[sustran] Transportation Modal Choice in Asian Cities

[Eric Britton]

Dear Cornie, Lloyd and Sustran and Kyoto friends,

 

This is a very creative exchange.  I would like to share four sets of
thoughts with you on this, quickly.

 

1.      I find the table as it now exists fascinating and most useful as
food for reflection. 



2.      That said and as Lloyd points out, the actual figures make me most
uneasy. There is so much variation, but even more when we bear in mind the
realities of both the situation of each city and the enormous room for
vagaries and alternative interpretations, I hardly see them as anything more
than food for thought.  (But let me copy this to Peter Newman and Jeff
Kenworthy who have far more experience that I do in collecting data of this
sort in cities around the world in the hope that their comments will carry
more authority than mine.)



3.      Moreover, as Lloyd suggests (I hope I read him correctly in this)
there are a number of pretty good reasons for not putting a lot of resources
into trying to do better.  While I can certainly support the thinking behind
such a proposal in principle, I also know from experience that not only is
it a huge amount of work, and that whatever you get is quickly overtaken by
events in this world of ours that simply refuses to stand still for us.  And
finally there is that real risk of GI-GO (garbage in, garbage out).



4.      Finally, the last part of Lloyd's note which has to do with
rewarding good performance and drawing attention to it so that other cities
can note and -- as they always (eventually at least ) will .. thank god -
emulate, each it its own way.  (And what is going on with BRT world wide is
a great example of that). So something like that ranking idea or some such
is worth more thought. And that must come from someone who is
internationally recognized and who can gin up the publicity needed to draw
attention to it.  Maybe some combination of all of us?

 

I hope that we together give this more thought.

 

Eric Britton

 

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
 On Behalf Of aables at adb.org
 To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
Subject: [Sustran] Transportation Modal Choice in Asian Cities


Dear all, 

The urban transport sector remains a major contributor to air pollution in
Asian cities. Decision makers and development agencies are starting to
realize that more active policies are required to address the problems of
air pollution, road safety and congestion associated with rapid
motorization. 

An emerging movement in developed and developing countries is the promotion
and improvement of public transportation and non-motorized transport in
urban areas. In Asia, there are a number of cities with projects on
improving public transportation (Bus Rapid Transit development),
non-motorized transportation and pedestrian access. Experience from these
cities in developed and developing countries have shown that substantial
benefits on urban air quality and traffic congestion can be achieved, not to
mention the relatively 'cheaper' cost required in implementing the project. 

However, in order to plan effective sustainable urban transport programs and
policies it is important to have a good picture of the manner in which the
urban transport sector is developing. A frequently heard complaint is that
there is no recent overview of modal split data and trends therein for
cities in Asia.  The Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia),  with
the help of other organizations like EMBARQ/WRI Center for Transportation
and Environment and the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy
(ITDP), has therefore taken the imitative to gather updated information on
modal split data in selected Asian cities (see attached ). This compilation
is also posted online at
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-60210.html 

We would like to receive your comments on the data that we have gathered. If
you had additional studies please send us copies of the studies. You can
also add the information to the table but in that case please send us the
complete reference for our information. We are especially interested in
trends for individual cities, which have been calculated making use of the
same methodology and definitions for the different years.  Some trends can
be observed from the data posted but in many cases different definitions and
methodologies have been used that make the trends somehow questionable. 

We thank you for your cooperation as always. Please send your inputs to
Aurora Fe Ables aables at adb.org. We would like to receive them if possible by
30 June, 2005. 


Best regards, 

Cornie Huizenga
Head of Secretariat
Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia)
Asian Development Bank
Tel (632) 632-5047
Fax (632) 636 2198
Email chuizenga at adb.org
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org at list.jca.apc.org]
On Behalf Of Lloyd Wright
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 5:01 AM
To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport
Subject: [sustran] Re: Transportation Modal Choice in Asian Cities

 

Dear Cornie,

 

Thanks for putting together the table of modal choice data.  I think more
than

anything the spreadsheet points to the lack of a consistent approach to

collecting such data.  One can particularly see this with non-motorised
trips,

which in many cases are not even included in the modal choice analysis.  

 

Of course, there are a number of difficulties in collecting data on walking

trips.  Some transport models will arbitrarily choose a minimum distance
that

must be travelled before a trip becomes an official trip.  The other

difficulty occurs with journeys involving multiple modes.  Virtually all
trips

involve walking at some point, and yet the walking portion is frequently not

counted at all.

 

My other observation of mode share numbers in Asia is the relative lack of

awareness amongst municipal officials.  Even in the cities where some data

exists, officials will have little dat-to-day interest in the numbers.
Thus,

it is not just a matter of collecting the data, but perhaps more importantly

it is a matter of effectively "marketing" the data.  

 

For this reason, I am not sure how valuable a major data collection effort
in

Asia would be.  As I have perhaps mentioned previously to you, I think
perhaps

the most effective means of raising awareness is through some sort of
ranking

system.  Ranking cities by mode share or perhaps by the correlation of mode

share to actual investment in particular modes could be a high-profile means

of focussing attention.  Municipal officials very much care about the
outside

perception of their cities.  Nobody wants to be last in terms of footpaths
or

public transport.  And yet, outside of a ranking, the same officials may
give

little or no attention to these issues.  Well, this is just one idea.  

 

Many thanks to everyone who helped contribute to your database.  It is very

good information to have.

 

Best regards,

 

Lloyd

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20050624/f77a479c/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: AsiaModalSplitData.xls
Type: application/vnd.ms-excel
Size: 26624 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20050624/f77a479c/AsiaModalSplitData-0001.xls