[sustran] Re: Why are we doing so poorly?

[Eric Bruun]

Eric (Britton):

The US TRB is a politically sensitive creature. Consider the funding source. When it makes special reports it 
strives to include a spectrum of opinion. It will never leave out the mainstream opinion but sometimes
leaves out environmentalist opinion. 

As for generalizations John Whitelegg makes about the products of the US university system, we don't
all buy into the same ideas. Both Daryl and I went to school in the US and we don't think at all alike,
to give an obvious example.

Eric Bruun

-----Original Message-----
>From: Daryl Oster <et3 at et3.com>
>Sent: Jun 12, 2006 5:24 PM
>To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
>Subject: [sustran] Re: Transport in cities: Why are we doing so poorly?
>
>Eric,
>
>BTW, as an experienced farmer who has had the occasion of being in the
>bottom of a hole with only the shovel that made the hole.  This happened to
>me while cleaning sediment out of deep irrigation structures.  I can assure
>you that it is possible to "dig one's self out of a hole".  When doing this,
>there is a likelihood of burying ones self while making the controlled
>cave-ins necessary to build a ramp to the surface.  It helps to recognize
>the situation before the hole is too deep.  
>
>BTW, in most measures we are NOT "doing so poorly", and the improvement in
>living condition in China IS partially blamed on Americans -- we were very
>well received wherever we went, and the people would convey many stories on
>their improved lives -- many of these related to cars and jets, and vastly
>improved travel.
>
>Daryl Oster
>(c) 2006  all rights reserved.  ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth"
>e-tube, e-tubes,  and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks
>of et3.com Inc.  For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River
>FL 34423-1423  (352)257-1310, et3 at et3.com , www.et3.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com at list.jca.apc.org
>> [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+et3=et3.com at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of
>> Eric.Britton
>> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:58 PM
>> To: Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org
>> Subject: [sustran] Transport in cities: Why are we doing so poorly?
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Whitelegg [mailto:John.Whitelegg at phonecoop.coop]
>> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:42 PM
>> To: Eric.Britton; WorldCarShare at yahoogroups.com;
>> NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
>> Cc: John.Holtzclaw at sierraclub.org
>> Subject: Re: Transport in cities: Why are we doing so poorly?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Eric,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Your comments are "spot on" but the situation is even worse.  When i
>> worked in China last year the Chinese experts constantly looked to the US
>> for guidance.  It slowly dawned on me that this was quite simple.  All the
>> English speaking (very) senior transport experts, engineers and
>> politicians were educated at US graduate school and they buy into this.
>> That is why Beijing will have 10 ring roads (up from 5) in the next few
>> years
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> plus ca change
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	----- Original Message -----
>> 
>> 	From: Eric.Britton <mailto:eric.britton at ecoplan.org>
>> 
>> 	To: WorldCarShare at yahoogroups.com ; NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
>> 
>> 	Cc: 'John.Whitelegg' <mailto:John.Whitelegg at phonecoop.coop>  ;
>> John.Holtzclaw at sierraclub.org
>> 
>> 	Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:55 AM
>> 
>> 	Subject: Transport in cities: Why are we doing so poorly?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	Subject: Transport in cities: Why are we so desperately off target?
>> Doing so poorly in the States?  (And everywhere else in the world where
>> our examples and perspectives spill over)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	“Critical Issues in Transportation”, Transportation Research Board,
>> Washington D.C., 2006. www.trb.org (report attached)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	This much ballyhooed report of the US Transportation Research Board
>> prepared by some of the most brilliant thinkers and practitioners in the
>> United States under the title “Critical Issues in Transportation” just
>> slipped under the door here. Hmm.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	I have been looking at policy and practice in our sector for quite
>> some time, and try hard to follow the main lines of developments and
>> thinking to the extent possible around the world. Which means I read quite
>> a lot. But through it all I continue to be puzzled as to why in the States
>> in particular we seem to be so far off target when it comes to transport
>> in cities with the generally pretty grotesque results that we have,
>> whether from the vantage of social equity, economics or sheer systemic
>> (in-)efficiency.  As I read through this report and its selected target
>> areas and recommendations, it suddenly become very clear to me what the
>> basic problem is.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	What we have here are the collected group thoughts of a selection of
>> America’s leading ‘transportation experts’, strong as anyone in the world
>> in engineering and construction in all the basic modal areas to which they
>> give attention– but have a closer look. There is not a single meaningful
>> point made about what brings all of us here together: the fundamentals of
>> how people get around and access what they need in cities.  Which means to
>> me that this piece, useful as it surely is in its overall domain, has all
>> of the relevance to us as a book of recipes explaining how we prepare deep
>> fried foods in Mississippi.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	Worse. Since it carries with it a title and a whole series of
>> implications that this is the way you should “do” transportation –
>> implicitly by title anywhere, cities included – it creates and reinforces
>> the basic mindset that is 100% central to the problems we are facing and
>> trying to resolve in cities today. In summary: build your way out of the
>> problems.  Dig your way out of the hole.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	Is the altogether incorrect? Unfair? Useless as an observation?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	I guess that is why we try to call it “New Mobility” and not
>> “transportation”.  We are trying to draw a clear line between these two
>> markedly different worlds of policy and practice. Otherwise . . .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 	Eric Britton .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>
>================================================================
>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.