisted bicycles and electric scooters). -------------------------------------------------- Views expressed here are not necessarily those of the SUSTRAN Secretariat or of all participants in the network. The Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (SUSTRAN) is dedicated to promoting transport policies and investments which foster accessibility for all; social equity; ecological sustainability; health and safety; public participation; and high quality of life. From tkpb at barter.pc.my Sat Sep 13 17:56:40 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 16:56:40 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] forwarded question on land devoted to transport Message-ID: This question appeared on another list, so if you reply to this list please cc to the original author (Stephen Marshall) as I am doing, so that he gets the benefit of your wisdom. >Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 11:31:35 +0100 > To: urban-regional-planning@mailbase.ac.uk > From: stephen marshall > Subject: Proportion of land used by transport - request > Reply-To: stephen marshall > > > Proportion of land used by transport > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > "Cumulative figures show that, worldwide, at least one third of all > developed urban land is devoted to roads, parking lots, and other motor > vehicle infrastructure. In the urban United States, the automobile >consumes > close to half the land area of cities; in Los Angeles the figure approaches > two thirds" - Southworth & Ben-Joseph (1997): Streets and the Shaping of > Towns and Cities > > I am interested if anyone knows of any other similar statistics, or sources > of statistics, on this theme, including the following variants: > - land devoted to all 'transport' infrastructure (including rail lines, > yards etc) > - land devoted to all space for movement including dedicated 'pedestrian' > space and other public space > - figures for other countries > - figures for other cities > > I will compile and send out a summary of findings if the responses are > sufficient. > > Thank you. > Stephen Marshall > > Bartlett School of Planning > Wates House > 22 Gordon Street > London WC1H 0QB > UNITED KINGDOM > Tel: +44 (0)171 387 7050 Ext 4885 > Fax: +44 (0)171 380 7502 My comment: Information on the area taken by transport is very powerful as it focuses attention on an important but neglected impact of the private car - namely its voracious appetite for urban space. It is especially good if the data includes parking and all transport related land-use as the item above asks for. BUT great care is needed in calculating these figures. One common problem is that some people divide by the total area in the relevant jurisdiction. This is invalid because it may include a large amount of agricultural and other non-urban land. One must divide by the urbanised area only. The Bangkok example below is for the more restricted concept of road area as a percentage of urban area (ie. not including parking space, etc.) but the same caution would apply to the more comprehensive measures. This is one reason that we hear very widely varying figures for Bangkok for example. I have seen figures ranging from about 6% to 11% of Bangkok's area is devoted to roads. The lower end figures come from using total area and often seriously underestimate the true figure. Such figures are often used to justify claims that only a huge road building programme will solve Bangkok's problems.... The higher end figures come from using only the urbanised area (which would in turn probably be a slight overestimate since some of the road area in the calculation would be roads that pass through non-urban parts of the jurisdiction). The higher end figures reveal that Bangkok is not much less endowed with roads that cities such as Paris (11%), Hong Kong (12%), Munich (13%), Tokyo (13%). (see Kenworthy, et al. 1995. "Is Increasing Automobile dependence Inevitable in Booming Economies?" IATSS Research, Vol. 19, No. 2, p. 63). A. Rahman Paul Barter The Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (SUSTRAN) is dedicated to promoting transport policies and investments which foster accessibility for all; social equity; ecological sustainability; health and safety; public participation; and high quality of life. From tkpb at barter.pc.my Tue Sep 16 14:13:02 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 13:13:02 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] World Bank Energy & Environment Strategy Consultation Message-ID: Here are some more comments to the World Bank which explicitly refer to Transport. I have deleted the comments on other issues. Comments on The World Bank Energy And Environment Strategy Paper submitted by: Michael Totten, Executive Director Center for Renewable Energy & Sustainable Technology( CREST) 1200 18th St NW, 9th floor, Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-530-2231 Fax: 202-887-0497 Web: www.crest.org/ Given the number of excellent comments made by a number of other energy professionals, I will constrain my comments to two specific areas that I think the World Bank?s Energy And Environment Strategy Paper needs substantial additional work. MARKET TRANSFORMATION ........ stuff deleted...... TRANSPORTATION The paper is fundamentally marred by the failure to mention, let alone discuss or endorse, non-motorized transport designs for urban areas. The words ?pedestrian-friendly? and ?bicycle? are nowhere to be found in the Strategy paper, and ?transit systems? are virtually ignored. The World Bank needs to have all transport planners at the Bank serve a stint in Curitiba, Brazil, and learn of the most inspiring, cost-effective, environmentally benign things that can be done with transit-oriented development. See, for example, the IIEC report, ?Integrated Transport Planning in Curitiba, Brazil? (http://www.crest.org/planning/curitiba/index.html). There is such an enormous literature on creating pedestrian, bike and transit-friendly cities that provide quality mobility services and amenities while minimizing motorized vehicle demand, capital and operating costs, pollution, and related externalities, that I will not repeat it here. The paper should at least make reference to the voluminous publishings in sustainable transport by such experts as Michael Replogle, Environmental Defense Fund, (e.g., Non-Motorized Vehicles in Asia: Strategies for Management -- http://www.crest.org/planning/nmv-mgmt-asia/index.html). Discussion, endorsement, and commitment to actions on the kinds of ideas sustainable transport experts have been presenting to the bank over the past decade would also be essential for this paper to be complete. The Surface Transportation Policy Project also maintains a web site that provides a good start in the sustainable transport area: http://www.transact.org/ From twalton at worldbank.org Wed Sep 17 09:04:35 1997 From: twalton at worldbank.org (Thomas Walton) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 08:04:35 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] RE: SUSTRAN News Flash #26 Message-ID: A short note on your piece about banning non-motorized vehicles in Calcutta, which I certainly agree is a step backwards from sustainable transport. I recently returned from a short trip to Solo (Surakarta) a city of about 500,000 in Central Java. There the principal in-city mode of public transport is the becak, a two-passenger, three-wheeled, pedal-driven vehicle, with the operator behind. Solo, in its wisdom, has created becak/bicycle lanes on both sides of its main streets, separated from the automobile lanes by dividers, many of which have trees on them. The effect and the efficiency are wonderful. Contrast this with Jakarta, which banned the becaks from the city at least 6 years ago. Apparently (I was not living here at the time), part of the government's becak phase-out policy was to dump a large number of them in the sea. The disruption to the families who depended on becak ownership for their livelihood was significant -- there are stories of suicides by becak owners who could not afford the price of the replacement vehicle, the bajai (familiar in India where it originated, as the bajaj). Now, Jakarta is phasing out the bajai in favor of mini-buses. Already banned from the central business district and many of the main arteries, they are still numerous in the outer parts of Jakarta. Their disappearance would be great for air quality, since they are driven by primitive two-stroke engines, but it will be bad for traffic which is already approaching Bangkok or Manila congestion levels. It seems to me that about 4 years ago, there was talk in Shanghai of a law that would ban bicycles from the city center "to reduce congestion"?? I wonder what happened to that? Tom Walton From tkpb at barter.pc.my Wed Sep 17 09:04:36 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 08:04:36 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] World Bank Energy & Environment Strategy Consultation Message-ID: More Transport comments for the World Bank (this time from Germany). I have cut the sections which have limited relevance to transport. I have left in the comments on energy pricing and taxation because these need more debate in the transport field as well. I should also emphasise that all of these comments refer to a draft document which is not yet World Bank policy. A. Rahman Paul Barter. -------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 19:15:32 +0200 From: "Rudolph, Jochen, 4150" To: owner-strategy@geei.org Subject: BMZ, KfW, GTZ: Comments on World Bank "Energy and Environment Strategy Paper" Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), Bonn, Germany Rainer E. Lotz, e-mail: lotz@bmz.bmz.bund400.de Kreditanstalt f}r Wiederaufbau (KFW), Frankfurt am Main, Germany Armin Brestrich, e-mail: armin.brestrich@kfw.de Gesellschaft f}r Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Eschborn, Germany Jochen Rudolph, e-mail: jochen.rudolph@gtz.de Our congratulations to the authors of the lucid, clear-cut draft on a rather difficult and controversial topic! We fully support the Bank's continued efforts to apply an integrated, environment-oriented approach towards sustainable energy development. We appreciate the Bank's remarkably self-critical wording. We welcome the opportunity to enter into an electronic discussion and consultation already at the drafting stage. We invite you to get in touch with any and all of us at the address indicated above. General Remarks In its basic strategic orientation, the draft is in agreement with our publication "Energie in der deutschen Entwicklungszusammenarbeit" (BMZ-Materialien No. 96, Bonn, March 1997; an English translation, "Energy in Development Cooperation", is in print). We nevertheless volunteer some comments. A strong point of the draft is its analytical clarity differentiating win-win options, local/ regional and global externalities. We are convinced that given the ever increasing role of the private sector in the provision of energy services the World Bank and other institutions have to make a clear point on what the particular contribution to that sector is. We agree with most of the central statements, in particular: - Energy services should be supplied following a least cost strategy - Markets fail to capture the full economic, environmental and social cost of fuel use - Regulatory frameworks should involve not only polluters and government policy makers but also representatives of the public at large and key sectors of the market The weak points of the present paper are the inadequate discussion of the transport sector and the lack of operational guidelines................ ............ Energy pricing We are surprised that energy pricing is treated as a low ranking issue. It is only mentioned as one of several aspects to be borne in mind (see page 18). It is a well-known fact (extensively researched by the Bank itself) that in most developing countries energy prices include enormous subsidy components and price distortions. In our view this is perhaps the single most important barrier for the realisation of win-win opportunities and the introduction of energy efficient technologies. There can be little doubt that raising energy prices to cover the full financial and economic cost is the most cost-effective way to "remove barriers to energy efficiency and energy conservation". Any operational strategy should make clear, that energy efficiency and energy conservation projects have to be identified and defined with much more care in countries with insufficient energy prices - because of an enormous risk of failure. And it should be made clear that in these countries the scope of activities which can be financed from Bank funds is much more limited than in countries which energy prices reflecting the costs. We are therefore not as optimistic about the development of a competitive ESCO industry in developing countries (pages 23 and 24) and feel that this instrument will only work in the - thus far - few countries were reform processes are fairly developed. Sectorial minimum requirements ........ Role of Government ..... Greenhouse gases (Shadow value for carbon/CO2 ) ........ Win-win Options ..... Energy Taxes Competition and privatization lead to lower energy prices (cf. Chile and Argentina as examples) and, hence, to higher levels of energy consumption. This bounce-back effect needs to be balanced out by the user-pays principle, particularly in the form of energy taxation. The pertinent observations, however, are overly abridged, especially on page 38, C2. The strategy paper should clarify the role the World Bank would assign to the introduction of fossil fuel taxes within the context of its advisory services on sectoral reform to reduce the emission of CO2 and other pollutants. In that connection, reference could be made to the "double dividend" concept, according to which fiscal income is combined with taxation of negative external effects to yield a positive steering effect. Rural Energy Services and Global Environmental Protection ...... Transport The draft paper's focus is biased towards industry. However, since most carbon-monoxide and nitrogen-oxide emissions derive from motor vehicles (up to 70% and around 50%, respectively) it would benefit the paper to be revised by a transportation expert. Win-win strategies for the transport sector are lacking, for example, in the subsection on " Final Energy for End-use" (page 16, bottom). This is where the reader's attention should be called to the large potential for local environmental protection to be realized by installing more modern, fuel-efficient engines in existing vehicles and/or replacing such vehicles with new ones. Likewise, measures taken to improve traffic management can benefit transport undertakings by cutting fuel consumption and saving time. While the future strategies for the World Bank do include an introductory reference (page 29, top) to urban planning, improved mass transit systems, better fuel quality and new vehicles as win-win options, these factors are missing in the subsequent main components 1 through 5. Only industry and energy are referred to from that point on. Apparently, it was simply forgotten in this case, because the strategies outlined in chapter 3 (page 34, top) include these same measures as options. In addition the paper contains no mention of traffic-avoidance options such as integrated urban planning (e.g., short distances between home and workplace). Also lacking is the aspect of promoting non-motorized modes of transportation. Hydropower Solar Initiative From RVerzola at phil.gn.apc.org Thu Sep 18 07:18:15 1997 From: RVerzola at phil.gn.apc.org (RVerzola) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 14:18:15 -0800 Subject: [sustran] RE: SUSTRAN News Flash #26 Message-ID: <50c_9709171500@phil.gn.apc.org> > outer parts of Jakarta. Their disappearance would be great > for air quality, since they are driven by primitive two-stroke > engines, but it will be bad for traffic which is already May I request a clarification on this? According to Barry Commoner in his books The Closing Circle and Making Peace with the Planet, the so-called "primitive" engines are low-compression engines and therefore produce less poisonous fumes and other pollutants than the high-compression engines. He cites this as example (among others, such as the shift from paper/leather/cotton to synthetics, from organics to chemical fertilizers, from soap to detergent, from glass bottles to aluminum disposables, etc.) to illustrate his contention that the main cause of environmental pollution in the U.S. is the shift from older, more ecologically-benign technologies to newer, more ecologically unfriendly technologies. He also adds that newer technologies can be made more benign, if the objective for their development is shifted from increasing profit margins to pollution prevention. Roberto Verzola From Rob_Cervero at ced.berkeley.edu Thu Sep 18 04:09:32 1997 From: Rob_Cervero at ced.berkeley.edu (Robert Cervero) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Becaks, bajas, ojeks in Jakarta Message-ID: <199709171909.MAA09187@coyote.ced.berkeley.edu> The story on the succession of vehicles in Jakarta, and the mobility/environmental implications, is not quite as simple as suggested in the earlier post. With the becak and bajaj bans in Jakarta city proper, what's occurring is spatial redistribution and filtering. The spatial redistribution is that the becaks and bajajs are being pushed outside of Jakarta's city limits, to peripheral neighborhoods like Cinere (toward Bogor, where I happened to have lived a lot and still co-own a house with my wife). The new market niche of the becak (and increasingly bajaj) drivers are lower-middle class and middle-class residential enclaves on the suburban/exurban fringes as well as rural kampungs. The becak is live and well in Jakarta's outermost suburbs. They're just no longer in the city where rapid motorization has left little space for them and poses significant safety risks to becak drivers. The variation in travel speeds across Jakarta's vehicle fleets has become so great as to prompt this ban. In some very poor kampungs in the central city, you still find becaks (and helicaks) operating; as long as they operate within the neighborhoods only and don't venture onto main roads, arteries, and collector streets, authorities generally ignore them. I think this role as internal circulators in kampungs is the correct one for becaks in cities like Jakarta. The filtering process is not unlike housing filter -- as households' incomes rise, they filter through higher end housing products. In the case of Jakarta's transport scene, the becaks and bajajs are being replaced by ojeks (motorcycles owned and driven by young men in 20s and 30s who have saved enough to buy their own two-wheeler and pick up rupiah on the side; this contrasts with the becaks and bajajs which were largely leased by all-too-often unscrupulous middle-men to the very hardworking operators). Oceks are now found everywhere throughout metro Jakarta, at main depots of bus routes and entrances to neighborhoods. This is laissez-faire transport at this best, and provides usually a higher-quality (though somewhat higher-priced) door-to-door feeder connection to and from mainline transit routes. This entire paratransit filtering process reflects Indonesia's on-going advancement as a developing country, and is something that should be planned for and generally encouraged, not resisted. Markets generally work far better than planners in matching transport supply and services to demand, assuming social/environmental costs are appropriately internalized by travelers. Therein lies the bigger problem in Jakarta and other megacities -- gross mispricing of resources, perverse incentives effecting travel behavior, inept regulations, non-enforcement, corruption, poor citing of markets, etc., etc. Mobility and environmental problems should be attacked in these arenas, and not by any meddling with shifting market preferences for travel. The characterization of paratransit's mobility versus sustainability trade-offs is generally correct. Smaller two- and three-stroke engines generally pollute more on a passenger kilometer basis (not just in terms of air pollutants, but also noise), though a far bigger problem in places like Jakarta is the relatively old fleets of vehicles without any catalysts to mitigate tailpipe emissions, old and poorly maintained deisel buses, and leaded fuels (which Indonesia's trying to regulate out of existence over the next several years). The potentially higher environmental costs of three-stroke-engined paratransit must be weighed against the fact that as more fleet-footed, flexible forms of transport, they're vital toward getting people out of cars and into buses and trains. They're important complements to mainline transit services, particularly in sprawling metropolises like Jakarta, Bangkok, and in particular, Mexico City. Mexico City's metro wouldn't be carrying anywhere near 4.5 million passengers per day were it not for the tens of thousands of privately owned and operated colectivos minibuses and peseros microbuses/vans that feed into rail stops. Thus, the bigger environmental value of any paratransit mode lies in making public transport a reasonably valuable alternative to driving. If anyone's interested in any further details on these cases, chapter 4 of my recent book on "Paratransit in America" (Westport, Co.: Praeger Press) provides comparative case reviews of paratransit in S.E. Asia (mainly Jakarta), Mexico City, and San Juan, Puerto Rico. From cowherd at MIT.EDU Wed Sep 17 18:28:19 1997 From: cowherd at MIT.EDU (Bob Cowherd) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 18:28:19 Subject: [sustran] Re: becaks Message-ID: <9709172222.AA22317@MIT.MIT.EDU> The segregated becak/bicycle/pedestrian ways along the main streets of Solo and its sister city Jogjakarta are a legacy of Dutch planning in these two former royal capitals of colonial Java. A particularly interesting aspect of the Jakarta story is the theatricality of throwing the becaks into the sea. The becak holds a powerful position in the ongoing cultural struggle between the local and the global in contemporary Indonesia. One notably colorful assertion in this struggle is the recent practice (beginning in 1993) of restoring old "buffalo" bicycles in bright colors and spinning bells. Formerly these bicycles were the vehicle of choice only for poor farmers bringing their goods in from the hinterland. Their new-found riders are in part reacting against the rise of the new status symbols of mountain bikes, motor bikes and cars. Every Saturday night groups of young men and teenagers, usually riding two per bicycle, parade up and down the main streets of Solo and especially Jogjakarta ringing bells and enjoying a rare outlet of collective expression. The packs of bell ringers reach into the hundreds sometimes stopping motorized traffic much to the glee of the two wheeled throng. Still, the dramatic escalation of motorized traffic in Java beyond Jakarta is indeed sobering to those who recognize the present severity of the traffic congestion and the steep increase in first motor bike and then automobile ownership and usage that continues to accelerate. Robert Cowherd Ph.D. Candidate MIT School of Architecture and Planning From rijnsburger at waste.nl Thu Sep 18 22:33:14 1997 From: rijnsburger at waste.nl (rijnsburger@waste.nl) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 13:33:14 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: South cycling studies Message-ID: <199709181240.AA11128@antenna.nl> Some of you may have become tired from waiting for my information. I'm sorry for the delay. While all of my colleagues are enjoying themselves this week at the Velo-City congress in Barcelona, I am winding up some loose ends. In Barcelona is being presented: the Synthesis Report of the local background studies in the I-ce project "Cycling and Bicycle Theft" or "Transporte en Bicicleta y Prevencion del Robo". In the report major cycling issues have been defined based on local background studies in Leon, Nicaragua; Lima, Peru; Delhi, India; Guangzhou, China and Accra, Ghana. The major issues: - safety (traffic safety, social safety, bike theft) - perceptions - awareness - expertise - conditions (institutional, socio-economic, physical) - potential use Also a framework for understanding bicycle use is presented in the report. It depicts the interaction between three subsystems (activity subsystem, physical infrastructure subsystem and institutional support system) with trip caracteristics as result. The authors of the synthesis are Geetam Tiwari and Rajeev Saraf of the Indian Institute of Technology. It is available in an English as well as in a Spanish version, translated by Carlos Cordero, the Lima researcher. The source reports of the local background studies in the 5 case cities are also available. Each contains information based on user surveys as well as focus group discussions: LEON, NICARAGUA. by Patricia Lindo and Ton Daggers LIMA, PERU. by Carlos Cordero DELHI, INDIA. by Rajeev Saraf and Geetam Tiwari GUANGZHOU, CHINA. by Zhou He-long and Deng Xin-dong ACCRA, GHANA. by Andrews Kwablah. Still available, though already a bit outdated, is a preliminary desk study at the start of this project: PREVENTION OF BICYCLE THEFT, Dutch experiences and possibilities for application in Cities of the South, by Jaap Rijnsburger and Ton Daggers Each of the reports can be ordered against reproduction and mailing costs. We have set a unit price of $15 per report including handling and mail. I-ce does not receive any subsidy so we cannot disseminate for free, unfortunately. How to order: send an e-mail or fax to Ton Daggers, the research coordinator: email: daggers@knoware.nl fax: +31 30 2512208 How to pay: international bank transfer of these minor amounts (though very high for many South colleagues) is a drag. Checks are not being used in the Netherlands, cashing them often costs more than the value. The best experience we have is by sending cash in a sealed envelope. If you know of any local distribution point that could facilitate the dissemination of cycling information please keep me posted. I-ce is establishing a clearing house for all kinds of cycling information, so there is more to come. Lastly I'd like to let you know that I-ce has opened a small office in Utrecht in addition to its "virtual" existence. That also means a change of postal address of which I'd like you to take notice. For those like me who didn't have the opportunity to go to Velo-City Barcelona: keep up! You can prepare yourself for the cycling event of the century: Velo-Mondiale 2000, June 2000 in Amsterdam. One of the ideas we are working on is to organise pre-meetings or consultations in Latin America, Africa, South Asia and China. VM2000 now has its own secretariat, with Tom Godefrooij (Dutch Cyclists Union ENFB, and President European Cyclists Federation) as conference director. Many greetings Jaap Rijnsburger *************************************************** I-CE, Interface for Cycling Expertise POBox 2476, 3500 GL Utrecht, The Netherlands email: I-ce@cycling.nl *************************************************** From ken at ewg.org Thu Sep 18 23:48:43 1997 From: ken at ewg.org (Ken Cook) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 09:48:43 -0500 Subject: [sustran] U.S. Transportation Studies Message-ID: Ann Leonard suggested that I make the listserv aware of some of our work on transportaiton. My organization (Environmental Working Group), in collaboration with the Surface Transportation Policy Project, has published a number of studies on transportation policy that have received massive media coverage and have made the case for more sustainable transportation policies--to protect pedestrians, bike riders, and to prevent "sprawl" around cities. These and other environmental reports can be found at our site: www.ewg.org From mobility at igc.apc.org Fri Sep 19 10:12:46 1997 From: mobility at igc.apc.org (Institute for Transportation and Development Policy) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 09:12:46 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] becaks-reaction to Dr. Cervero Message-ID: I was very disappointed by Dr. Cervero's comments about the becaks and bajaj in Jakarta. His new book on Paratransit is excellent, but I'm afraid despite his long experience in Indonesia that I cannot agree entirely with his perception of the situation there. Just as with housing 'filtering', which tends to result in a shortage of low income housing, hence the numerous homeless in American cities, the process of transport mode 'filtering' in Jakarta is hurting the mobility and increasing the costs of lower income residents. The oceks are both more expensive and very inconvenient for women carrying parcels and wearing traditional Indonesian clothes. Women particularly feel this reduction in their mobility. They are operated by a higher class of people than operated the becak and bajaj, and hence do less to provide employment to low income people. Further, this 'filtering' is not, as Dr. Cervero seems to suggest, a market-driven process. The becak and now the bemo and the bajaj were not driven out of Jakarta's downtown neighborhoods by the invisible hand of the 'market', they were driven out by police power. This police power was used for a variety of reasons. While Dr. Cervero seems to accept the government's rationalization that 'the variation in travel speeds across Jakarta's vehicle fleet has become so great as to prompt this ban," in my view this is a spurious argument. The traffic is such in Jakarta that nobody is traveling more than 5 or 10 km an hour-roughly the speed of a becak. Travel speeds suffer from too many vehicles with too few passengers consuming too much road space, and only marginally by differences in vehicle travel speeds. The problem in high-density Java is that the population density is too high to support much further extension of space-intensive auto travel, and the failure to allocate street space in a way which facilitates the travel of buses, paratransit, and non-motorized modes all of which consume less street space than the taxis and cars which clog the streets. Plans for an extensive network of exclusive bus lanes, proposed nearly 8 years ago by the World Bank, have languished for lack of political support, as conflicting plans for light rail and metro, pushed by well connected businesses (ie. family of the President) jockey for position. I think the bans on becak, and now bemo and bajaj, have more to do with prejudice against modes identified with the poor, and probably because the decision maker (notice the singular) in that country does not profit directly from the small shop becak industry they way he does from the motorcycle, taxi, auto, and toll road industry. Free market in Indonesia is mostly an illusion; it means staying inconspicuous and small enough to not be noticed, or being bought out by the family. Its true that something like half the becak fleet used to not be owner operated, but the other half was owner operated. This is probably not significantly different from other paratransit modes. In my view, the transport mess that is Jakarta, likely to become the world's most polluted city within a decade according to the UN, is partially the result of a planning process utterly devoid of public participation. Decisions in this environment are made to favor those with money and/or power, at the expense of those without, and of the environment. Even the most experienced planners in Indonesia, recently forming themselves into the Indonesian Transport Society, are often impotent to impose rationality into the planning process, let alone justice. I will be working in Indonesia in November on behalf of SUSTRAN to work with Indonesian groups interested in articulating the needs and desires of transport users which tend to not get heard. Anyone who can help us in this regard, your advice and assistance are most welcome. Rgds, Walter Hook ITDP ________________________________________________________________________________ The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) 115 West 30th Street, Suite 1205 New York, NY 10001 Tel 212-629 8001, Fax 212-629 8033 mobility@igc.apc.org From vsapkota at ecel.uwa.edu.au Fri Sep 19 10:21:01 1997 From: vsapkota at ecel.uwa.edu.au (Virginia SAPKOTA - imm_staff) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 10:21:01 Subject: [sustran] PEAK PERIOD PRICING AND PEAK SPREADING POLICIES Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970919102101.0091b8d0@staff.ecel.uwa.edu.au> My apology for cross posting. I am a PhD student at the University of Western Australia. I am on my first year of study, and planning to undertake a research into congestion pricing. Specifically, I am thinking of examining the joint effect of peak period pricing and peak spreading policies such as flexible work hours. My interest to model the joint effect of pricing is that the flextime arrangements which are commonly practiced here in Australian cities, I thought, might have significant effect on the price elasticity of peak period commuters. By ignoring flextime, the tradeoff between travel time cost and the penalty to arrive late at work, might result in setting a relatively higher toll. If the schedule delay cost is high, then a higher toll is required to shift commuters to change their schedule outside the peak. However, with flextime available (albeit not to all peak travellers) maybe at a lower toll commuters will already change time of departure since it will not cost them to do so. I would greatly appreciate comments, as well as relevant studies and references, about my intended research problem. Thanking you in anticipation. Yours sincerely Virginia Sapkota _________________________________________________________________________ Virginia Sapkota Email: vsapkota@ecel.uwa.edu.au PhD Student Phone: +61 8 9380 3195 Dept of Information Management Fax: +61 8 9380 1004 & Marketing The University of Western Australia NEDLANDS WA 6907 AUSTRALIA _________________________________________________________________________ From rob at popper.ced.Berkeley.edu Fri Sep 19 17:36:18 1997 From: rob at popper.ced.Berkeley.edu (Robert Cervero) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 01:36:18 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks & bajajs Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970919083618.009d2db4@popper.ced.Berkeley.edu> At the risk of backing myself into a cyber-debate, I've got a few comments in response to Mr. Hook's contrasting views on the role of becaks and bajajs in Jakarta. Having lived over 3 years, off and on, in Jakarta and logged many, many hours in becaks, bajajs, and their many cousins, both as a consumer and curious observer, I've formed pretty strong opinions about questions of management and regulation of this sector. >Just as with housing 'filtering', which tends to result in a shortage of low >income housing, hence the numerous homeless in American cities, the process >of transport mode 'filtering' in Jakarta is hurting the mobility and >increasing the costs of lower income residents. Modes like becaks and bajajs obviously arose to serve the mobility needs of the poor in megacities across the globe. The question of whether they should be regulated or even banned out of existence gets at the core of welfare economics (efficiency versus equity) as well as the always sticky matters of income and class. Jakarta's officials -- largely at the urging of ex-pat traffic engineers -- decided the efficiency/safety benefits of removing pedal-powered vehicles off distributors and arterials outweighed equity considerations, and on balance, I and many others who have tried to make sense out of Jakarta's traffic mess have come around to concur. Like any efficiency-based public policy, the challenge is to figure out how to best redress the inequities and harm caused. Making sure good quality motorized paratransit options (e.g., minibuses and microbuses) are available would help many more poor than trying to sustain rikisha and 3-wheeler put-put services. The origin-destination patterns are becoming so scattered in places like Jakarta that even for the very poor, moderately fast and fleetfooted carriers like microbuses serve most of their mobility needs better than becaks or bajajs ever could. Jakarta's changing composition within the paratransit sector itself (from becaks, helicaks, bajajs to Kijangs and minibuses) reflect this market dynamic; between 1970 and 1985, before becaks were banned and tossed into the sea, their numbers were already in decline in Jakarta, down some 20 percent. There are better ways to enhance paratransit for the poor -- introducing congestion charges, higher registration and parking fees, carbon taxes, etc., etc. would yield the funds to provide special lanes for minibuses, off-peak staging areas (e.g., as in San Juan, Puerto Rico), and perhaps even monies for a system of user-side subsidies. Inequities have also been redressed by officials not hassling becak drivers who stay within kampung borders and don't venture onto busy streets. The reality, however, is that Jakarta proper is being gutted and ridded of its kampungs. Many of the poor have been forced onto the periphery to make way for modern hotel and office superblocks housing multinationals and the growing population of elites. The social injustices from banning becaks pale in comparison to uncompensated dislocations of the poor to outlying kampungs (where, as I noted, many becaks have also ended up). > The oceks are both more expensive and very inconvenient for women carrying parcels and wearing >traditional Indonesian clothes. When you get to Jakarta, you'll be amazed how many people fit on a motorscooter. It's not uncommon to find a husband and wife with their two kids and groceries in tow on a bike. More and more ojek drivers, by the way, are attaching side carts for the very purpose of serving this niche market -- people going from street markets to home. Regarding the traditional garb, one rarely sees this in Jakarta -- in a town where MTV and soaps are a stable diet in many households, the vast majority of women and men I see are in jeans and slacks. >Women particularly feel this reduction in >their mobility. They (ojeks) are operated by a higher class of people than operated >the becak and bajaj, and hence do less to provide employment to low income >people. Every becak driver I've ever met wanted to get out of this back-breaking, often demeaning line of work. Becak drivers probably average the shortest life expectancy of any occupation in Indonesia. Between the high risk of being hit by a bus, chronic illnesses (enlarged hearts) endemic to the job, and the reality of no longer being able to effectively compete with other drivers once you've hit 30, the odds against a long, healthy life -- the last numbers I saw on average life expectency in this line of work was the early-40s, well below the national average. >Further, this 'filtering' is not, as Dr. Cervero seems to suggest, a >market-driven process. The becak and now the bemo and the bajaj were not >driven out of Jakarta's downtown neighborhoods by the invisible hand of the >'market', they were driven out by police power. Yes, the excercise of police power to regulate so as to do what's within the broader public interest, notwithstanding the fact there are always winners and losers in the process. >This police power was used >for a variety of reasons. While Dr. Cervero seems to accept the >government's rationalization that 'the variation in travel speeds across >Jakarta's vehicle fleet has become so great as to prompt this ban," in my >view this is a spurious argument. The traffic is such in Jakarta that >nobody is traveling more than 5 or 10 km an hour-roughly the speed of a >becak. This is ludicrous. Jakarta's building private tollways faster than any place, and in large part because of the burgeoning middle class that wants to live in the suburbs, own a car, and escape the irritations of the central city, just as in the developed world. Jakarta doesn't have the gridlock of Bangkok or Lagos, though traffic's getting worse every year. Granted, if resources (e.g., air, fuel, travel time, etc.) were properly priced, there would be less sprawl and expresway construction, however the likelihood of this happening seems no greater in Indonesia than the developed world. > Travel speeds suffer from too many vehicles with too few passengers >consuming too much road space, and only marginally by differences in vehicle >travel speeds. This certainly doesn't describe the Jakarta I know (including just having spent five weeks there in June & July). The buses and minibuses are often packed, and available road space is probably too efficiently used -- motorcyclists drive on sidewalks, cars spill onto curbsides, motorists inch in to gain position, etc. With the 3-in-1 vehicle policy, even the Mercedes and BMWs traveling the protocol roads (like Jalan Sudirman and Jalan Thamrin) are filled with folks. As places like Jakarta try to retrofit a hierarchy of roads (locals, distributors, collectors, freeways) into the cityscape, variations in motoring speeds matter an awful lot toward maintaining stable traffic flows. Road space needs to be rationalized, not fair-shared out to everyone. >The problem in high-density Java is that the population >density is too high to support much further extension of space-intensive >auto travel, and the failure to allocate street space in a way which >facilitates the travel of buses, paratransit, and non-motorized modes all of >which consume less street space than the taxis and cars which clog the >streets. No one disagrees that space could be more efficiently rationalized to reward higher occupancy vehicles, but what's this got to do with human-powered becaks and 3-wheel bajajs? >Plans for an extensive network of exclusive bus lanes, proposed nearly 8 >years ago by the World Bank, have languished for lack of political support, >as conflicting plans for light rail and metro, pushed by well connected >businesses (ie. family of the President) jockey for position. I think the >bans on becak, and now bemo and bajaj, have more to do with prejudice >against modes identified with the poor, and probably because the decision >maker (notice the singular) in that country does not profit directly from >the small shop becak industry they way he does from the motorcycle, taxi, >auto, and toll road industry. Free market in Indonesia is mostly an >illusion; it means staying inconspicuous and small enough to not be noticed, >or being bought out by the family. No question, graft, corruption, and social injustices abound in Indonesia as in many developing countries, but pursuing this line of argument to make sense out of urban transport policy gets us nowhere. Wouldn't it be great to change the world, however there are clear parameters reform-minded folks have to work within, and in Indonesia, at least for now, tight-fisted central control is one of them. I don't buy this conspiracy theory, just like I don't buy it as an explanation for the automobile's ascendency in the U.S. -- i.e., the contention that General Motors bought up and dismantled the turn-of-the-century streetcars to eliminate competitor for the ICE automobile, leading to sprawl, etc. Indonesia has been one of the most rapidly industrializing and modernizing economies in the world over the past decade, and it's currently transitioning from the ranks of a lower-income to a lower-middle-income country. The greater force under way is rising affluence, and becaks (along with traditional clothing and many other things) are getting swept under in the process. More money in the pockets of average households gets translated into shifting market demands, including the demand for motorization. Debating the effects of macro-economic changes on the poor in the context of becaks, bajajs, and bemos, of course, is rather silly. Of far greater concern are the problems the poor are facing in terms of adequate shelter, nutrition, education, and health care. >In my view, the transport mess that is Jakarta, likely to become the world's >most polluted city within a decade according to the UN, is partially the >result of a planning process utterly devoid of public participation. Beyond targetting public works projects, little regional planning occurs in Jakarta. Growth is ad hoc, hit-or-miss. There's simply no notion of spillover effects or externalities in the decision of where to site or how to build a shopping mall or housing complex. Public participation would help, but far more important would be actually doing physical master planning at a regional level -- rationalizing zoning and land use. As long as developers fail to absorb the high social and environmental costs associated with where and how they build, inefficient and unsustainable growth will continue. Places like Jakarta sorely need programs like impact fees, concurrency rules, adequate facility mandates, etc. to force more socially desirable and responsbile patterns of land development. Note, this too involves the exercise of police powers. I'm a strong believer in expanding paratransit, restraining auto dependency, and designing policies to help the poor. And I generally share cause with the environmental community. However, I don't accept that sustainable transport always has to mean embracing NMT, carte blanche. This is unfortunately an arena where all too often there's far more ideology than reasoning. From ob110ob at IDT.NET Sat Sep 20 08:07:24 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 16:07:24 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks-reaction to Dr. Cervero References: Message-ID: <342305AC.66F@idt.net> Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (by way of tkpb@barter.pc.my (Paul Barter)) wrote: > [...] The traffic is such in Jakarta that > nobody is traveling more than 5 or 10 km an hour-roughly the speed of a > becak. Travel speeds suffer from too many vehicles with too few passengers > consuming too much road space, and only marginally by differences in vehicle > travel speeds. The problem in high-density Java is that the population > density is too high to support much further extension of space-intensive > auto travel, and the failure to allocate street space in a way which > facilitates the travel of buses, paratransit, and non-motorized modes all of > which consume less street space than the taxis and cars which clog the > streets. [...] > Rgds, > Walter Hook > ITDP ----------------------------- This part of the article gave me pause to think -- How is the space, a car or other motorized vehicle, calculated? We know that as cars speed up they need more room, about an additional car length for each 10 m.p.h. of speed. That's only a minimum standard for drivers in good health with good eyesight and good reflexes. It's entirely likely that under normal conditions motorists will take even more room. When a pedestrian crosses the street (here in NY jaywalking is common for a number of reasons with I won't discuss here) they will often wait even though the oncoming car is still many dozens of seconds away, in excess of the time needed to cross the 8ft lane the car will require. Often this is due to caution because the car can easily speed up very quickly so you can't simply judge or rate your chances to cross based on the current observable speed of the oncoming car. At roughly 10ft per car length, at 30mph each car then takes up 10+ 30 or 40 ft. or 132 cars per mile. But at 40mph we get 105.6 cars per mile. A loss of road capacity of 26.4 cars. This may very well be why small obstructions, like double parked cars or cars entering or leaving the roadway produce dramatic interferences with traffic flow. So if a roadway presents many opportunities for cars to obstuct its flow, such as a street which has parking on either side, it needs more space to allow for the expected obstructions to occur, or it's flow potential calculation must be reduced. A street that passes many stores, as in a commercial district, must be assumed to accommodate deliveries as well as people who will stop to shop. Often, I note, that many of the parking spaces in these commercial areas, are taken up, not by shoppers or delivery vehicles, but by local residents who get first crack at the spaces. So delivery vehicles are forced to double park and thus reduce the number of cars per mile that the road has the capacity to serve. Are these temporary obstructions included in calculating how much traffic a road can handle? Like on highways, where there can be expectations of cars breaking down or accidents. If there are expected numbers of accidents per no. of vehicles, then this must have impact on the amount of traffic that the highway can be expected to handle. At 60 mph a car needs 70 ft. clear of traffic and obstructions to operate. Or 75.43 cars per mile. This is reduced by the number of access/exit ramps and also by the expected number of accidents expected to occur. But I'm given to suspect that city street capacities don't come anywhere near what they are being calculated to carry. Simply because I think they are calculated without including even normally expected obstructions like deliveries, double parking and cars entering and leaving parking spaces. I suspect that if downtown, urban road capacities include provisions for, obstructions expected to take place, plus a figure for unexpected obstructions, roadway capacity would fall to where the need for alternative resources would be more clear. Obwon From EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com Sat Sep 20 18:28:03 1997 From: EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com (Britton EcoPlan) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 1997 05:28:03 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Interaction Message-ID: <199709200528_MC2-2124-4C46@compuserve.com> Dear Friends, As some of you will be aware, I have a life time interest and involvement with matters of transportation, conviviality and equity. Somewhere in the middle of all that go such things as technology, economics, initiative and public policy. I strongly support the work of Paul and his colleagues at Sustran, and have recently attempted to establish a link between this good forum and some of the activities that go on under our Web/electronic work which you can check up on via The Commons at http://www.the-commons.org. More specifically, you may wish to have a look at our ongoing virtual conference on Zero Emissions (at http://www.the-commons.org/zero-ems) where you will see a profile on Sustran and enough information on it to encourage those of our visitors who have any feel at all for these matters to sigh up and benefit from the exchanges that are taking place on this list server. Because one of the main points behind The Commons is that there is a great yawning gap between our collective knowledge and even wisdom on these subjects, and then what happens in terms of public policy and private practice, we would like to see what we can do to give some of the ideas and debates that take place here more visibility. To this end, we have set up a special 'discussion space' within our Zero Emissions conference which we are calling the Transportation Nexus, and where I intend to post from time to time individual exchanges and series of exchanges which I believe our conference should be aware of. As an immediate next step, I am posting this short note both here and in our own conference, and if you have ideas (or objections) concerning how we are making use of these materials (YOUR materials?), well I suggest that you simply get in touch and we shall attempt to work things out. Two final quick notes on this: I do intend to proceed with this 'technology transfer' in a very partial and selective manner and will add in my own occasional comments both as conference 'organizer' (grim Orwellian word as it is) and as long-time observer and activist in the sector in an attempt to ensure that we do not burden our visitors with a tired rehash of the many views, shibboleths and half-truths that have been out there for a couple of decades, a lot of which recapitulate (and re-recapitulate) arguments and views which have seen their day. Finally, this is of course only an interim measure. As soon as Sustran has a Web site of its own (and maybe we should be talking about this as well, Paul), all of this can be done simply by a bit of careful reading, selection and linking on our part. In the meantime... Well, in the meantime, if you do go over to our site, make sure too that you have a look at the new associated site for Turning Point 2000 (http://www.the-commons.org/tp2000). James Robertson and his colleagues spread their arms well beyond matter of transport, but they keep them in sight as well (as indeed they must). Finally, Paul, do stay indoors. Here in Paris we have our occasional Level 2 Alert Days (an empty box if ever there were one), but I gather that thing shave gone a bit further in good old KL. Well, that's what they get from sending their planners and policy maker to school in America and Europe. With all good wishes, Eric Britton _________________________________________________________________ EcoPlan International -- Technology, Economics & Social Systems Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, F-75006 Paris, France e-mail: eric.britton@the-commons.org Main Tel. 331.4441.6340 Fax 331.4441.6341 Data: 331.4441.6342 24 hour backup phone/fax: 331.4326.1323 ISDN/videoconferencing/groupwork: 331.4441.6340 (1-4) http://www.the-commons.org Electronic Libraries available at: EuroFIX: 331 4441.6343 ftp.the-commons.org/pub/ (then chose your section) CompuServe: GO TWEUR (then go to "New Ways to Work") From raad at unixg.ubc.ca Sun Sep 21 15:12:09 1997 From: raad at unixg.ubc.ca (Tamim Raad) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 1997 23:12:09 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: road fatalities In-Reply-To: <199709201940.EAA15791@mail.jca.ax.apc.org> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970920231209.0069ffb8@pop.unixg.ubc.ca> Hello all, A while back Christopher Zegras posted a request for information on road deaths. Since I received many individual requests for more details on the New Scientist article, I will just post the details to all... The article is: "Trafficking in Death," New Scientist, Vol 151 No 2047, 14 September 1996 Also in that issue may be a couple of other articles of interest: - "Wake-up call for world's health"...the WHO estimates that by 2020 road traffic accidents will become the number 2 public health problem in the developing world (up from number 11 in 1990). - "Urban nightmare drives Americans out of control" Unfortunately, due to the number of requests, I can't really copy it and mail it to everyone. However, if there is someone who really needs it and whose library doesn't carry NS, I will try to do so. Tamim. ------------------ Point Grey RPO, Box 39150 Vancouver, British Columbia V6R 4P1 CANADA Tel: (604) 739-2146 From dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in Sun Sep 21 18:24:23 1997 From: dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in (Dinesh Mohan) Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 14:54:23 +0530 (IST) Subject: [sustran] becaks & bajajs In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19970919083618.009d2db4@popper.ced.Berkeley.edu> Message-ID: I am touched by Mr. Cervero's concern for the health of becak drivers in Jakarta. All of us who have so much concern for the health of the poor in this world should also think now of banning construction of higways and expressways. I have never really met a man or woman who would not like to escape the drudgery and back breaking work at road construction sites. After we have done that we could proceed with banning iron ore and bauxite mining as the miners also live and work in horrible conditions. While we are at it we should also consider banning construction of houses and factories. Construction workers have the highest accident rates and can't think of working beyond the age of 40. Sustran has its work cut out for a long time. I hope we can do this quite efficiently. Dinesh ***************************************************************************** Professor Dinesh Mohan Office: (91 11) 685 8703 Coordinator, Transportation Research & 666 979 Ext 3161 & Injury Prevention Programme, Head, WHO Collaborating Centre, FAX: (91 11) 686 2037 Indian Institute of Technology, & 685 1169 New Delhi 110016, India E-mail: dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in Home: (91 11) 649 4910 ***************************************************************************** On Fri, 19 Sep 1997, Robert Cervero wrote: > At the risk of backing myself into a cyber-debate, I've got a few comments > in response to Mr. Hook's contrasting views on the role of becaks and bajajs > in Jakarta. Having lived over 3 years, off and on, in Jakarta and logged > many, > many hours in becaks, bajajs, and their many cousins, both as a consumer and > curious observer, I've formed pretty strong opinions about questions of > management > and regulation of this sector. > > >Just as with housing 'filtering', which tends to result in a shortage of low > >income housing, hence the numerous homeless in American cities, the process > >of transport mode 'filtering' in Jakarta is hurting the mobility and > >increasing the costs of lower income residents. > > Modes like becaks and bajajs obviously arose to serve the mobility needs of > the poor in > megacities across the globe. The question of whether they should be > regulated or > even banned out of existence gets at the core of welfare economics (efficiency > versus equity) as well as the always sticky matters of income and class. > Jakarta's > officials -- largely at the urging of ex-pat traffic engineers -- decided > the efficiency/safety > benefits of removing pedal-powered vehicles off distributors and arterials > outweighed equity considerations, and on balance, I and many others who have > tried to make sense out of Jakarta's traffic mess have come around to > concur. Like any > efficiency-based public policy, the challenge is to figure out how to best > redress > the inequities and harm caused. Making sure good quality motorized paratransit > options (e.g., minibuses and microbuses) are available would help many more > poor than trying to sustain rikisha and 3-wheeler put-put services. The > origin-destination > patterns are becoming so scattered in places like Jakarta that even for the very > poor, moderately fast and fleetfooted carriers like microbuses serve most of > their > mobility needs better than becaks or bajajs ever could. Jakarta's changing > composition > within the paratransit sector itself (from becaks, helicaks, bajajs to > Kijangs and minibuses) reflect > this market dynamic; between 1970 and 1985, before becaks were banned and > tossed into the sea, > their numbers were already in decline in Jakarta, down some 20 percent. > There are better ways to > enhance paratransit for the poor -- introducing congestion charges, higher > registration and > parking fees, carbon taxes, etc., etc. would yield the funds to provide > special lanes for minibuses, > off-peak staging areas (e.g., as in San Juan, Puerto Rico), and perhaps even > monies for a system of > user-side subsidies. > > Inequities have also been redressed by officials not hassling becak drivers who > stay within kampung borders and don't venture onto busy streets. The reality, > however, is that Jakarta proper is being gutted and ridded of its kampungs. > Many of the > poor have been forced onto the periphery to make way for modern hotel and > office superblocks > housing multinationals and the growing population of elites. The social > injustices > from banning becaks pale in comparison to uncompensated dislocations of the > poor to > outlying kampungs (where, as I noted, many becaks have also ended up). > > > The oceks are both more expensive and very inconvenient for women carrying > parcels and wearing > >traditional Indonesian clothes. > > When you get to Jakarta, you'll be amazed how many people fit on a motorscooter. > It's not uncommon to find a husband and wife with their two kids and > groceries in tow on a bike. More > and more ojek drivers, by the way, are attaching side carts for the very purpose > of serving this niche market -- people going from street markets to home. > Regarding > the traditional garb, one rarely sees this in Jakarta -- in a town where MTV > and soaps are a > stable diet in many households, the vast majority of women and men I see > are in jeans and slacks. > > >Women particularly feel this reduction in > >their mobility. They (ojeks) are operated by a higher class of people than > operated > >the becak and bajaj, and hence do less to provide employment to low income > >people. > > >Further, this 'filtering' is not, as Dr. Cervero seems to suggest, a > >market-driven process. The becak and now the bemo and the bajaj were not > >driven out of Jakarta's downtown neighborhoods by the invisible hand of the > >'market', they were driven out by police power. > > Yes, the excercise of police power to regulate so as to do what's within the > broader public interest, notwithstanding the fact there are always winners and > losers in the process. > > >This police power was used > >for a variety of reasons. While Dr. Cervero seems to accept the > >government's rationalization that 'the variation in travel speeds across > >Jakarta's vehicle fleet has become so great as to prompt this ban," in my > >view this is a spurious argument. The traffic is such in Jakarta that > >nobody is traveling more than 5 or 10 km an hour-roughly the speed of a > >becak. > > This is ludicrous. Jakarta's building private tollways faster than any > place, and > in large part because of the burgeoning middle class that wants to live in > the suburbs, own a car, > and escape the irritations of the central city, just as in the developed > world. Jakarta doesn't have the gridlock > of Bangkok or Lagos, though traffic's getting worse every year. Granted, > if resources (e.g., air, fuel, travel time, etc.) > were properly priced, there would be less sprawl and expresway > construction, however the likelihood of this happening > seems no greater in Indonesia than the developed world. > > > > Travel speeds suffer from too many vehicles with too few passengers > >consuming too much road space, and only marginally by differences in vehicle > >travel speeds. > > This certainly doesn't describe the Jakarta I know (including just having > spent five > weeks there in June & July). The buses and minibuses are often > packed, and available road space is probably too efficiently used -- > motorcyclists > drive on sidewalks, cars spill onto curbsides, motorists inch in to gain > position, etc. With the 3-in-1 vehicle policy, even the Mercedes and BMWs > traveling > the protocol roads (like Jalan Sudirman and Jalan Thamrin) are filled with > folks. As places > like Jakarta try to retrofit a hierarchy of roads (locals, distributors, > collectors, freeways) into > the cityscape, variations in motoring speeds matter an awful lot toward > maintaining stable traffic flows. > Road space needs to be rationalized, not fair-shared out to everyone. > > >The problem in high-density Java is that the population > >density is too high to support much further extension of space-intensive > >auto travel, and the failure to allocate street space in a way which > >facilitates the travel of buses, paratransit, and non-motorized modes all of > >which consume less street space than the taxis and cars which clog the > >streets. > > No one disagrees that space could be more efficiently rationalized to reward > higher occupancy vehicles, but what's this got to do with human-powered > becaks and 3-wheel bajajs? > > > >Plans for an extensive network of exclusive bus lanes, proposed nearly 8 > >years ago by the World Bank, have languished for lack of political support, > >as conflicting plans for light rail and metro, pushed by well connected > >businesses (ie. family of the President) jockey for position. I think the > >bans on becak, and now bemo and bajaj, have more to do with prejudice > >against modes identified with the poor, and probably because the decision > >maker (notice the singular) in that country does not profit directly from > >the small shop becak industry they way he does from the motorcycle, taxi, > >auto, and toll road industry. Free market in Indonesia is mostly an > >illusion; it means staying inconspicuous and small enough to not be noticed, > >or being bought out by the family. > > No question, graft, corruption, and social injustices abound in Indonesia as in > many developing countries, but pursuing this line of argument to make sense out > of urban transport policy gets us nowhere. Wouldn't it be great to change the > world, however there are clear parameters reform-minded folks have to > work within, and in Indonesia, at least for now, tight-fisted central > control is one of them. > I don't buy this conspiracy theory, just like I don't buy it as an > explanation for the > automobile's ascendency in the U.S. -- i.e., the contention that General > Motors bought > up and dismantled the turn-of-the-century streetcars to eliminate competitor > for the ICE automobile, > leading to sprawl, etc. Indonesia has been one of the most rapidly > industrializing and modernizing > economies in the world over the past decade, and it's currently > transitioning from the ranks of > a lower-income to a lower-middle-income country. The greater force under > way is rising affluence, > and becaks (along with traditional clothing and many other things) are > getting swept under in the process. > More money in the pockets of average households gets translated into > shifting market demands, > including the demand for motorization. Debating the effects of > macro-economic changes on the poor in > the context of becaks, bajajs, and bemos, of course, is rather silly. Of > far greater concern are > the problems the poor are facing in terms of adequate shelter, nutrition, > education, and health care. > > > >In my view, the transport mess that is Jakarta, likely to become the world's > >most polluted city within a decade according to the UN, is partially the > >result of a planning process utterly devoid of public participation. > > Beyond targetting public works projects, little regional planning occurs in > Jakarta. > Growth is ad hoc, hit-or-miss. There's simply no notion of spillover > effects or externalities > in the decision of where to site or how to build a shopping mall or housing > complex. > Public participation would help, but far more important would be actually doing > physical master planning at a regional level -- rationalizing zoning and > land use. As long > as developers fail to absorb the high social and environmental costs > associated with where > and how they build, inefficient and unsustainable growth will continue. > Places like > Jakarta sorely need programs like impact fees, concurrency rules, adequate > facility > mandates, etc. to force more socially desirable and responsbile patterns of > land development. > Note, this too involves the exercise of police powers. > > I'm a strong believer in expanding paratransit, restraining auto dependency, > and designing policies to > help the poor. And I generally share cause with the environmental > community. However, I don't > accept that sustainable transport always has to mean embracing NMT, carte > blanche. This is unfortunately an > arena where all too often there's far more ideology than reasoning. > > > > From ob110ob at IDT.NET Mon Sep 22 01:22:04 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 09:22:04 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks & bajajs References: Message-ID: <342549AC.757D@idt.net> Dinesh Mohan wrote: > > I am touched by Mr. Cervero's concern for the health of becak drivers in > Jakarta. All of us who have so much concern for the health of the poor > in this world should also think now of banning construction of higways and > expressways. I have never really met a man or woman who would not like > to escape the drudgery and back breaking work at road construction > sites. After we have done that we could proceed with banning iron ore > and bauxite mining as the miners also live and work in horrible > conditions. While we are at it we should also consider banning > construction of houses and factories. Construction workers have the > highest accident rates and can't think of working beyond the age of 40. > Sustran has its work cut out for a long time. I hope we can do this > quite efficiently. > > Dinesh ---------------------------------- Quite touching... Did you also forget that office workers, especially in the newer seald building with air conditioning are at quite some health risk? Then there's carpal tunnel syndrom, and hey, while we're at it why should football players be allowed to damage themselves for the amusment and pay? Which is to say that I too find this supposed offer of concern just a bit suspect! And to add to the matter of concerns, I've learned that tress stop breathing when the temperature get's high, and so I can suspect that thermal pollution which, traffic jams provide in abundance, is yet another feature of increased auto use that's further damaging the ecosystem upon which mankind depends more heavily than he does cars. Cheers Obwon From Rob_Cervero at ced.berkeley.edu Tue Sep 23 03:27:45 1997 From: Rob_Cervero at ced.berkeley.edu (Robert Cervero) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 11:27:45 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks & bajajs Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970922112734.006b07f8@popper.ced.berkeley.edu> Messrs. Dinesh and Obwon: You seem to be somewhat challenged in abilities to pursue this discussion on an intellectual plane. The point wasn't so much that we should pity the poor becak drivers or safeguard their welfare. The point was that this occupation was undergoing a shift -- former becak drivers in Jakarta deciding they'd prefer (and admittedly, in some cases, forced to ) becoming motorcycle (ojek) drivers, sometimes under contract with a motorcycle owner, mainly because they could make a lot more Rupiah, though I'm sure in some instances because they realized operating a motorscooter was safer than a rikishaw in the midst of Jakarta's traffic chaos. Again, this is mainly the market giving rise to these shifts. Thus we shouldn't be trying to protect becak drivers to guarantee jobs, but rather working with the market to allow them to potentially work in shifting positions, ones that could very well be safer. A role for Indonesia's governments might be to take some of the tons of revenues they make from vehicle registrations and vehicle transfer fees (one-quarter of Jakarta municipality's local-source income) and provide loans for former becak drivers to move up the ladder to become ojek and microbus operators. By the way, it should be kept in mind that the only place becaks have been banned in Indonesia, as far as I know, is Jakarta. The same arguments don't hold for Solo, Jogja, or even Medan, where the nature of the mobility problems are of much different scales of magnitude. Thus while I agree with the original post that better provisions should be made for NMT/becaks in Solo, Jogja (which already has special lanes along the main strip, Jalan Maliaboro), I still contend market adjustments under way in Jakarta should not be interfered with. R.C. >Dinesh Mohan wrote: >> >> I am touched by Mr. Cervero's concern for the health of becak drivers in >> Jakarta. All of us who have so much concern for the health of the poor >> in this world should also think now of banning construction of higways and >> expressways. > > Quite touching... Did you also forget that office workers, especially >in the newer seald building with air conditioning are at quite some >health risk? Then there's carpal tunnel syndrom, and hey, while we're >at it why should football players be allowed to damage themselves for >the amusment and pay? Cheers > Obwon > > > > From ob110ob at IDT.NET Tue Sep 23 02:43:06 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 10:43:06 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks & bajajs References: <3.0.32.19970922112734.006b07f8@popper.ced.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: <3426AE2A.3D1D@idt.net> Robert Cervero wrote: > > Messrs. Dinesh and Obwon: > > You seem to be somewhat challenged in abilities to pursue this discussion on > an intellectual plane. Hmmm... What have we here??? An appeal to allow and aid a shift to a polluting form of transport that is inherently dangerous besides??? You probably have noticed the absence of Warning Labels on roadways, either now in use or those proposed! ***Warning: Your New Roadway Comes with the following Kill Ratio X/xxx!*** How's that for an 'intellectual plane'? :_D There's a lot of other good stuff that we are not told about the Newer-Bigger-Better products and structures that we are and have been sold! For instance they didn't tell us that that new plant providing jobs was going to be dumping wastes into our Riversk! Eventually poisoning it so that the few remaining fish couldn't be eaten or that we wouldn't be able to swim in the river either. The ecosystem in developed nations has undergone some permenant damage, which by the way, we've no way of repairing. So, are we to help others repeat our errors? My guess is that the car is such a convienient transport device that we won't abandon it or even dramatically reduce it's use until we're the only species of higher life form left on the planet. Only waking up to the fact that there is a problem when on day we look around and say "Gee... where did all the animals go, what happened to the plants and trees and where are all these insects coming from?" I guess Scottie can beam me up too! :_DDDD Obwon From EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com Tue Sep 23 18:31:03 1997 From: EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com (Britton EcoPlan) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 05:31:03 -0400 Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Message-ID: <199709230531_MC2-2176-FD34@compuserve.com> More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon... becak, bajajs, ojek et al Admittedly, we are seeing in these exchanges of the last days quite a range of personal preferences, ideologies (maybe the word is a bit too strong in this case), attitudes, and competencies in the matters under discussion. Nonetheless I am impressed that this is a first class exchange which is worthy of being extended in a number of ways. Let me amplify this point briefly and invite comment from others should they wish to build on any of these ideas with (or without) me. First, more of this sort of open, free-wheeling exchange is desperately needed, particularly in a sector like transport where public policy and professional counsel (and actual decisions) are all too often made with little real attempt at getting to the complex nub of the fundamental issues which indeed must be addressed, uncomfortable and difficult as that may be. (This is, of course, every bit as much the case in the advanced economies as it is in the developing countries, thought perhaps not quite so blatantly, egregiously evident... We have had more time and more practice at covering up our mistakes.) The fundamental problem of the transport sector is that so many of the real decisions, the shaping decisions that ultimately determine the outcome of the decision process are taken, how to put it?, "off the map" of the explicit planning and decision process. The reality is that they are 100% value-laden, value-determined, with the additional wrinkle that the values themselves are inevitably kept firmly in the background and not brought up for debate and decision. This is the real conspiracy of course, with the additional wrinkle that those most intimately involved are themselves not really aware of what is going on (at least many of them). (For those who have not been directly involved in or witness to this process, this may seem like an exaggerated statement, but trust me! it is not. If anything in light of the feckless, self-serving, unexamined reality that prevails out there in the planning and policy world of transport, it is far too tame. Peter Hall in his magnificent book Cities of Tomorrow (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1988) picked up a statement made in a public enquiry by Frank Pick, one of the founders of London Transport back in the twenties of this century, that we might do well to bear in mid: "There was much planning, but no plan The needs of the moment are met, sometimes exceedingly well, but without reference to the whole Unfortunately London is at that low stage of animal development in which the brain is rudimentary and ganglia scattered throughout the organism stimulate such activity as serves to keep the creature alive". That's just about it.) As a result of the ways in which we plan and make decisions in the sector, we are consistently seeing roads built and expanded where they should never be (and doubtless roads not being built or maintained where they should be... especially if they might happen to be 'rail' roads, and most particularly if they happen to be in outlying or rural areas). And we are constantly witnessing weird anomalies such as cities which are providing high speed channels for vehicles, despite the fact that they are located immediately adjacent to sidewalks or areas where children, old people and just plain people are trying to go about their business on foot. Sheer sheer folly, and yet it continues unabated and in the main almost altogether unquestioned. And it is certainly not the usual 'research' or 'studies' route that is going to help us put an end to these anomalies, since in nine cases out of ten (and here I am probably being generous), the outcome of the research and its ultimate recommendations are in the main completely foreordained. Thus... tell me who you source of counsel is, and I can tell you what kind of things they are going to recommend. Now, if we lived in a well ordered mechanical universe in which there were no significant differences between Place X and Place Y (and Time Z and Time N), all this might not be such a problem. But that is of course far from the case, as we are seeing in these exchanges (and right out there in the streets in front of our own doors, if we take the time to look). So as you can see I think that we need more of this sort of discussion that Walton, Hook, Cervero and others are engaging in here, and that we need to find ways to do it yet better and with more participation and exposure yet. For this reason, I have taken to exporting bits of the Sustran exchanges to the portion of our Zero Emissions Virtual Conference which is looking into this sort of thing (at http:// www.the-commons.org/zero-ems), and I hope that we will eventually find ways to begin to piece some of this variety together. Of course, we can be sure that these exchanges are going to lead to a number of book, articles and theses, but I believe that we have the means at hand to do better yet bearing in mind that our ultimate objective is not to publish papers with our own lovely names on them, further our own careers, but to impact on public policy (and private practice) in a way which is going to lead to a more sustainable, convivial and equitable world. Something important is going on here with the same technologies and communications patterns that permitting these exchanges. Could be worth a bit of thought. anomalies such as cities which are providing high speed channels for vehicles, despite the fact that they are located immediately adjacent to sidewalks or areas where children, old people and just plain people are trying to go about their business on foot. Sheer sheer folly, and yet it continues unabated and in the main almost altogether unquestioned. And it is certainly not the usual 'research' or 'studies' route that is going to help us put an end to these anomalies, since in nine cases out of ten (and here I am probably being generous), the outcome of the research and its ultimate recommendations are in the main completely foreordained. Thus... tell me who you source of counsel is, and I can tell you what kind of things they are going to recommend. Now, if we lived in a well ordered mechanical universe in which there were no significant differences between Place X and Place Y (and Time Z and Time N), all this might not be such a problem. But that is of course far from the case, as we are seeing in these exchanges (and right out there in the streets in front of our own doors, if we take the time to look). So as you can see I think that we need more of this sort of discussion that Walton, Hook, Cervero and others are engaging in here, and that we need to find ways to do it yet better and with more participation and exposure yet. For this reason, I have taken to exporting bits of the Sustran exchanges to the portion of our Zero Emissions Virtual Conference which is looking into this sort of thing (at http:// www.the-commons.org/zero-ems), and I hope that we will eventually find ways to begin to piece some of this variety together. Of course, we can be sure that these exchanges are going to lead to a number of book, articles and theses, but I believe that we have the means at hand to do better yet bearing in mind that our ultimate objective is not to publish papers with our own lovely names on them, further our own careers, but to impact on public policy (and private practice) in a way which is going to lead to a more sustainable, convivial and equitable world. Something important is going on here with the same technologies and communications patterns that permitting these exchanges. Could be worth a bit of thought. With all good wishes, Eric Britton _________________________________________________________________ EcoPlan International -- Technology, Economics & Social Systems Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, F-75006 Paris, France e-mail: eric.britton@the-commons.org Main Tel. 331.4441.6340 Fax 331.4441.6341 Data: 331.4441.6342 24 hour backup phone/fax: 331.4326.1323 ISDN/videoconferencing/groupwork: 331.4441.6340 (1-4) http://www.the-commons.org Electronic Libraries available at: EuroFIX: 331 4441.6343 ftp.the-commons.org/pub/ (then chose your section) From wcox at publicpurpose.com Tue Sep 23 21:35:02 1997 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox ) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 07:35:02 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Message-ID: <199709231235.HAA13431@mail1.i1.net> Agree with the underlyiing thrust of the Eric Britton comments.... Let the debate continue... >And it is certainly not the usual 'research' or 'studies' route that is >going to help us put an end to these anomalies, since in nine cases out of >ten (and here I am probably being generous), the outcome of the research >and its ultimate recommendations are in the main completely foreordained. >Thus... tell me who you source of counsel is, and I can tell you what kind >of things they are going to recommend. Sounds like Eric has studied US transport planning rather comprehensively. Best regards, Wendell Cox WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal http://www.publicpurpose.com Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax +1 618 632 8538 P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA From pendakur at unixg.ubc.ca Wed Sep 24 02:02:12 1997 From: pendakur at unixg.ubc.ca (Dr. V. S. Pendakur) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:02:12 -0700 Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Message-ID: Eric Britton's comments are especially important in the context of social values and goals underlying the analytical methods and the so called intellectual aspects of this debate. I would encourage this debate to continue, hopefully the discussants will provide some examples of how things are done in their own cities and countries and enable all of us to learn more about the complex questions. Most of the "intellectual thinking" and methods arising out of this, are quite value loaded and thus, may or not be suitable for certain countires, cities or economies as they called these days. The question then is : should every one's analysis based upon only one set of values ( social goals and social justice)? Even if all the intellectuals of the world got together and tried this in unison, it is unlikely to happen! If one mode is inefficient ( space, environment, speed etc), and if we ban and or eliminate that mode, then what are the consequences to the users? The Singapore model provides some unique answers in this regard. They have concurrently provided alternative modes and incomes ( jobs and job availability for higher incomes) that go with higher costs. In other places, some modes have been banned with no alternatives in modes and costs provided ( Jakarta). In some cases, the banned modes have been welcome back after some public uproar ( Guangzhou). In some cities, more capacity has been provided by seggregating modes ( Beijing-Bicycle Streets). If we were to include only the value of time savings, it is obvious that the higher speed modes are favoured. Then the question becomes...who pays and who benefits...if they are aggregated...........then we simply cannot by the old philosopy " progress requires that some people will have to suffer". I am hoping that we are certainly more advanced than that. Take for example, the the concept of value of time ....the poor have more time and very little money. Especially if the poor are a majority in a given city, who are we favouring by valuing time in a given way? Should they be favoured? Is there an incremental value for time? What values should be attahced for various trip purposes? All of the public transport systems in Canada are subsidised. The direct user cost ( fares ) varies from 25% to 45% depending upon the history, wages, fleets,size and the urban strucutre. The subsidies come in many forms...gasoline( petrol) taxes ( crosss subsidisation ), property taxes ( municipal ) energy taxes ( electricity ) and general provincial tax revenues. There is no federal role in this. The basic social values that public transport is a necessity and mobility is fundamental to survival are at the core of these subsidies. We can talk intellectually till the cows come home, this not likely to change a lot although the modus may vary over time. Many of the European systems are not subsidised. Is one better than the other and is the only way of measuring success the level of subsidy? This is true of our health system also which provides universal care and favours and treats the poor as patients and not as "poor pateients". The American system of health care is advertised to be more efficicient, providing more choices and is certyainly " private" profit oriented enterpise. The one that makes profit...is this the one that is better? In Canada, many cities, including the one I live in, Vancouver, are building ( spending money ) facilities for bicycles and pedestrains. We have no trust funds like in the USA or the ISTEA programs. These expenditures come from the municipal governments. The social values underlying thse are the whole question of environment and safety. Honestly, there has not been a great deal of economic or intelllectual analysis preceding these plans and expenditures although there has been a hell of lot of public consultation and community input into plan making and plan implementation. The Dutch, the Danes and other northern Europeans are far ahead of us in this regard. The tranport investment policy and decision matrix is quite complex and varies from country to country. When we are making thse investments in any country...we have to ask the basis questions of underlying values and who are these investments suppopsed to serve? Cheers. **************************************************** Dr. V. Setty Pendakur School of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 1-604-822-3394-voice, 1-604-822-3787-fax *************************************************** ---------- From: Britton EcoPlan To: Sustran (to post mail) Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Date: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 2:31 AM More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon... becak, bajajs, ojek et al Admittedly, we are seeing in these exchanges of the last days quite a range of personal preferences, ideologies (maybe the word is a bit too strong in this case), attitudes, and competencies in the matters under discussion. Nonetheless I am impressed that this is a first class exchange which is worthy of being extended in a number of ways. Let me amplify this point briefly and invite comment from others should they wish to build on any of these ideas with (or without) me. First, more of this sort of open, free-wheeling exchange is desperately needed, particularly in a sector like transport where public policy and professional counsel (and actual decisions) are all too often made with little real attempt at getting to the complex nub of the fundamental issues which indeed must be addressed, uncomfortable and difficult as that may be. (This is, of course, every bit as much the case in the advanced economies as it is in the developing countries, thought perhaps not quite so blatantly, egregiously evident... We have had more time and more practice at covering up our mistakes.) The fundamental problem of the transport sector is that so many of the real decisions, the shaping decisions that ultimately determine the outcome of the decision process are taken, how to put it?, "off the map" of the explicit planning and decision process. The reality is that they are 100% value-laden, value-determined, with the additional wrinkle that the values themselves are inevitably kept firmly in the background and not brought up for debate and decision. This is the real conspiracy of course, with the additional wrinkle that those most intimately involved are themselves not really aware of what is going on (at least many of them). (For those who have not been directly involved in or witness to this process, this may seem like an exaggerated statement, but trust me! it is not. If anything in light of the feckless, self-serving, unexamined reality that prevails out there in the planning and policy world of transport, it is far too tame. Peter Hall in his magnificent book Cities of Tomorrow (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1988) picked up a statement made in a public enquiry by Frank Pick, one of the founders of London Transport back in the twenties of this century, that we might do well to bear in mid: "There was much planning, but no plan The needs of the moment are met, sometimes exceedingly well, but without reference to the whole Unfortunately London is at that low stage of animal development in which the brain is rudimentary and ganglia scattered throughout the organism stimulate such activity as serves to keep the creature alive". That's just about it.) As a result of the ways in which we plan and make decisions in the sector, we are consistently seeing roads built and expanded where they should never be (and doubtless roads not being built or maintained where they should be... especially if they might happen to be 'rail' roads, and most particularly if they happen to be in outlying or rural areas). And we are constantly witnessing weird anomalies such as cities which are providing high speed channels for vehicles, despite the fact that they are located immediately adjacent to sidewalks or areas where children, old people and just plain people are trying to go about their business on foot. Sheer sheer folly, and yet it continues unabated and in the main almost altogether unquestioned. And it is certainly not the usual 'research' or 'studies' route that is going to help us put an end to these anomalies, since in nine cases out of ten (and here I am probably being generous), the outcome of the research and its ultimate recommendations are in the main completely foreordained. Thus... tell me who you source of counsel is, and I can tell you what kind of things they are going to recommend. Now, if we lived in a well ordered mechanical universe in which there were no significant differences between Place X and Place Y (and Time Z and Time N), all this might not be such a problem. But that is of course far from the case, as we are seeing in these exchanges (and right out there in the streets in front of our own doors, if we take the time to look). So as you can see I think that we need more of this sort of discussion that Walton, Hook, Cervero and others are engaging in here, and that we need to find ways to do it yet better and with more participation and exposure yet. For this reason, I have taken to exporting bits of the Sustran exchanges to the portion of our Zero Emissions Virtual Conference which is looking into this sort of thing (at http:// www.the-commons.org/zero-ems), and I hope that we will eventually find ways to begin to piece some of this variety together. Of course, we can be sure that these exchanges are going to lead to a number of book, articles and theses, but I believe that we have the means at hand to do better yet bearing in mind that our ultimate objective is not to publish papers with our own lovely names on them, further our own careers, but to impact on public policy (and private practice) in a way which is going to lead to a more sustainable, convivial and equitable world. Something important is going on here with the same technologies and communications patterns that permitting these exchanges. Could be worth a bit of thought. anomalies such as cities which are providing high speed channels for vehicles, despite the fact that they are located immediately adjacent to sidewalks or areas where children, old people and just plain people are trying to go about their business on foot. Sheer sheer folly, and yet it continues unabated and in the main almost altogether unquestioned. And it is certainly not the usual 'research' or 'studies' route that is going to help us put an end to these anomalies, since in nine cases out of ten (and here I am probably being generous), the outcome of the research and its ultimate recommendations are in the main completely foreordained. Thus... tell me who you source of counsel is, and I can tell you what kind of things they are going to recommend. Now, if we lived in a well ordered mechanical universe in which there were no significant differences between Place X and Place Y (and Time Z and Time N), all this might not be such a problem. But that is of course far from the case, as we are seeing in these exchanges (and right out there in the streets in front of our own doors, if we take the time to look). So as you can see I think that we need more of this sort of discussion that Walton, Hook, Cervero and others are engaging in here, and that we need to find ways to do it yet better and with more participation and exposure yet. For this reason, I have taken to exporting bits of the Sustran exchanges to the portion of our Zero Emissions Virtual Conference which is looking into this sort of thing (at http:// www.the-commons.org/zero-ems), and I hope that we will eventually find ways to begin to piece some of this variety together. Of course, we can be sure that these exchanges are going to lead to a number of book, articles and theses, but I believe that we have the means at hand to do better yet bearing in mind that our ultimate objective is not to publish papers with our own lovely names on them, further our own careers, but to impact on public policy (and private practice) in a way which is going to lead to a more sustainable, convivial and equitable world. Something important is going on here with the same technologies and communications patterns that permitting these exchanges. Could be worth a bit of thought. With all good wishes, Eric Britton _________________________________________________________________ EcoPlan International -- Technology, Economics & Social Systems Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, F-75006 Paris, France e-mail: eric.britton@the-commons.org Main Tel. 331.4441.6340 Fax 331.4441.6341 Data: 331.4441.6342 24 hour backup phone/fax: 331.4326.1323 ISDN/videoconferencing/groupwork: 331.4441.6340 (1-4) http://www.the-commons.org Electronic Libraries available at: EuroFIX: 331 4441.6343 ftp.the-commons.org/pub/ (then chose your section) ---------- From ob110ob at IDT.NET Wed Sep 24 16:09:32 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 00:09:32 -0700 Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al References: <199709231235.HAA13431@mail1.i1.net> Message-ID: <3428BCAC.685D@idt.net> Wendell Cox wrote: > > Agree with the underlyiing thrust of the Eric Britton comments.... Let the > debate continue... > [...] Oh goody! I have a couple of thoughts, in brief: I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and provide good entertaining views. They also would allow us to release land coverage (roadways) which have an auxilliary effect of dividing natural animal habitats (and human habitats as well). It's nice to have large contiguous spaces/areas where we can roam as pedestrians. Since HPV's are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and speed, they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the enjoyment of locationg adjacent to carways. Tunnels for highways are good, but there's still large volumes of gasses to be vented somehow, and particularly gasses which should not be released at all. It took hundreds of millions of years for coral and dinosaurs and plants to lock away enough CO2 to make the world habitable for the more modern species of life that then adapted this modern world. We are doing a good job of reversing that work. Yet we don't know what the world was like when that CO2 was still around in the atmosphere. We don't know what quantity of it was needed to be absent to produce what changes. Therefore, we are in effect, embarked upon an atmospheric reconfiguration experiment, the results of which we can only hope to imagine. I think the 'experiment' should stop! It not being either reasonable or possible to ween ourselves immediately and/or absolutely from automotive power 'on the dime', I don't think it's unreasonable to mount smaller efforts to do so and where possible study and enlarge upon them. So, for starters, I'd like to see tranportation authorities begin supplementing/augmenting their vehicular services with hpv's to begin picking up local travel slack. This would allow us to move and/remove autos to areas outside of recreational areas and historic districts and malls to a great degree. Then, by analysing the usuages that develop we can figure out what to do next, via providing additional support structures for various other situations like handicapped/aged persons facilities. Obwon From mobility at igc.apc.org Thu Sep 25 23:22:16 1997 From: mobility at igc.apc.org (Institute for Transportation and Development Policy) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 22:22:16 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] becaks and bajaj-re: Dr. Cervero's comments Message-ID: [ Paul Barter here... This contribution from Walter Hook on 19 September was accidentally sent to owner-sustran-discuss@.... rather than sustran-discuss@.... (Walter..please check the address that you use). This means it came only to me in Kuala Lumpur. Unfortunately, I didn't notice the mistake and assumed it had gone to the whole list. I am very sorry Walter! Anyway, here it is a little late. Walter was making a direct response to Robert Cervero's posting which began as follows: >Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 01:36:18 -0700 >From: Robert Cervero >Subject: Re: [sustran] becaks & bajajs >At the risk of backing myself into a cyber-debate, I've got a few comments >in response to Mr. Hook's contrasting views on the role of becaks and bajajs >in Jakarta. Sorry again for not passing this on to the list when I first received it. Paul.] Cyberdebate is the purpose of this email list, so feel free to back in. Many of us on this email list, including myself, are quite familiar with Jakarta and its environs from extensive travel and work there, and we also have strong opinions. I respond to some of your comments as I hope the debate is found to be constructive by others on the list. I hope we can work towards some consensus, as I value your insights into a country I care deeply about. Most of the foreign consultants I know that have acted as advisors to the Indonesian government, including Dr. Dimitriou and many folks from Parsons Brinkerhoff, recommended that the becaks be allowed to remain as a feeder system in the kampungs to the bus system operating on the main arteries, as they continue to function in the outlying areas. This is not what happened. Many of the foreign consultants I know also recommended improving conditions for pedestrians, becak, and cyclists, and not the outright banning of these modes, but then again I guess my contacts are from different circles. I've spent hours sitting in unbreathable air in congested traffic in Jakarta. I think Bangkok and Sao Paulo may be worse, but this is hardly an achievement to be proud of, and hardly the result of any admirable 'efficiency-based public policy.' I would like to hear your suggestions for how we can redress the 'ineqities and harm caused.' I fully support facilitating the travel and operation of motorized paratransit of many forms in Jakarta. I also agree that congestion charges, higher registration and parking fees, carbon taxes et. to fund special lanes for minibuses, off peak staging areas, etc. are worth pursuing. I also agree that more problematic still is the gutting of an increasing number of urban kampungs, pushing more and more people to the periphery. It is also true that travel speeds on the toll roads are faster, particularly the toll road to the airport is very fast, largely because the prices are too high for most motorists, worsening congestion on the untolled network. But nearly as many kampungs are being gutted by new road construction. The toll road to the airport cut through a massive kampung. The population density on Java is so high that the enormous spacial demands of the burgeoning highway infrastructure is driving the forced resettlement of tens of thousands of families each year. Its not just hotels and multinational businesses. The population density of Java is the highest of anywhere in the world. Space-intensive motorization is driving the conversion of an increasing amount of environmentally sensitive land and agricultural land as well. It is hard to imagine, with the sort of gridlock already manifesting itself in Jakarta, what it will look like if motor vehicle ownership figures rise to European levels. My observations about the ojeks and their utility for women came from complaints of many women living in Jakarta. So women have to wear slacks now in order to go out of the house? There are women in Indonesia over 25. I agree that road space needs to be rationalized, but rationality would dictate allocating road space to favor modes with higher capacity/flow ratios. Even the Dept. of Land Transport admits that the 3 in 1 program has been largely a failure as it only applies to a short stretch of road, and is easily avoided and poorly enforced. Rationalizing road space would require exclusive bus and paratransit lanes. But how do we get them? The plans already exist; its a matter of building political support for them. We don't need any more foreign consultants developing nice plans that will never be implemented. And lets not forget that 40% of the trips in Jakarta are made on foot, and walking is still the predominant mode used by the majority of the poor. Something like 40% of the road infrastructure has no sidewalks, however. Is this the 'rationality' that you speak of? And why not bicycle and becak lanes? Perhaps Setty Pendakur would know how the capacity/flow characteristics of becaks measure up to BMWs. I think they are fairly close. Bicycles are certainly more efficient users of road space than BMWs and taxis. It seems to me that there is a thriving bicycle market in Jakarta, and this mode could certainly be more extensively utilized. Wouldn't making it possible to travel in Jakarta by foot and by bicycle and becak also be rational? Why not developing a bicycle network also? Kuala Lumpur, thanks to SUSTRAN's urging, has decided to develop one for that polluted and congested city. Can we have your support for this? If we are going to ban cycle rickshaws and bajaj, why not ban single occupant motor vehicles? Why is one 'rational' and the other 'ideological?' Even in Jakarta only one person in maybe six has access to a private motor vehicle, and in the country as a whole its only one per 100 or 200. I don't think that employment is a silly issue to discuss in terms of the poor in Jakarta, and banning the becak and now the bajaj will certainly had/have adverse employment effects among the poor. If you have reliable numbers on the number of becaks between 1970 and 1985, I would love to see that data and know how it was collected, because I haven't seen anything reliable to indicate a decline in their utilization prior to the ban. I agree that there needs to be more regional planning. But who would do it? Master planning without public participation? Didn't we try this in the U.S. in the 1960s, and didn't it lead to highways being paved through low income black neighborhoods, and a less than efficient and less than environmentally sustainable transport system here in the U.S.? Who would run such a master planning exercize in Jakarta? Some foreign consultants who have done such a stellar job so far? I have a headache from the air pollution from the minute I step off the plane until the moment I leave. Upper respiratory illness in Jakarta and lead poisoning of children are endemic, if recent studies are to be believed. I agree about impact fees and pushing for better zoning and land use. But what is the political constituence for this in Indonesia, or here in the U.S. for that matter? Currently building codes require new facilities to build minimum numbers of parking spaces will little attention to the ability of the road network to accommodate these trips. This would be a simple change. How can we push for this? Certainly you agree that there is a difference between enforcing planning and environmental regulations (which are rarely heeded here in the U.S. either) and physically dumping cycle rickshaws into the Jakarta bay? Most of the human rights groups in Indonesia agreed that the later represented a human rights violation. Should the same be done to bajaj, even though they admittedly do produce a lot of pollution? I am frequently in Jakarta, on funds provided by Foundations primarily interested in promoting environmental sustainability and public sector accountability. My biases are indeed in this direction. This is where my paycheck comes from. Knowledge is situated. If you don't mind my asking, what brings you to Jakarta? Sincerely, Walter Hook ________________________________________________________________________________ The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) 115 West 30th Street, Suite 1205 New York, NY 10001 Tel 212-629 8001, Fax 212-629 8033 mobility@igc.apc.org From vallette at citizen.org Fri Sep 26 05:02:00 1997 From: vallette at citizen.org (Jessica Vallette) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 16:02:00 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Highway Bill Update Message-ID: <6D06753101112C00@mail.citizen.org> ***** Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project ***** SENATE TO TAKE UP ISTEA2 NEXT WEEK The Senate continues to work on its six year version of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), which compiles with the balanced budget agreement. Senate Majority Leader, Trent Lott (R-MS) is committed to a six year bill and no extension. The Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works passed its reauthorization bill last week and the full Senate is expected to take it up next week. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) is threatening to amend the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality provision to allow increased highway capacity for single occupancy vehicles. This amendment would gut the program and allow state departments of transportation yet another avenue to increase their overall highway spending without a need to consider the negative air impacts of more driving. We need to pressure the Senate to support a full strength CMAQ program because it is the only provision that links automobile travel with bad air quality by funding programs to increase the number of less polluting and more efficient, alternatively fueled busses on our nation's roads and other methods to improve transportation's impact on air quality. Other issues that are of great concern to the environmental community are proposals to weaken metropolitan planning provisions and "streamline" provisions that link with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. For more information on these issues contact Michael Replogle at the Environmental Defense Fund, 202-387-3500 or michaelr@edf.org. HOUSE TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE PASSES 6 MONTH HIGHWAY EXTENSION BILL MARKS-UP BESTEA On 24 September, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed a bill that extends the original Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 for an additional 6 months from October 1, 1997 to March 31, 1998. This bill, H.R. 2519, maintains ISTEA's policy structure and extends FY 1997 funding levels for another 6 months. This move is meant to pacify House leadership's concerns about the Shuster's reauthorization proposal that would "bust the budget". The committee expects to use this additional time to work out budget levels that would be acceptable to House Budget Committee chair, John Kaisch, and House Speaker Gingrich. The Committee also marked-up BESTEA without reporting it to the House Floor. BESTEA was amended to take it from a three year bill to a six year bill. Thus far it retains large increases in transportation spending in the first three years, but these levels have been reduced to levels near those approved in the budget agreement passed earlier this year. The Committee also resolved to increase transportation funding by transfering 4.3 cents of the federal gas tax currently used to balance the budget into the Highway Trust Fund, without actually spending the money. Since revenue projections for FY98 are expected to be higher than anticipated under the balanced budget agreement, there is a distinct possibility that more funds will be available for transportation in next year's budget process. The Committee will take the bill back up in March when the extension expires. WHAT ALL THIS MEANS After the Senate passes their version of ISTEA, members of both the House and the Senate could meet in conference to finalize legislation for the President's signature. However, this is unlikely since the House passed only a 6 month extension. Any further action won't likely occur until March when the House will take up their version of the bill. WHAT YOU CAN DO Call or write your Senator and ask that they: *Support a fully reauthorized ISTEA that would last for 6 years and would: - Fully fund an untouched Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program - Keeps spending within the limits agreed to in the Balanced Budget Agreement Since the bill will be taken up by the full Senate starting October 1, please FAX your letter if your Senator is listed below (all area codes are 202): Senator Phone FAX John W. Warner (R-VA) 224-2023 224-6269 Olympia Snowe (R-ME) 224-5344 224-2946 Susan Collins (R-ME) 224-2523 224-2963 Jim Jeffords (R-VT) 224-4242 228-1967 Alfonse D'Amato (R-NY) 224-6542 224-5871 William Roth (R-DE) 224-2441 224-0354 Harry Reid (D-NV) 224-3542 224-7327 John Breaux (D-LA) 224-4623 228-2577 Mary Landrieu (D-DE) 224-5824 224-9735 James Inhofe (R-OK) 224-4721 228-0380 Daniel Inouye (D-HI) 224-3934 224-6747 Phil Gramm (R-TX) 224-2934 228-2856 Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) 224-5922 224-0776 Wendell Ford (D-KY) 224-4343 224-0046 Bob Graham (D-FL) 224-3041 224-2237 Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) 224-4744 224-9707 Daniel P. Moynihan (D-NY) 224-4451 228-0406 John Chafee (R-RI) 224-2921 228-2853 FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Vallette Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project 202-546-4996 vallette@citizen.org ___________________________________________________________________________ To receive regular alerts on energy policy through the Internet, sign up for the Critical Mass listserver by sending the following message to listproc@essential.org: SUBSCRIBE CMEP-LIST Your Name - Organization (no acronyms) - Home state or for restructuring information use: SUBSCRIBE ELEC-LIST Your Name - Organization (no acronyms) - Home state The Critical Mass Energy Project world wide web site is located at: http://www.citizen.org/CMEP E-mail Critical Mass at: cmep@citizen.org From pwcl at wr.com.au Fri Sep 26 09:25:32 1997 From: pwcl at wr.com.au (Christine Laurence) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:25:32 +1000 Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al In-Reply-To: <3428BCAC.685D@idt.net> References: <199709231235.HAA13431@mail1.i1.net> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970926102532.006b5e58@wr.com.au> Obwan wrote: > > I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and provide >good entertaining views. They also would allow us to release land >coverage (roadways) which have an auxilliary effect of dividing natural >animal habitats (and human habitats as well). It's nice to have large >contiguous spaces/areas where we can roam as pedestrians. Since HPV's >are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and speed, >they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating >expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the enjoyment >of locationg adjacent to carways. > > Obwon > Elevated monorails?! How do we get up to them? What if I have a pram with me, or parcels, or am in a wheelchair? Do you plan to build lifts at every entry point? It seems to me that elevated monorails are a piece of high tech nonsense. What is wrong with simple light rail? They are on the ground - easy to get on, easy to get off, they can move lots of people easily. And because we know exaclty where they go, because of the rails, we can feel confident that they aren't going to suddenly lurch at us and bowl us over. And, unlike other forms of road based public transport I could mention, they don't belch out poisonous fumes or ear piercing noises. You can share the road easily with light rail, so why go to all that extra expense? Christine From seacow at juno.com Fri Sep 26 12:15:37 1997 From: seacow at juno.com (Brian A Kuhl) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 23:15:37 EDT Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al References: <199709231235.HAA13431@mail1.i1.net> <3.0.1.32.19970926102532.006b5e58@wr.com.au> Message-ID: <19970925.232230.4263.0.seacow@juno.com> On Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:25:32 +1000 Christine Laurence writes: >Obwan wrote: >> >> I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and >provide >>good entertaining views. They also would allow us to release land >>coverage (roadways) which have an auxilliary effect of dividing >natural >>animal habitats (and human habitats as well). It's nice to have >large >>contiguous spaces/areas where we can roam as pedestrians. Since >HPV's >>are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and >speed, >>they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating >>expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the >enjoyment >>of locationg adjacent to carways. > >> >> Obwon >> > >Elevated monorails?! How do we get up to them? Most elevated platforms have escalators. > What if I have a pram with >me, or parcels, or am in a wheelchair? Do you plan to build lifts at >every >entry point? Metro Dade (Florida) has elevators at every station. > >It seems to me that elevated monorails are a piece of high tech >nonsense. > >What is wrong with simple light rail? Or an elevated rail, for that matter? > They are on the ground - easy to >get >on, easy to get off, they can move lots of people easily. And because >we >know exaclty where they go, because of the rails, we can feel >confident >that they aren't going to suddenly lurch at us and bowl us over. It's not like they would derail, or anything. > And, >unlike other forms of road based public transport I could mention, >they >don't belch out poisonous fumes or ear piercing noises. Unless you happen to be close to them. > >You can share the road easily with light rail, so why go to all that >extra >expense? The only probelm with rail is that you need to share the tracks with the railroad companies or build your own tracks. Tri-Rail here in South Florida ran into this problem early on. They got a limited set of hours because of their low status. Brian Kuhl seacow@juno.com; d039664c@dc.seflin.org; afn55529@afn.org; bak345@freenet.tlh.fl.us "Anyone who has begun to think places some portion of the world in jeopardy" -- John Dewey "My size? My size is the amount of space I fill up!" Murdock (Dwight Shultz) The A-Team From tkpb at barter.pc.my Fri Sep 26 18:37:28 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 17:37:28 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] New book on transportation equity Message-ID: [This came from the alt-transp list. Although the book is about North America I think it will still be relevant and interesting to sustran-discuss (which focuses mainly on transport issues relevant to developing and newly industrialised countries). Perhaps an awareness of the inequitable consequences of car-oriented transport policies in the USA can serve as a useful warning to those of us in other countries. Paul. ] From: litman@IslandNet.com (Todd Litman) Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 09:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: alt-transp Book on Transportation Equity Some of you may be interested in the new book, "Just Transportation: Dismantling Race and Class Barriers to Mobility," edited by Dr. Robert Bullard, New Society Publishing, 1997, $15.95 U.S./$18.95 Canadian. This book includes twelve essays by different authors describing historic and current issues related to the impacts of transportation policy in terms of racial, social and economic equity. It examines how transportation policies are linked to housing, residential patterns, spatial layout of cities (i.e. urban sprawl), and environmental protection. Chapters include "Just and Sustainable Communities" (by Henry Holmes of Urban Habitat), "Linking Social Equity with Livable Communities" (by Don Chen of the STPP), "Transportation Efficiency and Equity in Southern California" (by Michael Cameron of the Environmental Defense Fund), "Confroning Transit Racism in Los Angeles" (By Erick Mann of the Labor Community Strategy Center), "Civil Rights and Legal Remedies: A Plan of Action" (by Bill Lann Lee of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund), and other case studies. The epilogue provides policy recommendations and strategies to achieve justice in transportation. I'd be interested in hearing comments about this book by others who have read it. Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: (250) 360-1560 E-mail: litman@islandnet.com Website: http://www.islandnet.com/~litman From jbrooks at peeras.demon.co.uk Fri Sep 26 20:49:23 1997 From: jbrooks at peeras.demon.co.uk (John Brooks) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 12:49:23 +0100 Subject: [sustran] becaks and bajaj-re: Dr. Cervero's comments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4uhtuYADF6K0Ew8t@peeras.demon.co.uk> In article , Institute for Transportation and Development Policy writes .... > The population density of Java is the highest of anywhere in >the world. Space-intensive motorization is driving the conversion of an >increasing amount of environmentally sensitive land and agricultural land as >well. It is hard to imagine, with the sort of gridlock already manifesting >itself in Jakarta, what it will look like if motor vehicle ownership figures >rise to European levels. > .... >I agree that there needs to be more regional planning. But who would do it? >Master planning without public participation? Didn't we try this in the >U.S. in the 1960s, and didn't it lead to highways being paved through low >income black neighborhoods, and a less than efficient and less than >environmentally sustainable transport system here in the U.S.? Who would >run such a master planning exercize in Jakarta? Some foreign consultants >who have done such a stellar job so far? ... I am not a transportation expert and hesitate therefore to argue with experts...however... It seems breathtakingly arrogant for anyone (even an expert) to offer advice about transportation (even at broad-brush, government study level) without considering the limits of the possible. If we are to believe other reports, over-population is now the major environmental, economic and political threat in several countries in SE Asia, in particular Indonesia. It seems pointless to discuss transportation planning (even mentioning car ownership and usage levels approaching those of the US and W Europe) without pointing out the futility of such plans unless population growth is brought under control and quickly reversed. If, as consultants, you offer advice to your clients based on unrealistic scenarios for either traffic / transportation growth (eg. failing to take account of economic viability, water supply, waste disposal, air pollution from non-vehicle sources, energy availability, ...) then you are guilty at least of professional negligence. It is not a valid excuse to claim that such issues are outside your terms of reference. Please, someone tell me, what is the purpose of transportation infrastructure plans which simply cannot be implemented and / or will never actually be required? The 'haze' (from forest burning) currently killing a few Malaysians in KL (and probably many more elsewhere) should be an awful warning of the likeliest future scenario for that region at least, in the absence of effective action. At risk of offending some of the more myopic members of this list, GET REAL! -- John Brooks - Technical Consultant, Energy, Network Systems and Data Comms South Croydon, 7,CR2 7HN, UK Tel: (44) 181 681 1595 Fax: (44) 181 649 7536 The opinions expressed here are mine but are not offered as professional advice. From dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in Fri Sep 26 21:44:45 1997 From: dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in (Dinesh Mohan) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 18:14:45 +0530 (IST) Subject: [sustran] becaks and bajaj-re: Dr. Cervero's comments In-Reply-To: <4uhtuYADF6K0Ew8t@peeras.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: > John Brooks - Technical Consultant, Energy, Network Systems and Data Comms > South Croydon, 7,CR2 7HN, UK Tel: (44) 181 681 1595 Fax: (44) 181 649 7536 > The opinions expressed here are mine but are not offered as professional advice. > GOOD. From schuster at ibtta.org Fri Sep 26 22:05:52 1997 From: schuster at ibtta.org (Neil Schuster) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 09:05:52 -0400 Subject: [sustran] becaks and bajaj-re: Dr. Cervero's comments In-Reply-To: <4uhtuYADF6K0Ew8t@peeras.demon.co.uk> References: Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970926090552.0069fd58@idsonline.com> >Please, someone tell me, what is the purpose of transportation >infrastructure plans which simply cannot be implemented and / or will >never actually be required? i think transportation plans and projections should be viewed as just that -- educated guesses. instead of providing a definitive number, projections and plans should be based on a range of likely outcomes. neil schuster From roryan at dii.uchile.cl Sat Sep 27 02:15:17 1997 From: roryan at dii.uchile.cl (Raul O'Ryan) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 13:15:17 -0400 (CST) Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Message-ID: <199709261715.NAA01952@domeyko.dii.uchile.cl> >Obwan wrote: >> >> I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and provide >>good entertaining views. They also would allow us to release land >>coverage (roadways) which have an auxilliary effect of dividing natural >>animal habitats (and human habitats as well). It's nice to have large >>contiguous spaces/areas where we can roam as pedestrians. Since HPV's >>are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and speed, >>they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating >>expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the enjoyment >>of locationg adjacent to carways. > >> >> Obwon >> CHRISTINE WROTE: >Elevated monorails?! How do we get up to them? What if I have a pram with >me, or parcels, or am in a wheelchair? Do you plan to build lifts at every >entry point? > >It seems to me that elevated monorails are a piece of high tech nonsense. > >... >You can share the road easily with light rail, so why go to all that extra >expense? > THE POINT HERE IS HOW DO THE EXTRA COSTS OF ELEVATED MONORAILS COMPARE WITH THE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. I.E., DOES THE EXTRA SPACE, BETTER VIEW AND OTHER POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF ELEVATED MONORAILS MORE THAN COMPENSATE THE ADDITIONAL COSTS (INCLUDING LIFTS...). DOES ANYONE HAVE NUMBERS ON THE COSTS PER KILOMETER OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO HAVE AN IDEA HOW THEY COMPARE? RAUL. Ra?l O'Ryan Investigador Centro de Econom?a Aplicada Director Programa de Gesti?n y Econom?a Ambiental Departamento de Ingenier?a Industrial Universidad de Chile Rep?blica 701 Santiago, Chile fono: (56-2) 678-4524 fax: (56-2) 689-7895 From ob110ob at IDT.NET Sat Sep 27 09:41:47 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 17:41:47 -0700 Subject: [sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al References: <199709231235.HAA13431@mail1.i1.net> <3.0.1.32.19970926102532.006b5e58@wr.com.au> Message-ID: <342C564B.3870@idt.net> Christine Laurence wrote: > > Obwan wrote: > > > > I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and provide > >good entertaining views. They also would allow us to release land > >coverage (roadways) which have an auxilliary effect of dividing natural > >animal habitats (and human habitats as well). It's nice to have large > >contiguous spaces/areas where we can roam as pedestrians. Since HPV's > >are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and speed, > >they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating > >expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the enjoyment > >of locationg adjacent to carways. > > > > > Obwon > > > > Elevated monorails?! How do we get up to them? What if I have a pram with > me, or parcels, or am in a wheelchair? Do you plan to build lifts at every > entry point? > > It seems to me that elevated monorails are a piece of high tech nonsense. > > What is wrong with simple light rail? They are on the ground - easy to get > on, easy to get off, they can move lots of people easily. And because we > know exaclty where they go, because of the rails, we can feel confident > that they aren't going to suddenly lurch at us and bowl us over. And, > unlike other forms of road based public transport I could mention, they > don't belch out poisonous fumes or ear piercing noises. > > You can share the road easily with light rail, so why go to all that extra > expense? > > Christine ------------------------------------------- A series of good questions, I'll try to explain. ----------------------------------------\ /------ \ express / ---------\ /---------------\------------/-------- \ / local \------------/ Now there! Let's suppose that the local stations are at ground level. But as the local trains leave the station the rail rises. Now some where out and about, it needs to connect with express trains that cover much greater distances between stops. These Express trains would decend and meet at the elevated local/express stations. The locals would then continue along and again decend at the next local station. Next the express train would rise to yet another height to meet with intercity trains which in turn would rise to meet regional ones. Trains already go up and down hills. So why not plan the hills and make that work for us? These 'hills' would be small and they would be put there with a purpose in mind. Releasing the land that's under their right of way. No need for escalators at all, the elevated stations could be anywhere, inside/through buildings perhaps where elevators and escalators are already in place. The grounds nearby the local stations would be pleasant pedestrian malls and parks. Sunken roadways or tunnels would whisk feeder traffic in and out quickly with little impact on quality of life in the area. The almost noiseless monorails themselves would be an entertaining sight to behold as they move around above ground. The views they could present would almost tempt one to ride them. Since the trains rise and settle to meet the next level of service there's no impediment to either people carrying packages or people in wheelchairs or even on stretchers. In fact, with a little adjustment, made at the request of a central computer and based on the destinations selected at key pads, whole trains could be simply switched from local service tracks to express service tracks without the passengers even needing to disembark at all. During off peak times smaller self propelled units could be available and moved to where requested by the same central computer. Simply walk to a station and tap the keypad, viola you're carrage is waiting on track number 3, the yellow one numbered 11! Each local station could have several tracks (of course the switching means would have to be worked out) so you aren't limited to merely an uptown or downtown track or train. The 'trains' are assembled from individual units going in the same direction or to the same destination. There's not even a need to wait in the station at every stop the train needs to make, while other passengers get on and off. The train just uncouples the cars for that stop, picks up the ones already loaded and continues on. Yes! The technical problems abound. But the basic idea seems to provide ameliorations worth shooting for. Obwon From tkpb at barter.pc.my Sat Sep 27 19:08:06 1997 From: tkpb at barter.pc.my (Paul Barter) Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 18:08:06 +0800 (MYT) Subject: [sustran] Guidelines for polite discussion Message-ID: Dear sustran-discuss participants, As one of the initiators of this list, I have generally been pleased with the way it is going. Most discussions and debates have been polite, informative, and generally well-informed. Most people are staying more or less 'on topic' which, as you all know, is to discuss sustainable and people-centred transport in (or relevant to) developing and newly industrialising countries. The list welcomes a very wide diversity of opinion - we do not censor opinions. Vigorous debate and exchange of useful information is exactly what we want to see. However, I am a little worried that rude remarks are occasionally being made which go beyond what is generally acceptable in polite intellectual discussion. I know that it is often very tempting to fire off an angry or sarcastic response. But I would be very sad if such remarks frightened anyone away from joining the discussion out of fear of getting a rude response. There are about 140 subscribers to this list and I am sure it would be valuable to hear from more of them. Unfortunately, rudeness and insults on e-mail lists are common problems.......BUT we can stop them getting out of hand if we all make a special effort to be courteous -- even when we are vigorously disagreeing with each other. May I suggest a few guidelines that should help keep things polite: * Never reply in anger. Sleep on it and see how it sounds in the morning. * The best way to stifle a "flame" (an ungracious, nasty comment) is not to reply in kind. * Do not make any personal attacks. Address the substance of the discussion. If you believe that a comment is stupid then by all means point out what is wrong with it. But please do not pass judgement on the person who made the comment, and do not attack or belittle their intelligence, their credentials or their background. Just point out what you believe is their error. * Avoid using sarcasm if possible. It does NOT work well in this medium. It almost always causes misunderstandings, anger or hurt feelings. * If you feel that someone has been unacceptably rude or made personal attacks and you have a complaint, can I suggest that you please raise the issue with the list-owner (at the moment that is me). In general the list-owner can be reached at . In such cases I will usually raise the issue with the 'offender' and remind them to stick to polite discussion of the issues. In extreme cases of repeated offences I reserve the right to remove people from the list. But I really don't think it will come to that. I hope this helps. Happy discussions! A. Rahman Paul Barter Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia & the Pacific (SUSTRAN) c/o Asia Pacific 2000, PO Box 12544, 50782 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: +603 2559122 ext 2240, Fax: +603 253 2361, E-mail: ------------------------------------------------- SUSTRAN is dedicated to promoting transport policies and investments which foster accessibility for all; social equity; ecological sustainability; health and safety; public participation; and high quality of life. From ob110ob at IDT.NET Sun Sep 28 02:15:35 1997 From: ob110ob at IDT.NET (Obwon) Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 10:15:35 -0700 Subject: [sustran] becaks and bajaj-re: Dr. Cervero's comments References: <4uhtuYADF6K0Ew8t@peeras.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <342D3F37.17EC@idt.net> John Brooks wrote: > > In article , Institute for Transportation > and Development Policy writes > .... [...] > Please, someone tell me, what is the purpose of transportation > infrastructure plans which simply cannot be implemented and / or will > never actually be required? [...] > -- > John Brooks - Technical Consultant, Energy, Network Systems and Data Comms > South Croydon, 7,CR2 7HN, UK Tel: (44) 181 681 1595 Fax: (44) 181 649 7536 > The opinions expressed here are mine but are not offered as professional advice. ------------ Unfortunately... As described/defined by your article in toto. This particular question, of your design, rather dramatically points a damning finger to a special and very important component within the transportation study process. As a lay person myself, I too feel this question deserves a better answer than the one that we lay people everywhere often believe to be true each time we pick up a newpaper to learn that some study, often costing millions of dollars, has been found inadequate, impractical, or otherwise shelved. And so then our stereotypical answer; "It appears that such appurtenances, constructed as they are to skirt direct confrontation with the 'auto industrial complex', are merely artifacts by which contractual obligations, borne of political 'pork barrel schemes', can thereby be 'technically' met. This, without triggering non-performance clauses which could cause the 'useless' return of public monies to various Republic's General Funds, where from which - the dangers exist that - their potential impacts might be 'dissipated' on actual or more practical projects." There is no way for me to determine wheather or not the above answer is in fact true. I have done no studies or research on the matter, nor have I a memory of any such funds ever being returned, no less dissipated on more practical projects. I Remain warmly yours Obwon From stbendall at gsb.usyd.edu.au Mon Sep 29 17:20:03 1997 From: stbendall at gsb.usyd.edu.au (Kirk Bendall) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:20:03 +1000 Subject: [sustran] More on Monorails Message-ID: <40BF9970754@gsb.usyd.edu.au> Monorails would also involve proprietary technology - so there is a risk of being captive to one of the few suppliers. Kirk Bendall Masters of Transport Management student Institute of Transport Studies University of Sydney stbendall@gsb.usyd.edu.au PH: +61 - 2-9764 2163 (H) 24/10 Burlington Rd HOMEBUSH 2140 AUSTRALIA From EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com Mon Sep 29 23:37:07 1997 From: EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com (Britton EcoPlan) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:37:07 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al Message-ID: <199709291037_MC2-2220-5C2A@compuserve.com> Re: More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al. And more recently monorails, Christine and ' simple light rail' (which is not quite that simple when you try to get it built, but anyway ): The ideas that Obwon is floating on monorails as fixes to the problems which have been receiving our attention under this discussion are fine for a quick exchange. However it would be a pity if we were to let the focus and the level of our exchanges on these important policy issues decline to a specific technology area or 'fix'. Moreover, as it happens Obwon, most of the concepts you are mentioning -- which on the surface have considerable merit -- have long since been put out there, considered, tested in a variety of situations, and eventually discarded. It's not that there is not potential merit in these ideas (or at least some of their goals), it's just that they have (or are getting) their shot in various ways and places. To this end, I have prepared this short commentary, subsequent to which, unless there are any major objections from our informed majority, I would really like to get our discussions out of the technology area (interesting as it might be) and back on to the critical focus of these exchanges, which is, in my view, 'public policy and private practice'. That said and before I lurch on to monorails et al, I do want to make sure that you (Obwon) understand that I concur entirely with the main goals you mention behind this (as I am sure do all of us here), namely such things as achieving reductions of CO2 emissions, releasing land presently tied up by cars and motor vehicles more generally, removing barriers to animal habitats (and human habitats as well), more safe and convivial space for pedestrians, lower power and lower speed transport in central areas, etc. These are all important, even central issues in transportation policy. The trick here, though, is that the way to this future is not paved with technology per se (though it can have a role), but above all with our collective ability to shape our cities within the envelope of the technologies and arrangements that are already out there and well mapped. No Deus ex Machina here (sorry about that!). Just so that you do think that I am ex cathedraing (oops again!), let me quickly list for you a bunch of names which have been hallmarks of the past interest and work going all the way back to the salad days of high technology ambitiousness, which were the late 'sixties: Alweg, Safege, Atobus, H-Bahn, Kompaktbahn, Urba, Tridim, Orbit, Strada Guidata, Shonan Monorail, Hitachu-Alweg (a minor variant), Donas 20, Orbit and the list goes on and on. I myself led four major international surveys of these systems between 1969 and 1974, and continue to have a close look about every ten years to be sure that I have neither overlooked anything nor am about to be surprised by new versions or permutations that might solve all the old problems that kept them from happening in the first place (which are many in number and, for the most part it appears to me, quite intractable). Our last peek into these systems was a massive six volume enquiry entitled (for my sins), World People Mover Survey. The short story on their defects is that they are costly to build and maintain properly, highly intrusive in urban contexts, take up a lot more central real estate than you might guess, are ugly as sin (with a few exceptions), and the more ambitious they get in technology and performance terms the less able they prove to be to get the job done. True, as our ability to handle the huge amounts of data with the speed and security that is needed to be higher performance out of them (e.g., very tight headways so you can have smaller capsules and the more frequent service that goes with them, more versatile switching to permit combined express and local services and larger service basins) are improving by leaps and bounds and these are now becoming much more interesting (i.e., possible) areas of enquiry, but at the end of the day the negatives are simply too pervasive to be ignored. The so-called 'transportation experts' around the world (of which I guess I am one) may agree about very little indeed, but we have by and large really come to quite a firm consensus on monorails. PRT, and anything else that is stuck up in the air like that. The solution lies elsewhere. Does this mean that there are no good elevated systems around (the number of 'rails' is really not the point)? Sure there are some rather interesting ones, of which my favorite happens to be the 100 year old Wuppertal monorail (actually it was put into service only in 1901). The Wuppertal system is so safe that a few years ago the operator was making the statement that after all these years there had been only one fatal accident on the system "and that was the passenger's fault". And for those of you who like the way that the Westinghouse system in Miami or the Val system in Lille look, I can only suggest that you spend some time with their accounts. Then there are all those systems in zoos and casinos, which have their own raison d'?tre which, I might mention, are a far cry from the tough world of public transportation. For anyone with a strong interest in unconventional transportation systems or monorails, there are places on the Web and elsewhere to turn for copious background and encouragement. If you are looking for a largely favorable view on this whole class of systems (monorails, PRT, GRT, APM, et al, including the most insipid of words, "people movers") I can suggest for example the very competent industry newsletter of Larry Fabian at TRANS21 (Lfabian@compuserve.com), the Monorail Initiative in Seattle (http://www.cullman-net.com/monorail), the comprehensive Web page of Professor Jerry Schneider (e-mail:jbs@u.washington.edu) at http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/itrans1.htm and the list goes on and on. These people are very enthusiastic, and if you like that sort of thing you will find them interesting sources for you. Incidentally, if you don't like people and jobs than you should love these systems. Our studies revealed that one of the main motives in trying to push these technologies is that, whatever their shortcomings, they did one very important job very well; i.e., "save labor". Indeed, at the end of the day, you will find that this is usually advanced as the clinching argument. Which brings us to another and not trivial issue, and that is should we be using large clumps of public moneys ('cause these things are never cheap, and they always, always depend on public handouts to get built) in order to use technology one more time to remove jobs. Well, that's a choice, isn't it? Bottom line: Whether we like it or not (and I for one rather like it, because I really don't like to go underground to be spirited to some destination, nor do I feel the need to watch people eat their dinner as I speed by their apartment window on my handy monorail), our solutions to the problems of transport in cities lay primarily on the ground. On the one hand we have to put a gradual (in places maybe rather more than that) squeeze on the car. And this will be achieved in the final analysis mainly by the removal of parking, while at the same time orchestrating a broad band of measure that will reduce the need for motorized movements by increasing the supply and safety of . But this is not the place for this summary of MY views on all this. Rather what we are trying to do with these exchanges is deepen this debate, and see if we can somehow among us reach an 'expert consensus' that we can then find ways of putting right out front in the policy and public debates on these matters. Isn't that why we are here? With all good wishes, Eric Britton _________________________________________________________________ EcoPlan International -- Technology, Economics & Social Systems Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, F-75006 Paris, France e-mail: eric.britton@the-commons.org Main Tel. 331.4441.6340 Fax 331.4441.6341 Data: 331.4441.6342 24 hour backup phone/fax: 331.4326.1323 ISDN/videoconferencing/groupwork: 331.4441.6340 (1-4) http://www.the-commons.org Electronic Libraries available at: EuroFIX: 331 4441.6343 ftp.the-commons.org/pub/ (then chose your section) CompuServe: GO TWEUR (then go to "New Ways to Work") From chris at mailnet.rdc.cl Tue Sep 30 01:40:01 1997 From: chris at mailnet.rdc.cl (Christopher Zegras) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 12:40:01 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Overhead monorails Message-ID: <199709291640.MAA21144@mailnet.rdc.cl> At 04:40 AM 25/09/97 +0900, sustran-discuss wrote: > > I like elevated monorails because they cut CO2 emissions and provide >good entertaining views.... Since HPV's >are relatively non polluting and because of their lower power and speed, >they can operate among pedestrians quite safely and without creating >expectation or perceptions of danger that interfere with the enjoyment >of locationg adjacent to carways. In urban areas, elevated infrastructure-- whether road, rail or monorail -- may provide entertaining views and efficient traffic flow, but their interruption of urban space is far from non-polluting (from an aesthetic perspective), and typically do more to create dead urban space underneath, than anything else. The recently inaugurated Line 5 of the Santiago Metro has a long elevated section which basically slices the neighborhood in half. Those views might be entertaining for the riders, but how about those that are now the subject of those views? cz Christopher Zegras http://www.iiec.org /\ /^\ Instituto Internacional para la Conservacion de Energia /^\ /_o\ / \ General Flores 150, Providencia, Santiago, CHILE /^^^/_\< /^^^^^\ Tel: (56 2) 236 9232 Fax: 236 9233 / (*)/(*) \ From ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu Tue Sep 30 05:22:14 1997 From: ebruun at rci.rutgers.edu (Eric Bruun) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 16:22:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al In-Reply-To: <199709291037_MC2-2220-5C2A@compuserve.com> Message-ID: Bravo to Eric Britton's posting re. not letting the discussion drift towards particular technological solutions. But, I am sorry to say that consensus has not been reached regarding monorails, PRT, etc. I was just at the American Public Transit Association Annual Meeting, and I can assure you that PRT is still being pushed actively with a demo project still going forward in Rosemont, Illinios, adjacent to O'Hare Airport. Larry Fabian and others are pushing automation heavily. Etc., etc. Incidentally, I wrote a short column for the forthcoming Urban Transport International where I raise the issue of displacing labor and whether it really is a good idea. Finally, if you look at a place like Bay Area Rapid Transit, even though highly automated, it still has to carry operators on every train to mind the doors. It just doesn't maintain schedule adherence as well as a well run manually driven system, and requires a much bigger engineering support infrastructure. I think the case for automation is best where extremely frequent service is needed no matter how little the demand, such as airports, and weakest where trains are large, demand is high, and headways are already reasonably short. The case is especially weak for developing countries. (The last things they need are more capital intensive, low labor content solutions.) From sarah.roberts at IIED.ORG Tue Sep 30 21:52:05 1997 From: sarah.roberts at IIED.ORG (sarah.roberts@IIED.ORG) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 12:52:05 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Impact of trade related transport? Message-ID: <199709301146.MAA15358@sys4.cambridge.uk.psi.net> I work for the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) in London. Transport has not been a major focus of our work to date although we did look at the impacts of the transport of pulp and paper related goods in large study that we did on the sustainability of the global paper industry. We are thinking of following this up with a more general study on the environmental and social impacts of transport of internationally traded goods, particularly as countries all over the world are increasingly relying on export success to support economic development. I wonder if anyone on this discussion list knows of other work that has been done in this area or people that it would be useful for me to contact while we develop this project. I would be grateful for any information that you could give me on this. Best wishes Sarah Roberts International Institute for Environment & Development 3 Endsleigh Street London WC1H 0DD UK tel: +44(171) 388 2117 fax: +44(171) 388 2826 International Institute for Environment & Development 3 Endsleigh Street London WC1H 0DD UK tel: +44(171) 388 2117 fax: +44(171) 388 2826 From cowherd at MIT.EDU Tue Sep 30 10:39:51 1997 From: cowherd at MIT.EDU (Bob Cowherd) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:39:51 Subject: [sustran] Re: trade related transport? Message-ID: <9709301433.AA02005@MIT.MIT.EDU> Regarding the inquiry from Sarah Roberts: The most recent issue of _Access: Research at the University of California Transportation Center_ (Spring 1997, number 10) includes a short article by Pnina Ohanna Plaut () entitled "Telecommunication Vs. Transportation" in which she examines the question of whether or not the overlap of functions between the two means that telecommunications will substitute for transportation or stimulate increased demand for transportation. She uses European industrial trade and the freight sector in particular to answer this question. I hope this helps. Robert Cowherd Ph.D. Candidate MIT School of Architecture and Planning From Banihan.Gunay at newcastle.ac.uk Tue Sep 30 17:04:05 1997 From: Banihan.Gunay at newcastle.ac.uk (B.GUNAY) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 17:04:05 GMT0BST Subject: [sustran] (no title) Message-ID: <199709301604.RAA08127@cheviot.ncl.ac.uk> Hi, I am looking for the e-mail address of the listowner of this mailing list. Thanks for your help, Banihan.