[sustran] Re: comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report

[Konstantinos Tsourlakis]

  Trying to contribute to this discussion and not to offer solutions, more
as a concerned citizen than a traffic expert, I 'd like to add that in
many cases the general public has (perhaps deliberately formulated) biases
in transport issues. I have in mind e.g. that (as I have observed
discussing such issues) I rarely have found people - not experts of course
- who would realize the importance (and the meaning) of generated and
induced traffic in road building; the usual (and spontaneous) response to
the inevitable congestion problem is "build more roads". This may be the
result of the car oriented brainwashing from direct or hidden
advertisement. 
  There is also the problem of representativeness of the citizens chosen
(of course there are processes to insure this, but they can be debased,
and in such a case the fault impressions may induce additional
legalisation to the chosen solutions). 
  On the other hand the recourse to representatives of groups of citizens
suffers twice from this "represantativeness problem" (they represent the
groups, and the groups represent the general interests).

- ----- Original Message -----
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:31:38 +0530
From: "kisan mehta" <kisansbc at vsnl.com>
Subject: [sustran] Fw: [sustran]   comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report

- ----- Original Message -----
From: kisan mehta <kisansbc at vsnl.com>
To: <sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
Sent: Monday November 19, 2001 5.30 PM
Subject: Re: [sustran] comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report


> Dear Matthias,  and our Sustran friends,
>
> Matthias"s message raises a flood of issues. But I am
> going to restrict to emphasizing the need for involving
> the citizens, as users of facilities coming up as a part
> of a project in the project planning. Programmes
> formulated by technicians and experts sitting on a
> drawing board without remaining in touch with the ground
> fail because they have no basis to feel the citizen need.
> Statistics do not always give the correct picture.
>
> Another drawback is that the experts do not pursue for
> implementation of programmes laboriously formulated
> as they do not feel that it their duty to follow them up.
> Citizens do not feel enthused to pursue because the
> expert project do not reflect their aspirations and
> expectations.
>
> In the developing countries, innumerable programmes
> are considered as essential as the basic infrastructure
> is non-existent.  They compete with each other. Politician
> and bureaucrat take up easy & glamourous programmes.
> Needs of the people are not met.
>
> It is important  and more so in case of mass mobility that
> people's needs are met.  Some of us feel that citizen
> initiative works better than technically and academically
> perfect plan.  We try to involve citizens by taking proposals
> to them and to feel their responses. We have to find out
> sustainable and affordable programmes.  We cannot talk
> of flyovers and light rail systems where need for mass
> movement of people on schedule is not met. We should
> not talk of providing support to car sale when public road
> buses are always overcrowded.
>
> I strongly feel that the Sustran should show readiness to
> the WBCSD to prepare a comprehensive mobility plan say
> for next 10 to 20 years that the car manufacturers do not
> produce more than the need.  We observe that they start
> giving all freebees and pressure the government to
> extend allconcessions and subsidies in the name of
> maintaining the production levels.
>
> There is a myth that the industry provides jobs, and more
> sophisticated it is more the jobs.   India is the largest
> manufacturer of textiles in the world.  It is also the largest
> or the second largest exporter too.  It is estimated that
> Rs 165 billion (Rs 47 equal to One $) are invested in the industry,  The
> industry provides 1.3 million jobs. The
> handspun and handwoven textile producing sector
> provides 4,5 million jobs though only Rs 5 billion are
> invested. Despite this, the government does
> everything to help large industries because expert
> reports recommend large industries.
>
> There is no reason for not conveying to the WBCSD that
> the Sustran is ready to prepare a holistic and
> comprehensive programme on mobility and use of
> different modes. Best wishes
>
> Kisan Mehta
> Priya Salvi
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: matthias mueth <matthias_mueth at hotmail.com>
> To: <sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:11 PM
> Subject: [sustran] comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report
>
>
> Dear John,
>
> the idea of bringing in such people (and others) into the decision
> making process (through steering committees) is tempting.
>
> However, being a victim (in the wider sense) of transport and traffic
> does not make you an "expert" (in the sense of catching complex and
> interdependent aspects).
>
> If the purpose is to incorporate further vested interests, there is a
> valid point in the suggestion. But it carries consideralbe costs as
> well, because the decision making process is becoming even more likely
> to be blocked by narrowly defined agendas.
>
> Finding representatives for these groups (preferably with some sort of
> mandate that gives them legitimacy to speak up for their group), who
> bring along expertise in further aspects (political decision making,
> needs and interests of other groups, etc.), might be a more realistic
> strategy in reaching results.
>
> This does not mean that I was suggesting to leave the traffic planning
> solely to the so-called "traffic-expert" alone - we have had that for
> quite a while...
>
> Best regards
> Matthias Mueth
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
> [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org] Im Auftrag von Paul Barter
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. November 2001 10:09
> An: 'sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org'
> Betreff: [sustran] FW: Re: comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report
>
> Subject: BOUNCE sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org: Non-member submission
> from ["John Whitelegg" <j_whitelegg at hotmail.com>]
>
>
> From: "John Whitelegg" <j_whitelegg at hotmail.com>
> To: sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
> Subject: Re: [sustran] comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:04:55 +0000
>
> Dear Sustran colleagues,
>
> Just a very brief comment on the WBC sustainability process rather than
> the
> content.  There is currently a great deal of effort globally on the part
> of
> large corporations, groups that represent businesses and public interest
> groups in sustainable mobility.  If all this effort and cash is to turn
> out
> good results it is imperative that the process reflects all stakeholder
> interests and not just buinesses, transport professionals, NGOs etc.
>
> I would like to make a very specific suggestion.  Those of us involved
> in
> transport and mobility work anywhere in the world should request that
> all
> projects of this kind (eg the WBC project) should be managed by a
> steering
> committee drawn from the following groups:
>
>
>
> retired/aged over 60
> those with mobility difficulties
> women with young children
> victims of road traffic crashes
> those who do not drive
> regular cyclists
> those who walk to work
> those involved in small scale farming/food production
> those who live in rural areas
> those who live in large cities
> those who live in medium sized towns
> those who live near airports and high speed rail lines
> those who are without work
> those who are in part time work
> children
> those who live on heavily trafficked streets on on routes across the
> Alps
>
> Other suggestions would be most welcome.
>
>
> The world of sustainable mobility has a great deal to offer to policy
> makers
>
> and others concerned with charting paths out of mobility addiction but
> it
> does not automatically bring with it a people centred, accessibility
> based
> modesty.  It has the potential to make as many mistakes as the paradigm
> it
> is attempting to replace and it should (I suggest) be re-centred in a
> people-oriented context.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
>
> John Whitelegg
> Roskilde University, Denmark
>
>
> and Editor, World transport Policy and Practice
>
>
>
> >From: mobility <mobility at igc.org>
> >Reply-To: sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
> >To: sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
> >Subject: [sustran] comments on WBCSD Mobility 21 Report
> >Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:32:33 -0500
> >
> >Dear Sustran members, etc.
> >
> >We will send some collective comments to the World Business Council for
> >Sustainable Development reacting to their Mobility 2001 report.  Please
> >send your comments to us by Friday, November 16 and we will circulate a
> >draft letter and ask anyone who wants to to co-sign.
> >
> >Evidently, only $1.5 or so million was spent on the study and some
> >workshops, not the $10 million that I mentioned earlier.  This means
> >that there is still some $8 million in funds that the WBCSD may be
> >spending on sustainable transport related activities.
> >
> >For this reason it might be worth considering, as well as critiquing
> >their report, some suggestions as to how best they could spend this
> >money.  Arguably, wasting the entirety of the money on more research
> >might not be the worst thing, given the source of the funding, (big oil
> >and big auto) and possible alternative uses of that money.  However, I
> >am persuaded by more moderate voices that there is a possibility we
> >could persuade them to use this money in a truly constructive way.
> >
> >Please get any thoughts sent to us by this friday and we'll incorporate
> >them in a draft letter to send to the WBCSD.
> >
> >thanks, best
> >walter hook
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1