[sustran] Re: India's blind love for cars (The Hindu)

[Cornie Huizenga]

Thanks for sharing -  Did you see the keywords used by the Hindu.

Keywords: Auto Expo<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, Cars<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, urban middle-class<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, nuclear family<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, car loans<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, social mobility<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, Narrow roads<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>
, traffic jam<http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true#>

Interesting to see the sequence which ends with narrow roads - traffic
jam.  It appears as if the person doing the key words is somehow caught in
the same blind love as is being described in the article.

It is interesting to see that the Indian press is coming up with an
increasing number of opinion pieces questioning the sustainability of the
current motorization trends in Indian cities. But it seems that the
emphasis is still very much on (re)stating the problem.  Only towards the
end a brief outline is given of what is called: "another approach":* there
must be policies in place to limit use of cars. Cars should be heavily
taxed, more so diesel ones. Banks should go easy on car loans as part of
long-term energy and environment management. Business and central districts
in a city should ramp up their parking rates, as in places like London.And,
we should ensure that our cities don't grow too large. The ideal city is
one where we can cycle from one place to another, like some of the prettier
European towns. The aesthetics of such an existence would outdo that
conjured up for us by auto design gurus. By the way, how come the cyclist
does not figure in our energy and transport planning?*

If we would like to see *another approach *towards motorization in India I
think that we need to do more than restating the problem. We need to
present the decision makers with more detailed alternative approaches on
how India and Indian cities can develop economically and socially without
sacrificing the city to the car.  Singapore and Shanghai generally are seen
as two of the more successful cities in terms of economic development
strategy. Both cities are considered examples of modern urban development.
Yet, these are the two cities which against the then current thinking 15
years ago imposed severe restrictions on the growth of private
motorization.

Generally, the more attractive cities are the ones with a high modal split
in favor of public transport, walking and cycling.

What it boils down to according to me is a discussion on whether government
has a duty to provide each citizen with the access to goods and services in
support of economic and social advancement or whether it needs to provide
citizens with the required road space to use their own cars. Or, can we
restrict the freedom of choice when it comes to the way in which people
move.

I think that it is by now generally accepted that government through
planning ordinances can restrict the freedom of people to live in nice New
Delhi bungalow style houses (although that is what the majority of people
would want) and impose density requirements which result in the building of
apartment complexes.  Similarly, while 30 years ago rules and regulations
were in favor of those who wanted to smoke, there is now general acceptance
that the rights on the non-smokers should prevail over those of the
smokers.

Environmental and developmental organizations have a joint task to educate
decision makers on the lack of sustainability of current motorization. They
also have a joint obligation to explain to decision makers what the
alternative should be. Part of this is a discussion with  citizens on what
they can and can not expect as part of the growth and development of their
cities.

Cornie


On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Sarath Guttikunda <sguttikunda at gmail.com>wrote:

> The Hindu, January 6th, 2012
> *India's blind love for cars
> *
>
> http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/article2780985.ece?homepage=true
>
> *The energy and environmental effects of too many automobiles have not been
> addressed.*
> * *
> * *
> * *
>
> The Auto Expo reminds us that it is hard to imagine an urban middle-class
> nuclear family without a car. It establishes their middle class identity,
> and demarcates them from the press of the masses in crowded trains and
> buses. Cars seem safe, comfortable and — what holds the key to the
> middle-class psyche — dignified.
>
> The Hamara Bajaj family of four miraculously perched on a scooter would
> earlier evoke an indulgent smile; now, in an age of double-income families
> and car loans, it is a horror to be avoided for its risks and its sheer
> gracelessness. A family with an entry-level car like Nano or Alto, like
> Hamara Bajaj in the pre-reform days, is indisputably middle-class in the
> eyes of society.
>
> Cars are about both physical and social mobility; but there is also a caste
> system within the world of cars that is becoming intricate by the day. So,
> even within a small car segment, there are players who promote style and
> the ‘sensuous experience' of driving over the convenience of having a car.
>
> These subjective features, or ‘auto aesthetics' if you like, become more
> dominant as one goes up the price ladder. Hence, designers are crucial to
> the industry for their ability to lure the consumer. Helping them out on
> the showroom or exhibition floor are glassy models that wrap themselves
> around cars in impossible body angles.
>
> So, post-reform India has also been The Great Automobile Experience — not
> just for the consumer forever looking to upgrade his ‘auto caste', but for
> society at large. It has redefined the sharing of urban spaces: Those with
> cars control the public space, with the backing of the state. Yet, after
> two decades of our love affair with cars, society and government have been
> unmindful of its effects on the environment and energy consumption.
> ROAD TO NOWHERE
>
> Let's begin with social attitudes. It is remarkable how our main city roads
> are cluttered with cars right through the day, yet people driving cars
> complain about the worsening traffic, as though an extraterrestrial hand or
> some inherent tendency towards chaos were the cause. And, those sweating it
> out in buses cannot wait to buy their Nano or Alto on easy instalments!
>
> Some thousand new cars hit the roads of Bangalore or Delhi each day, yet
> the government or society isn't alarmed. Roads are widened, and trees,
> pavements, shops, houses and pedestrian paths make way for cars — and more
> cars. This seems like the normal thing to do, and is, in fact, regarded as
> a sign of good governance. When this space runs out, and it does very soon,
> there are flyovers and elevated expressways.
>
> Then, driving becomes pleasure, a cruise where no cows or slum-dwellers
> (who are below the expressway) can intervene. Distance is measured in
> minutes, not kilometres. So, when the road is great, you could be just “30
> minutes away from the city centre”, even if you are 30 km away. This
> promise of a silken smooth drive raises valuations of properties in distant
> suburbs. It also means that for some people, the cost of fuel does not
> matter much. If this is what “urban infrastructure” is all about, we are on
> a road to nowhere.
> COMATOSE GOVERNMENT
>
> The government is unperturbed, even as cars are rendering our cities
> dysfunctional by the day. Politicians and bureaucrats are sanguine about
> the emergence of India as an auto production and export hub. They wear a
> satisfied look, of presiding over a country that has ‘arrived', when they
> visit auto factories and expos. The Draft Approach Paper to the Twelfth
> Plan affirms this sense of unconcern. Its chapters on energy and transport
> merely talk about creating a mass rapid transit system in cities, without
> even a whisper on the distortions caused by the auto boom. Programmes like
> the JNNURM and Rajiv Awas Yojana have nothing critical to say about urban
> infrastructure as it is currently conceived. It's obvious that no one wants
> to take on the auto lobby. It has become a barometer of industrial
> activity; such is its grip on the minds of policymakers.
>
> At a broader level, the document seems to generally look upon rapid
> urbanisation as an inevitable and desirable consequence of high growth (in
> itself, a problematic notion), without saying anything on how urbanisation
> can deepen our energy problems. It could have observed that by promoting
> expressways and cars, the government and banks are encouraging energy
> inefficiency, not just through higher direct consumption of petrol and,
> worse still, diesel, but also through needless use of primary energy to
> make steel, cement and tar for flyovers, and longer and wider roads.
>
> India's supposed ‘right to grow', consume energy, and spew carbon compounds
> seems a specious argument in the context of the transport sector. Transport
> accounts for approximately 11 per cent of our energy use, but this is
> likely to increase rapidly if we are to continue with our present ways.
> ANOTHER APPROACH
>
> How do we break out of the present combination of shoddy thinking and
> dubious intent? A cosmetic approach of insisting on fuel-efficient vehicles
> is to evade the basic problem — too many cars on the road. That buses and
> trains are more energy-efficient is a no-brainer. But to ensure that they —
> along with the much-maligned and energy-efficient auto-rickshaw — get a
> lion's share of the road space, there must be policies in place to limit
> use of cars. Cars should be heavily taxed, more so diesel ones. Banks
> should go easy on car loans as part of long-term energy and environment
> management. Business and central districts in a city should ramp up their
> parking rates, as in places like London.
>
> And, we should ensure that our cities don't grow too large. The ideal city
> is one where we can cycle from one place to another, like some of the
> prettier European towns. The aesthetics of such an existence would outdo
> that conjured up for us by auto design gurus. By the way, how come the
> cyclist does not figure in our energy and transport planning?
>
> --
> *Dr. Sarath Guttikunda*
> Founder and Analyst, UrbanEmissions.Info (New Delhi, India)
> Affiliate Associate Research Professor, Desert Research Institute (Reno,
> USA)
> *Tel +91-9891315946  |  http://www.urbanemissions.info*
> *http://www.dri.edu/sarath-guttikunda*
> --------------------------------------------------------
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
> (the 'Global South').
>



-- 
Cornie Huizenga
Joint Convener
Partnership on Sustainable, Low Carbon Transport
Mobile: +86 13901949332
cornie.huizenga at slocatpartnership.org
www.slocat.net