[sustran] Re: Delhi Metro - A Transport Planner's Perspective

[Lee Schipper]

These are important concerns --- health, education, sanitation are very
important concerns. 
However, there are other ways of viewing the problem
First, why is there so much private money for individual vehicles and
cheap fuel in India but not enough to build protected sidewalks, bus
stops, bus lanes, and even metros? Clearly individual motorization on
two, three or four wheels is underpriced. Rather than providing
additional under-priced collective transport to compete against
motorization, why not make motorization pay its real costs and orient
overall transport policies to a more balanced system than the present
course is yielding.

Second, transport in India is closely associated with both
respiration-related illnesses from transports air pollution
(particularly particulate matter) and a very high rate of deaths per
kilometer driven or traveled, deaths dominated not by vehicle occupants
but by pedestrians, cyclists, and even those moving with animal power.
(kindly see our report, PSUTA, which included Pune, here..
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-60108.html

Finally, transport has plenty of money in India, but it is almost
entirely for roads, rail, ports and air. Your leaders have "decided" on
the balance, but some of us might comment that it appears to be an
imbalance when the overwhelming majority of Indians are on foot, pedals,
buses, that so much goes for roads and so little for these modes. How to
change this I can't say, but something has to give.


Lee Schipper, Ph.D.
Project Scientist, Global Metropolitan Studies, UC Berkeley
Senior Research Engineer, Precourt Energy Efficiency Center, Stanford
Univ.

-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+schipper=wri.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+schipper=wri.org at list.jca.apc.org] On
Behalf Of Dr Adhiraj Joglekar
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:34 AM
To: eric britton
Cc: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com; Global 'South' Sustainable
Transport; xeda702xoda at post.wordpress.com; Eric Bruun;
tevi538gada at post.wordpress.com
Subject: [sustran] Re: Delhi Metro - A Transport Planner's Perspective

I have erad this thread with some interest. Couple of comments. As a
medic perhaps to me it is very obvious and hence find the need for
evidence to make a case where the REAL choice is between better
healthcare, food, or education instead of better transport strange.

Having thought about it though, anyone who Google's (or is willing to)
and indeed any one who understands ground realities of a country like
India will not need much of an evidence. Indian Public Health
expenditure is 1-2% of its GDP (7-8 % for most Western Nations). Oddly
when we include ou-of-pocket spend on health, India spends 6% of its GDP
(less than 5% have medical
insurance) - telling figures for a country where 40% are under BPL!!

Compare National Health / Education budgets with those touted for half
dozen metro systems, the difference is stark when one thinks the former
is meant to be for 1.2 Billion and latter for 10th of that number.

Systematically spending over years has been localised to urban metor
cities
- no wonder every villager runs to these cities in hope of a decent
wager (only to live in shanties though it does become possible to
survive than starve).

I have to admit I was perturbed by what is a realistic statement /
question
- could the money have been more wisely spent? probably.  was or is it
likely?  not very. The answer is probably highly likely. But does that
make it good enough to to not steer the ship differently or should it
become an excuse, rather convinient one to be used to build one industry
at cost of many others that are far more vital for masses (many times
over than the masses that will use the metro) of what is still a poor
country (when thinking per capita incomes).

PT does not exist in a bubble, though much of debate seems to suggest
this to be the case.

Cheers

Adhiraj

> > agree that the PT should be postponed.


On 10 January 2011 11:12, eric britton <eric.britton at ecoplan.org> wrote:

> I wonder about this Walter.
>
>
>
> What if the idea of a Metro/BRT link is used as a tactic, fool's bait 
> to get the metro built? Makes sense as a business strategy for the 
> winners, since the money coming to the metro project will way outweigh

> the BRT share. So in such a case we would be getting ourselves used 
> for a greater bad.
>
>
>
> For now in most parts of the world, at least in places where there is 
> hyper-limited  money around to fund mobility improvements, don't we 
> have to wave the red flag for every metro project that raises its ugly
head?
>
>
>
> Or do I have this wrong?
>
>
>
> Once again and as we have been reminded recently. Gandhi's: "Doing 
> more, for less, for more." Is the only way to go.
>
>
>
> Eric Britton
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Walter Hook
> Sent: Sunday, 09 January, 2011 17:27
> To: ashok datar
> Cc: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com; sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
> Subject: [sustran] Re: Delhi Metro - A Transport Planner's Perspective
>
>
>
> interesting discussion.  could the money have been more wisely spent?
>
> probably.  was or is it likely?  not very.  we've had recent good
>
> experiences w/ some of the metro corps around India being quite open 
> to
>
> developing integrated metro/BRT systems and I think this approach is 
> showing
>
> some promise.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 12:46 AM, ashok datar <datar.ashok at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, Delhi is best compared with Beijing. Besides, in Indian 
> > context, it
> is
>
> > important that we must identify cost /benefit in a more 
> > comprehensive
>
> > manner
>
> > for alternative mass transportation projects and such an analysis 
> > should
>
> > consider the external economies such as effects on environment, low
> carbon
>
> > life style, affordability to a majority of population and whether it
> leads
>
> > to a switch from cars to public transportation.
>
> > from these angles, BRTS will come far superior than metro in  most 
> > cases
>
> > ashok datar
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 4:39 AM, V. Setty Pendakur <
>
> > pendakur at interchange.ubc.ca> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > A realistic comparison would be Shanghai and Beijing.  Washington,

> > > DC
>
> > does
>
> > > not have the same catchment area population and neither are car
> ownership
>
> > > rates comparable.
>
> > >
>
> > > Delhi Metro, like several other places, is an empire unto itself 
> > > and
> they
>
> > > can afford to get concerned about major issues such as land use or
>
> > > solvency.
>
> > > --
>
> > >
>
> > > Best wishes; Setty
>
> > >
>
> > > Dr. V. Setty Pendakur
>
> > > Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia
>
> > > Honorary Professor, China National Academy of Sciences
>
> > > Senior Counselor, The State Council of the PRC
>
> > > President, Pacific Policy & Planning Associates
>
> > > 1099 Marinaside Crescent, Vancouver, BC
>
> > > Canada V6Z 2Z3
>
> > > T: 1-604-263-3576; M:1-604-374-3575
>
> > > Fax: 1-604-263-6493
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > From: <bruun at seas.upenn.edu>
>
> > > Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 17:48:20 -0500
>
> > > To: <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>, <
> NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
>
> > >
>
> > > Subject: [sustran] Re: Delhi Metro - A Transport Planner's 
> > > Perspective
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > If a 180 km long network is carrying 1.6 million per day, this can
>
> > > hardly be called a failure. This is over double what the 
> > > Washington DC
>
> > > regional metro network of the same length carries, and it is crush
>
> > > loaded in parts of the network at rush hours.
>
> > >
>
> > > I am not surprised that the DMRC doesn't cooperate with other
>
> > > organizations. This is always potentially a problem when one 
> > > creates a
>
> > > new private corporation. But keep in mind that without creating a 
> > > new
>
> > > corporation it would never have been built. The existing 
> > > government
>
> > > bureaucracies were incapable of building anything in a timely
fashion.
>
> > > So the solution is to restructure the organizational relationships

> > > and
>
> > > build different contractual and organizational structures, not 
> > > throw
>
> > > out the concept of building high capacity systems.
>
> > >
>
> > > Yes, the overhead rights-of-way can be intrusive, but would it be
>
> > > better to build motorways in the sky instead? This is the real 
> > > choice,
>
> > > not feeding starving Indians. If we were to wait in the US until 
> > > all
>
> > > poverty was gone before we built decent PT, we would still be
waiting.
>
> > > If you can show me a case where the REAL choice is between better
>
> > > healthcare, food, or education instead of better transport, I will
>
> > > agree that the PT should be postponed.
>
> > >
>
> > > Eric Bruun
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit 
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to 
> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the 
> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, 
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing 
> countries (the 'Global South').
>
--------------------------------------------------------
To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss

--------------------------------------------------------
If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real
sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.

================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').