[sustran] Re: Guangzhou joins the list of cities in China with a quota for new vehicles

Cornie Huizenga cornie.huizenga at slocatpartnership.org
Wed Jul 4 18:53:07 JST 2012


Dear Eric,

happy independence day!  Just a small remark, the strength of the Shanghai
and Singapore systems are that they are auction based.  Car drivers are
paying for PT, walking and biking. Sounds good doesn't it?

happy to continue this discussion by skype.

Cornie

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 5:19 PM, eric britton <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>wrote:

> Thanks Cornie (see below), but I suspect we are moving away from my
> intended point, specifically my less than immediate enthusiastic  support
> of the concept of a lottery based quota system for car ownership.
>
>
>
> When it comes to cities one of the things we have learned over the last
> years is that what is most important about cars is not their ownership but
> how they are used.
>
>
>
> Once we have understood this fundamental strategic principle we
> immediately get into far more interesting and potential more effective
> territory, far more along the lines that Sujit is suggesting with his call
> for strong integrated TDM strategies, as opposed to specifically car
> ownership quotas.  Also the points made by others concerning realizing the
> full potential of policies and measures that constitute our 2012 cities
> toolkit such as road pricing, fuel taxes, improved parking management, HOV
> priorities, better land use planning and policy, and of course significant
> investments and coherent planning and integration of the 'Environmental Big
> Three' (PT, Bike, Walk) and yet more are of course the real keys to success
> of our improved policy -- these are the sorts of things to which all cities
> and governments should be giving their fullest attention.
>
>
>
> Those of us who have slogging away at all this for so long and in so many
> different city, country and behavioral contexts, have long come to the
> conclusion that neither the really-should-be-dead Paradigm I (all those
> cars and mindless road building) nor the very much wheezing Paradigm II
> (all those expensive metros and busses stuck in traffic) have done the
> trick, and that it is now well time  to give way to Paradigm III which you,
> I and others have extensively described over the last decade or more and
> which you summarize pretty well in one sentence.  We call this the New
> Mobility Agenda and virtually all of our work for the last fifteen years
> has been precisely along these lines.
>
>
>
> You say that "Vehicle quotas might be one of the easiest to implement" and
> then go on to cite the example of Shanghai. and Singapore. Hmm. From this
> end I am not sure that a simple statement of personal views is quite
> enough.  At the very least it is my hope that our professional community
> will not just play good puppy roll over on this quotas business.  All I am
> asking is that these events, instead of being joyously announced as the
> stuff of the long awaited transition, should be subject to critical
> independent examination.  And when Alok  tells us that  "It is always easy
> to reverse this process" (???), my experience is that once dug into the
> law, backing off on bad policies  is not so easy as all that.
>
>
>
> And now, dear friends,  I would like to sign off of this one.  The
> exchange has been energetic, varied and interesting. And that is what I had
> in mind the first place when I whipped off that brief note yesterday
> morning. I did not expect, as you may well imagine, to convince any of you
> of my highly reserved opinion  on, specifically, the wisdom of a "lottery
> based quota system" but rather to encourage critical thinking and exchange
> among our community of excellence.  Thanks for lending me your brains.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Eric Britton
>
>
>
> PS. In your note just in this morning Cornie, you ask of me two
> challenging  questions. Excellent, but we are getting into deep water here
> and it is not the stuff of a quick off the cuff, on the run email exchange.
> Your questions are perfectly germane and worthy of careful response. But I
> am going to have to try to do this with you via Skype, faute de mieux.
> That's newmobility. You'll see me on line today -- even though it is the
> 4th of July, the 236th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and
> the wise words of Thomas Jefferson which I leave you with today:
>
>
>
> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
> that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
> that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to
> secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their
> just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of
> Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People
> to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its
> foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to
> them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence,
> indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be
> changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath
> shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are
> sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they
> are accustomed. . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> On Behalf Of Cornie Huizenga  Sent: Tuesday, 03 July, 2012 09:20  To: eric
> britton  Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
>
>
>
> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
> I am a geographer - not an economist :-)
>
>
>
> I see the manner in which Chinese cities approach this as an important
> development in the evolution of urban transport policy. Initially,  the
> general mood was that additional road construction could resolve mobility
> problems   a phase that is now finalizing in many countries in the
> developed and developing world. Following this a new approach has been
> gaining ground where the emphasis has been placed on the expansion of
> public transport infrastructure and services (metro, BRT, busses) combined
> in some cases with improvement of Non-motorized transport. This has now
> become known as the general  sustainable urban transport  thinking and is
> promoted heavily in many cities and countries around the world with
> positive impacts in environment, economy and society.
>
>
>
>
>
> However, it is now becoming clear that also this second approach is not
> able to ensure sustainable access to goods and services in rapidly growing
> cities. A good example is that of Mexico City where the benefits of 4 BRT
> corridors and expansion of the metro were negated by an annual increase of
> about 500,000 private vehicles over the last years. In China the same could
> be seen in Beijing.  Based on this one can argue that a third phase is
> required in which the re-orientation towards sustainable transport from the
> second phase is combined with a pro-active Travel Demand Management policy
> under which the number of Kilometers traveled by private cars is limited
> through various economic and other types of instruments, including
> limitations in the registration of the number of new vehicles, congestion
> charging, parking policies and fuel pricing policies among various others.
>
>
>
>
>
> Vehicle quota's might be one of the easiest to implement.  Living in
> Shanghai where there has been a vehicle quota in place for the last 15
> years its positive impact on traffic congestion and also for example the
> emissions of GHGs is evident.
>
>
>
>
>
> The argument against vehicle quota's, especially those which are auction
> based, often mention that these benefit the rich and discriminate against
> the poor.  Being in a position that I could well afford a car here in
> Shanghai but that I prefer to use public transport or to cycle or walk
> (both subsidized with proceeds of the license plate action) I do not buy
> into that argument.
>
>
>
>
>
> So I guess that you will understand that I do not agree with your question
> whether there is a dumber way to get the job done.  You will have to come
> up with more/better arguments to convince me.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cornie
>
> -------------------------
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 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


More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list