[sustran] Re: Motorcycles Transportation Vietnam

[Craig Townsend]

Craig and Brendan,

While I agree that the functioning of Vietnam's motorcycle-based 
urban transport systems are rather remarkable, we should not overlook the 
incredibly high transport related injuries and deaths. According to data 
collected on 100 cities worldwide in 1995, in terms of transport 
deaths per passenger kilometre of motorized travel, Ho Chi Minh City ranked 
worst out of 100 cities from developing and developed countries. These numbers 
have grown far worse over the last 10 years (rougly a four fold increase), and 
the road toll (which have become the leading cause chilrens' deaths in 
Vietnam) is now a major concern of the government of Vietnam and the World 
Health Organisation. 

Craig Townsend

Quoting Brendan Finn <etts at indigo.ie>:

> Craig,
> 
> I agree with your assessment. I visited Hanoi last year. After the initial
> shock of the waves of two-wheelers, I began to understand that it really
> does flow, sort of like a large shoal of fish, Each individual really does
> have a sense of those around them, and behaves in a quite predictable way.
> It's also clear that while they may look chaotic, each rider does behave in
> a collision-avoidance mode. I did not once observe a collision or anyone
> falling off their bicycle to avoid a collision. It's the first time I had
> come across such level of two-wheeler use, and it was obvious that it works
> really well.
> 
> My observation was that all forms of two-wheelers (even those with 12-foot
> pipes!) can interact very well with each other. Further, pedestrians can
> quite easily cross the flows, as long as you time it reasonably well and
> behave predictably (my initially-terrified wife agreed on this one,
> eventually).
> 
> However, the introduction of even one car into this changed the picture
> dramatically. The scale of the car makes it a blockage, and the driving
> style means that it barges its way through, unwilling or unable to interact
> sensitively with the two-wheelers. I do not believe that cars and
> two-wheelers on Hanoi scale can interact safely.
> 
> I didn't come to a conclusion about buses. Because there are far fewer of
> them than cars, they are highly visible, and they drive slowly in a
> predictable (albeit unyielding) way, it seems that a certain number of buses
> can be absorbed in the flow of two-wheelers.
> 
> My personal opinion is that as a pedestrian I was far safer crossing the
> streets of down-town Hanoi than almost any where else I have been.
> Nonetheless, I believe that the promoters of automobiles will win, and that
> very shortly two-wheeler travel will have become extremely dangerous due to
> the number of cars. Since it is the mode of availability and affordability
> for over 95% of Vietnamese, they will continue to use it and will suffer
> high rates of casualty.
> 
> 
> Brendan Finn,
> ETTS, Ireland.
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Contact details are : e-mail : etts at indigo.ie   tel : +353.87.2530286
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig August Johnson" <caj24 at cornell.edu>
> To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport"
> <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
> Cc: <a3b14 at yahoogroups.com>; "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport"
> <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 6:28 AM
> Subject: [sustran] Motorcycles Transportation Vietnam
> 
> 
> > In terms of motorcycle use in Southeast Asia, I think there are examples
> > of how motorbikes have provided a viable alternative to an auto-based
> > urban transportation system. In Vietnam, while the high rate of motorcycle
> > usage (60% of traffic is on motorbikes) has displaced pedestrians from the
> > streets. High numbers of motorbikes have been able to coexist quite well
> > with high usage of bikes (30% of traffic is on bicycles). This has
> > contributed to a dynamic high energy street life that is quite different
> > than a more pedestrian-centered street life, but still viable. Sure there
> > are a greater number of collisions between
> > motorbikes-pedestrians-bicycles, but these collisions are usually not
> > fatal, and are rarely treated as accidents. Most of the road fatalities in
> > Vietnam happen on highways and not in the cities.
> >
> > Given the speed and the scope of motorization in Vietnam, the negative
> > impacts of motorization that one acutely experience in America such as
> > sprawl, smog, congestion, and the social inequality arising from
> > inadequate public mass transportation are not found in Vietnamese cities
> > for the following reasons:
> >
> > 1. Motorcycles pollute far less than cars- especially four stroke engine
> > motorcycles. An 80cc four-stroke engine scooter can get 85-90 miles per
> > gallon much better than a typical car at around 30 mpg. Also, there are
> > many viable electric scooters on the market that are zero emissions.
> >
> > 2. Parking is not a big issue for motorcycles. Vietnamese cities are
> > incredibly dense,   thus allowing cities to become quite dense and still
> > relatively uncongested given the high density.
> >
> > 3. While riding a motorbike, one has much greater connection to the
> > surrounding street. One is not able to control the personal environment
> > like in a car, so the importance of street life and streetscape are not
> > lost by the increase in motorbikes.
> >
> > 4. Motorcycles are cheaper than cars making motorbikes a more equitable
> > form of individual motorized transportation.  In Vietnam, the price of a
> > car is 15x the price of a motorbike. As a result Vietnam has a rate of
> > around 300 motor vehicles/1000 people. This is on par with many
> > industrialized European countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands.
> > Motorbikes have given all the benefits of owning private vehicle such as
> > personal mobility, speed, and no wait time while still being quite
> > affordable.
> >
> > 5. Motorbikes do not take up as much space on the road. In Hanoi there is
> > less than .17 km of auto-accessible road length per 1000 residents. This
> > compares drastically to New York which is 9.97km and Singapore which is
> > .98km per 1000 residents.
> >
> > Indeed, Vietnamese cities have been able to economically develop at great
> > speed, partly because the cities have not had to build an auto-based road
> > infrastructure. Now, though Vietnam is building the road infrastructure
> > with funding from World Bank and JBIC, and the increase in cars that is
> > now occurring in Vietnam will contribute much more to traffic
> > fatalities/congestion/pollution/sprawl/and social inequality than
> > motorbikes. Like Eric said, the pro-auto policies are having a much more
> > detrimental effect than the huge increase in motorbikes.
> >
> >
> > Craig Johnson
> >
> > Much of the statistics quoted were from both a JICA transportation study
> > in Hanoi, augmented with personal data collected this last summer
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I certainly have to agree that there are too many aggressive
> motorcyclists
> > > in Athens and far too many large, semi-legal street racers without
> proper
> > > mufflers. I also agree that most current motorcycles pollute too much,
> as
> > > they don't use the latest technology.
> > >
> > > However, a total ban is ridiculous. Some things to consider. First, they
> > > need far less parking space, one of the reasons for their popularity.
> > > Second, they are far more fuel efficient than all but the smallest
> autos,
> > > unless these autos operate full, which they almost never do. Third,
> small
> > > motorcycles get run over by cars in the developing countries in large
> > > numbers. And the people riding them are not in the same income class as
> > > those who own the cars.
> > >
> > > But here is one of my main points. Yes, there are too many motorcycles
> on
> > > the road in some places, especially in southeast Asia. But, lets look at
> > > why. They have fast growing economies and work sites that are
> increasingly
> > > far away. Yet these countries have substandard public transportation, as
> > > governments (and the World Bank) have prioritized auto facilities
> instead.
> > > What would you do if you could save enough money to buy a motorcycle?
> > > Blame
> > > a lot of the problem on pro-auto policies.
> > >
> > > The other main point is to consider the alternative. Would you rather
> have
> > > merchants and couriers shipping their goods around on space-conserving,
> > > low-polluting, well-muffled, and energy-conserving smaller motorcycles,
> or
> > > in cars and trucks?  Motorcycles can have their place if public policy
> is
> > > sensible. To the extent they displace pedestrians, bicycles, or buses,
> > > motorcycles will be bad. To the extent they displace autos and trucks,
> > > they
> > > will be good.
> > >
> > > We have a similar discussion in the US. The Segway company has a slick
> > > propaganda campaign saying how these motorized vehicles will displace
> cars
> > > on short trips. I am skeptical. What they will probably do is displace
> > > pedestrian and bicycle trips while promoting obesity,  electricity
> > > consumption, and broken toes. Yet, if they can actually be put in role
> > > where
> > > they genuinely reduce auto or truck traffic, I will support them.
> > >
> > > Eric Bruun
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "K. Tsourlakis" <ktsourl at mailbox.gr>
> > > To: <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 7:45 AM
> > > Subject: [sustran] Re: FW: WHO report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> At 05:59 ðì 15/4/2004 +0300, you wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >.....................................
> > >> >At the IFRTD Executive Committee meeting in November 2003 we had
> > >> >a considered discussion on road safety.   It would seem to me that
> > >> >road traffic injuries are correlated with  the increase in high
> > >> >speed road networks and increased motorisation.  The 'vulnerable
> > >> >road users' (pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists - and perhaps
> > >> >other non-motorised transport users ) are the most at risk but
> > >> >perhaps also the least likely to benefit from motorisation and
> > >> >highways. So, from the perspective of reducing vulnerability of
> > >> >poor people, do we not also need a road traffic injury prevention
> > >> >strategy that questions the dominant paradigm of high speed
> > >> >motorisation?
> > >> >.....................................
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Motorcyclists are NOT non-motorised transport users. Bunching up
> > > motorcyclists next to pedestrians, cyclists and other non-motorised
> > > transport users is a HUGE logical and methodological mistake. And
> > > motorcyclists DO benefit from motorisation and highways. Especially
> > > benefited are the larger ones, bought (at least to some extent) always
> as
> > > entertainment toys (e.g. the only use of 70HP, 80HP, 100HP - or even
> more
> > > -
> > > motorcycle power is to break speed limits) - but smaller ones have
> > > certainly
> > > their share too.
> > >>
> > >> Actually motorcycles pollute like cars do (even electrical ones pollute
> > > indirectly), are noisy (usually more than cars), kill pedestrians and
> > > their
> > > users (at a rate 10-40 times more frequently than cars do) and are not
> > > usable (not even as mere passengers like cars are) from a large part of
> > > the
> > > population (the most vulnerable one: babies, visually and kinetically
> > > impaired, elderlies etc).
> > >>
> > >> Overuse of cars has certainly destroyed world cities and brought about
> > > many problems - it is trivial and needless to mention them on a list
> like
> > > this one. However there may exist a place even for them in an ideal and
> > > rationally designed transport system - e.g. in sparsely populated areas,
> > > for
> > > the transport of people on special needs, or under some particular forms
> > > like the controversial caresharing scheme. But what advantage would
> > > motorcycle present over bicycle use, combined with proper mass transport
> > > (bike racks, train facilites for bikes etc) for longer distances? Has
> > > anybody ever thought if the total ban of motorcycle were a better
> solution
> > > to the vulnerability and the rest of the problems they present?
> > >>
> > >> In Greece motorcycle use has contributed (perhaps more than cars) to
> the
> > > oppression of pedestrians, the miserable situation of the public spaces
> of
> > > the city and the environmental and healthy problems (you may take a look
> > > at
> > > http://www.pezh.gr/english/photo4.htm ). Because of the deliberate
> > > encouragement of motorcycle use through a number of privileges (the last
> > > one
> > > is the right to use legally dedicated bus lanes) their number
> proliferated
> > > (in Athens their number is estimated to 1 mil - compared to 2 mil. of
> > > cars)
> > > while they are used only by a small (but mostly fanatical and
> politically
> > > influential) part of the population and contribute according to studies
> > > less
> > > than 8% to the total mobility. I am sure there are similar "horror
> > > stories"
> > > about motorcycles from Asia cities. Anybody to speak up?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> > > _________
> > >> http://www.mailbox.gr ÁðïêôÞóôå äùñåÜí ôï ìïíáäéêü óáò e-mail.
> > >> http://www.thesuperweb.gr Website ìå ÁóöáëÝò Controlpanel áðü 6 Euro
> êáé
> > > äþñï ôï domain óáò!
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> 
>