[sustran] More on Walton, Cowherd, Hook, Cervero, Dinesh, Obwon.. becak, bajajs, ojek et al

[Dr. V. S. Pendakur]

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 <EcoPlanCentral at compuserve.com>
To: Sustran (to post mail) <sustran-discuss-digest at jca.ax.apc.org>
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 at 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)
----------