[sustran] Wrong-minded modernization: rickshaw bans

[Syed Saiful Alam]

Wrong-minded modernization: rickshaw bans

A new
wave of rickshaw bans has just occurred in Dhaka. How appropriate were those
bans? How sound are the arguments against rickshaws?

The
rickshaw has for decades been attacked by the media and others in Bangladesh as being slow, causing
traffic jams and thus congestion, being an inhuman occupation for the pullers,
and holding Dhaka back from modernization.
Just how true are those claims?

First,
does the experience with rickshaw bans to date suggest that such bans
effectively reduce traffic congestion? On the contrary; even government reports
show that rickshaw bans do nothing to improve traffic, and sometimes traffic
speed even further deteriorates following rickshaw bans. In addition, people’s
travel cost as well as time increase. Are VIP roads free of traffic congestion?
Will the government blame rickshaws for congestion until there are no rickshaws
left, and then what will they blame? Cities around the world with no rickshaws
waste millions of dollars in lost time and wasted fuel due to traffic jams
caused entirely by cars. Why are we so eager to join them?

Are
rickshaws slow? Government reports indicate that in many cases, it is faster to
walk than to take a bus. Average car speed in many Asian cities is no greater
than the speed of a rickshaw. The fact that cars can on empty streets move faster than rickshaw is meaningless in Dhaka traffic situations, except
in the danger it implies: when cars race on empty roads, they regularly kill
pedestrians. How many fatal accidents are caused by rickshaws? Meanwhile,
congestion makes cars slow; too many cars cause congestion. Rickshaws not only
do not kill pedestrians, but they play a very important role in reducing
pollution, as they themselves are completely emission-free vehicles, even when
stuck in traffic.

It is
not just the (potential) speed of a vehicle that matters; vehicles also take up
space when parked. Cars are typically parked for most of the day, so the road
or other valuable urban space they occupy is the space not only on the streets
when moving but space for parking space. Imagine taking a series of short trips
around Dhaka by car: everywhere you go,
you must park the car somewhere. Although many apartment units now have car
parking, they do not allow visitors to use the spaces, even if the lot is
empty. So parked cars clutter the streets. As an alternative, we could work on
turning our city into a series of high-rise parking lots (as Bangkok has done,
much to the detriment of its liveability), or we could maintain a city with
many urban amenities by reducing car parking and making conditions good for
taking short trips by rickshaw, which require little space when parked and in
any case spend most of the day carrying people about.

How
inhuman is the business of pedaling a rickshaw? It might not be a profession
most of you reading this article would like to have, but neither is it likely
you would wish to spend hours a day standing in water, bent at the waist,
transplanting rice. The measure of whether a profession is inhuman is not
whether or not we are willing to engage in it, but rather what those working in
it feel about it and what their alternatives are. Rickshaw pulling is a huge
source of needed jobs; the pullers themselves clearly prefer it to begging or
starving. Further, unlike many other professions, it is fairly well-paid,
involves a good deal of independence, and gives the pullers a chance to choose
their hours and to rest when they wish. It is thus far less inhuman than many
other professions. What is inhuman is
denying people the right to earn a living.

How
well can we manage without the rickshaw in Dhaka? It is important to
remember that many trips taken are short. Does it make sense to wait 10-20
minutes for a bus in order to travel 3 kilometres? What if you have many
destinations: say a woman taking her child to school, going to a shop, visiting
a relative, going home, then going back to pick up her child? If she had to buy
separate bus tickets for each trip segment, the expense would be exorbitant. No
wonder 41% of trips to take children to school occur by rickshaw; it is a safe,
convenient, and affordable form of door-to-door transport. 

As
for walking as an alternative, we are all for it: but first there needs to be a
better environment for walking. The problems faced by those on foot in Dhaka are numerous: footpaths in
bad condition, often occupied by parked cars, and used at times by motorbikes;
lack of safe street crossings; bad smells due to the lack of public toilets;
lack of safety at night; and the exposure to continual fumes and noise from the
traffic on the streets. Rickshaws provide a fairly pleasant alternative to the
dismal business of walking in Dhaka; it is unfair to the middle class to take
away that option in the assumption that they should either buy a car or suffer
on buses, which themselves involve a number of obstacles to comfortable travel
and of course only operate on certain routes, causing problems for those
traveling with children, carrying heavy items, and so on.

Speaking
of the popularity of rickshaws, it is helpful to compare the percentage of
trips that occur by rickshaw versus car. No measures have been taken to ban
cars from narrow lanes, despite the obvious fact that cars create congestion in
the lanes, blocking the easy movement of hundreds of people traveling by
rickshaw. Far from it: the building code is insisting on the provision of ever
more car parking, providing incentive for ever more cars, even on narrow
streets. But how popular is the car versus the rickshaw?

According
to the latest government figures, for overall trips in the Dhaka Metropolitan
Area and Dhaka City Corporation, 4-5% are made by car versus 29-39% by
rickshaw. While men make 32% of their trips by car, that figure is 47.4% for
women. As mentioned, 41% of trips to school occur by rickshaw; only 4% are
taken by car (yet cars already create hideous congestion around schools and
during the times when children go to and from school). While car use is far
higher among the wealthy (here defined as those earning over 50,000 taka per
month), at 18% of trips, that figure is still dwarfed by rickshaw trips: 35% of
trips taken by the wealthy are by rickshaw. That is, rickshaws account for
twice the number of trips as cars even among the wealthier, and up to ten times
as many trips overall. If it is so important to ban vehicles due to the
congestion they create, why on earth is it the rickshaw that is being banned?

Finally,
are rickshaws an antiquated vehicle that should be relegated to the past, or
instead a glowing emblem of modernity? The most modern, attractive, liveable
cities are mostly in western Europe. A significant portion of trips in those
cities – say, 30-50% or more – occurs by bicycle. European cities, as well as
growing numbers of cities in Australia and North America, promote the bicycle in
order to reduce traffic congestion, fumes, noise, and travel expense, and to
increase the attractiveness and liveability of cities. 

What
after all is a rickshaw but a three-wheeled bicycle (imagine trying to cycle
through Dhaka...no wonder people prefer
rickshaws!). Given the related catastrophes of climate change, peak oil,
obesity, and lack of physical activity, governments around the world are trying
to get people out of their cars. It is the low-income cities of the world that
are heading in the opposite direction, laying out the red carpet for cars while
making life difficult and unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists. Why are
policymakers in Dhaka insistent on making things
worse for the city rather than better? If we really want to reduce traffic
congestion, we must do what city after city around the world has been forced to
do: actively work to reduce travel by car and increase travel by other means.

Years
ago, an international transport expert referred to Dhaka’s modal share as
“enviable”: few cars and many rickshaws. Rather than appreciate what we had and
work to make things even better, we are instead working to increase traffic
congestion, noise, fumes, and expense, and to make moving about the city more
difficult for the non-car-owning majority.

It is
also interesting to note that the latest rickshaw bans occurred after government decisions to limit car
use through a variety of measures. To the best of our knowledge, none of those
measures have been implemented to date, while other measures to encourage car
use continue. What was done instead, despite significant media attention over
the last few years to the problem of private cars, was to ban rickshaws from
various streets. Clearly the decision was based on prejudice, not any technical
understanding of the situation. It allows the government to say that it is
doing something to improve traffic, while only making matters worse, because
politically it is difficult to put into places measures to reduce the vehicle
preferred by a tiny portion of the most wealthy and powerful.

But
it is wrong to believe that only rickshaw pullers are upset by the bans. Dhaka residents have long
suffered for the various bans that have been put into place over the years: witness
the long lines of people attempting to go to and from New Market by rickshaw,
or the anger of women in focus groups discussing the rickshaw bans on Mirpur Road. Of course people want
safe, convenient, comfortable transport. People also vote. It is not wise to
anger the masses through such wrong-minded decisions.



It is
time to raise our voices in support of smart traffic planning: to ensure that
all people, not just those with a car, can move about safely and conveniently;
that non-polluting modes are given priority; and that international experience
in addressing traffic congestion is put to good use here. It is time to say no
to further rickshaw bans, to overturn the recent ones, and to work together to
make Dhaka a city in which people can move about safely, comfortably, and
conveniently on foot, on 2- and 3-wheeled bicycles (rickshaws), and on public
transport. We would all benefit from
the improved air quality, safety, and convenience.                
Syed Saiful Alam
Environmental Activist
+8801552442814
shovan1209 at yahoo.com
http://dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/2011/04/wrong-minded-modernization-rickshaw.html