From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Thu Jul 1 16:20:41 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 15:20:41 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Better Air Quality (BAQ) 2004, 6-8 December 2004, Agra, India Message-ID: <42F08B8662756D428F2811F53C6A93F5C2CF80@MBXSRV04.stf.nus.edu.sg> Apologies. I should have forwarded this to sustran-discuss some time ago. Paul Better Air Quality (BAQ) 2004, 6-8 December 2004, Agra, India BAQ 2004, now in its 4th year, will be held this year in Agra, India at the Jaypee Palace hotel (Agra, India) from December 6 to 8. The 3-day event will be jointly hosted by India's Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) and the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia). The Organizing Committee for BAQ 2004 is formed by the CAI-Asia Secretariat, the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers and the Central Pollution Control Board in India. BAQ 2004 will give representatives from national and local governments, civil society, academe, and the private sector the unique opportunity to interact with other stakeholders and share their experiences on better air quality management in the Asian region. OBJECTIVES OF BAQ 2004 General - Discuss air quality management and control techniques in Asia and how stakeholders can benefit from worldwide experiences Technical - Expose participants to new technological developments in air quality monitoring, and discuss recommendations on appropriate technical solutions for different countries Policy - Share innovative and effective examples of air quality management, and adopt a strategic framework for air quality management and control in Asia PARTICIPANTS AND REGISTRATION // self-funded participants // Self-funded participants (private sector, development agencies and non-Asia-based participants) are encouraged to register online and avail of special early-bird registration fees (until 1 October 2004). Private sector participants from India are also requested to register online to make use of the special registration fee for India-based participants. Register now at http://www.cleanairnet.org/baq2004/1527/form-main.html // sponsored participants // The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee will provide some funding for participants to attend BAQ 2004. These sponsorships are available for representatives from national government, local government, NGO's, academe and media in Asia. Participants from the private sector will have to fund themselves. Persons in India, who would like to be considered for sponsorship, are requested to email the BAQ 2004 Secretariat, attention: Parthaa Bosu (pbosu@siamindia.com) Persons from other countries in Asia, who would like to be considered for sponsorship are requested to email the BAQ 2004 Secretariat, attention: Glynda Bathan (gbathan@adb.org) Priority will be given to applicants with accepted abstracts for presentation in BAQ 2004. CALL FOR PAPERS The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee invites interested persons to submit abstracts for presentation in the BAQ plenary sessions, sub-workshops, or poster session. Abstracts on all themes related to ambient and indoor air quality management in Asia are welcome. Commercial presentations will not be allowed. Abstracts due : 31 August 2004 Authors advised : 30 September 2004 Papers due : 31 October 204 Email your abstract and/or queries to Mr. Herbert Fabian (hfabian@adb.org). Remember to limit the length of your abstract to 25 lines (or about 350 words). Submission guidelines: http://www.cleanairnet.org/baq2004/1527/articles-58516_call4abstracts.pd f SPONSORSHIP PACKAGES The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee invites applications from private sector firms for sponsorship of BAQ 2004. The three sponsorship packages -- Diamond, Platinum, and Gold -- entitle sponsors to an exhibit booth, free tickets to the conference, and their corporate logos on the BAQ 2004 website, BAQ cd-rom, and other collateral materials. For details, contact Mr. Cornie Huizenga (chuizenga@adb.org). -- BAQ 2004 Secretariat *** To get further updates about BAQ 2004, log on to www.baq2004.org *** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040701/9eeecaed/attachment.html From intlbike at ibike.org Fri Jul 2 00:12:54 2004 From: intlbike at ibike.org (David Mozer) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:12:54 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Difficulties that Pedestrians andPublic Road Transport face In-Reply-To: <00ee01c45ce2$ac83ce60$ae1229d9@tinypc> Message-ID: <000901c45f7d$f4e956a0$61cd3f40@m8v9r9> For a satirical look at SUV go to www.ibike.org/environment/conquistador.htm -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+intlbike=ibike.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+intlbike=ibike.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Noel Hodson Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 12:37 AM To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Cc: indianenvironment@yahoogroups.co.in; Harshad J. Kamdar; bombaynet@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Difficulties that Pedestrians andPublic Road Transport face SUV drivers should be put in chain-gangs and made to fill in all the ruts they make - by hand. We have an ancient 50 mile long grass road in Oxfordshire England called the Icknield Way or the Ridgeway, which is beautiful to walk or horse-ride along - except for the 2 feet to 5 feet (1.5metres) deep, muddy tracks carved in the surface by SUV's and 4 by 4's. Younger, more passionate walkers than I are threatening to disable such vehicles. Noel Noel Hodson SW2000 Telework Studies Experts Unlimited - Professional Advice Lines 14 Brookside OXFORD OX3 7PJ UK Tel +44(0)1865-760994 Fax 769384 Email: noelhodson@btconnect.com http://www.noelhodson.com Due to Spam, I auto-delete emails with blank or strange SUBJECT lines. Please complete the SUBJECT box sensibly. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040701/8be97e91/attachment.html From czegras at MIT.EDU Fri Jul 2 02:50:16 2004 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (P. Christopher Zegras) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:50:16 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context In-Reply-To: <20040420110734.076622D80D@list.jca.apc.org> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040701134918.02c494f8@po9.mit.edu> From the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.... http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Fri Jul 2 16:02:11 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 09:02:11 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context - a commentary Message-ID: <004f01c46002$807d6880$6501a8c0@home> -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of P. Christopher Zegras Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 7:50 PM Subject: Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context >From the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.... http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Thanks Chris for that good heads-up on the LRT piece. A comment and invitation for further discussions if I may, since I think this gives us a policy platform which stretches well beyond the intention of the authors (which was basically to be clever). (This letter incidentally is also being transmitted to the authors of the piece at the Fed in Saint Louis for their comments in turn.) Molly and Tom, economists let's note, have in their article trotted out a tired old trick that has been around for a long time in the 'give the poor a Beetle instead ' variant of transit bashing. This is not only one of the oldest games in town but also I am afraid rather mean-spirited stuff, because it attacks LRT on the cheap, dragging it out of its full and necessary longer term and structural context. (Not incidentally that I have LRT on my personal short list for immediate action to move toward more sustainable mobility system, but more on that another day.) We have to look at and decide about LRT case by case and as part of a larger package of policies, actions and services. And indeed perhaps its major contribution in many places where they managed to get it right is that it works to catalyze and justify a whole web of related transportation improvements -- including for walkers, cyclists, and users of other parts of the transit system - which otherwise just may not have got done, or at least had to wait another and perhaps far distant day. Moreover, when wisely done as we have seen in many places, let's cite Portland Oregon as one of many shining examples in the US, it helps to cluster activities. Pity that the authors stretched beyond their remit and competence to provide such a poor assault, but it's not the first time this has happened so no great damage is done. But the Bible says that "out of the mouths of babes and sucklings may come the greater truth", and if suckings also includes economists, well then we have to listen. By this I mean that the major contribution of their piece lies elsewhere, and specifically in the important section in which they kindly explain to us what externalities are and then go on the make the critical point in which I believe all (or at least most) of us are in full agreement: and that is that drivers should pay their way (just like airline passengers, eh?). The trick of course is how to create a new culture -because that is definitely what it will take - in which this is accepted. Because once it is, IT CHANGES EVERYTHING! Hmm. Let's think about that.. One small step might be for you to go to the New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org and cast your vote for Ken Livingstone and Congestion Charging, warts and all. Or if not your vote, let us hear your vigorous views as to why that may not be the best way to go. In closing, kind thanks to the Molly and Tom, together with an invitation to tune in here if they wish to learn something about the full context of the little sub-issue that they chose to take on without apparently quite understanding the greater whole. Welcome. Sustainability and social justice is a big house. Eric Britton "Almost an economist" 1962-1966, Department of Economics, School of Graduate Faculties, Columbia University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040702/1afe14c6/attachment.html From kennaughkb at yahoo.com.au Fri Jul 2 16:58:09 2004 From: kennaughkb at yahoo.com.au (=?iso-8859-1?q?Kirk=20Bendall?=) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 17:58:09 +1000 (EST) Subject: [sustran] Re: Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context - a commentary In-Reply-To: <004f01c46002$807d6880$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <20040702075809.80088.qmail@web21321.mail.yahoo.com> Some quick comments: - if you are 9, or 99, a car is most likely an encumbrance. - what is the asset life, and value, remaining after the 5 years suggested?, 30 years (typical LRT vehicle life)? - another complication is car-km/trips, or LRT-Km/trips, or Bicycle-km/trips, will often be substituted on a non one-for-one basis. - a 0.5 percent increase in traffic IS significant if it moves traffic to 100% of capacity at the location in question - cost allocation for long-lived infrastructure is a whole new topic - how much should current weekday peak/weekend/night drivers contribute to an extra lane across the Mississippi? regards, Kirk Bendall Wollongong Australia www.illawarra.transinfo.info --- ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr wrote: > -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of P. > Christopher Zegras > Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 7:50 PM > Subject: Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context > > > >From the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.... > http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > Thanks Chris for that good heads-up on the LRT > piece. A comment and > invitation for further discussions if I may, since I > think this gives us > a policy platform which stretches well beyond the > intention of the > authors (which was basically to be clever). (This > letter incidentally > is also being transmitted to the authors of the > piece at the Fed in > Saint Louis for their comments in turn.) > > Molly and Tom, economists let's note, have in their > article trotted out > a tired old trick that has been around for a long > time in the 'give the > poor a Beetle instead ' variant of transit bashing. > This is not only > one of the oldest games in town but also I am afraid > rather > mean-spirited stuff, because it attacks LRT on the > cheap, dragging it > out of its full and necessary longer term and > structural context. (Not > incidentally that I have LRT on my personal short > list for immediate > action to move toward more sustainable mobility > system, but more on > that another day.) > > We have to look at and decide about LRT case by case > and as part of a > larger package of policies, actions and services. > And indeed perhaps its > major contribution in many places where they managed > to get it right is > that it works to catalyze and justify a whole web of > related > transportation improvements -- including for > walkers, cyclists, and > users of other parts of the transit system - which > otherwise just may > not have got done, or at least had to wait another > and perhaps far > distant day. Moreover, when wisely done as we have > seen in many places, > let's cite Portland Oregon as one of many shining > examples in the US, it > helps to cluster activities. > > Pity that the authors stretched beyond their remit > and competence to > provide such a poor assault, but it's not the first > time this has > happened so no great damage is done. > > But the Bible says that "out of the mouths of babes > and sucklings may > come the greater truth", and if suckings also > includes economists, well > then we have to listen. > > > > By this I mean that the major contribution of their > piece lies > elsewhere, and specifically in the important section > in which they > kindly explain to us what externalities are and then > go on the make the > critical point in which I believe all (or at least > most) of us are in > full agreement: and that is that drivers should pay > their way (just like > airline passengers, eh?). > > In closing, kind thanks to the Molly and Tom, > together with an > invitation to tune in here if they wish to learn > something about the > full context of the little sub-issue that they chose > to take on without > apparently quite understanding the greater whole. > Welcome. > Sustainability and social justice is a big house. > > Eric Britton > > Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 2 17:30:20 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 10:30:20 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage Message-ID: <007001c4600e$d581d1c0$6501a8c0@home> Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe We have decided to work up a set of "Profiles of Courage", brief but sharp reminders of how a handful of hard-headed, far sighted mayors in (this list is in progress) Brazil, Britain, Colombia, Canada, France, Germany, and yes even the United States of America, have managed to turn around vital transport elements of their city and get them off the old path and onto that of a sustainable system (bit by bit). We hope to be able to share these with you before the end of the summer. Do you have candidates (let?s note that we have not yet identified anyone from Asia or Africa in this lot)? Do you have information on any of these mayors that should be integrated into the profiles? Let us know. Several of these cases are well known to all of you here ? for example the stories of Jaime Lerner and Enrique Pe?alosa ? but others are less known. And in any event I think that what will be important about this little collection is that by putting them next to each other and searching out the communalities and lessons in terms specifically of what is needed to break the old patterns, we will be able to help show the way for others. After all, there have to be some mayors out there who are ready to go and who may need just this nudge to greatness. I would intend to post these, possibly one by one on the site over the two months ahead so that you will have an opportunity to comment, which comments we shall of course take into fullest consideration. Note: Is there anyone out there who would like to take on this task for us? Either the whole thing or individual profiles that I could then try to whip into shape so that the whole lot reads as of a piece. I think it?s a important and timely challenge, and all offers of help will be gratefully received. Eric Britton PS. This could very nicely be sponsored by some international organization of local government, mayors or what have you. Or a foundation or anyone else who thinks this could be important and worth doing. The only condition, in addition to our being pleased to take their money and have a high profile public rostrum to get the news out, is that they cannot in any way influence the work in progress or final product. ;-) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040702/88c7c897/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Sat Jul 3 01:46:52 2004 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 09:46:52 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context - a commentary In-Reply-To: <20040702075809.80088.qmail@web21321.mail.yahoo.com> References: <004f01c46002$807d6880$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20040702094034.04162168@mail.highspeedplus.com> These issues are discussed in the 'Comparing Automobile and Transit Costs' section of our report "Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs" (http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf). Castelazo and Garrett's article exhibits nearly all of the 'Common Errors Made When Comparing Transit and Automobile Transport.' described in my report. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 05:58 PM 7/2/2004 +1000, Kirk Bendall wrote: >Some quick comments: >- if you are 9, or 99, a car is most likely an >encumbrance. > >- what is the asset life, and value, remaining after >the 5 years suggested?, 30 years (typical LRT vehicle >life)? > >- another complication is car-km/trips, or >LRT-Km/trips, or Bicycle-km/trips, will often be >substituted on a non one-for-one basis. > >- a 0.5 percent increase in traffic IS significant if >it moves traffic to 100% of capacity at the location >in question - cost allocation for long-lived >infrastructure is a whole new topic - how much should >current weekday peak/weekend/night drivers contribute >to an extra lane across the Mississippi? > >regards, >Kirk Bendall >Wollongong Australia >www.illawarra.transinfo.info > >--- ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr wrote: > -----Original >Message----- On Behalf Of P. > > Christopher Zegras > > Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 7:50 PM > > Subject: Interesting Piece on LRT in US Context > > > > > > >From the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.... > > >http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pdf/light_rail.pdf > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > > Thanks Chris for that good heads-up on the LRT > > piece. A comment and > > invitation for further discussions if I may, since I > > think this gives us > > a policy platform which stretches well beyond the > > intention of the > > authors (which was basically to be clever). (This > > letter incidentally > > is also being transmitted to the authors of the > > piece at the Fed in > > Saint Louis for their comments in turn.) > > > > Molly and Tom, economists let's note, have in their > > article trotted out > > a tired old trick that has been around for a long > > time in the 'give the > > poor a Beetle instead ' variant of transit bashing. > > This is not only > > one of the oldest games in town but also I am afraid > > rather > > mean-spirited stuff, because it attacks LRT on the > > cheap, dragging it > > out of its full and necessary longer term and > > structural context. (Not > > incidentally that I have LRT on my personal short > > list for immediate > > action to move toward more sustainable mobility > > system, but more on > > that another day.) > > > > We have to look at and decide about LRT case by case > > and as part of a > > larger package of policies, actions and services. > > And indeed perhaps its > > major contribution in many places where they managed > > to get it right is > > that it works to catalyze and justify a whole web of > > related > > transportation improvements -- including for > > walkers, cyclists, and > > users of other parts of the transit system - which > > otherwise just may > > not have got done, or at least had to wait another > > and perhaps far > > distant day. Moreover, when wisely done as we have > > seen in many places, > > let's cite Portland Oregon as one of many shining > > examples in the US, it > > helps to cluster activities. > > > > Pity that the authors stretched beyond their remit > > and competence to > > provide such a poor assault, but it's not the first > > time this has > > happened so no great damage is done. > > > > But the Bible says that "out of the mouths of babes > > and sucklings may > > come the greater truth", and if suckings also > > includes economists, well > > then we have to listen. > > > > > > > > By this I mean that the major contribution of their > > piece lies > > elsewhere, and specifically in the important section > > in which they > > kindly explain to us what externalities are and then > > go on the make the > > critical point in which I believe all (or at least > > most) of us are in > > full agreement: and that is that drivers should pay > > their way (just like > > airline passengers, eh?). > > > > > In closing, kind thanks to the Molly and Tom, > > together with an > > invitation to tune in here if they wish to learn > > something about the > > full context of the little sub-issue that they chose > > to take on without > > apparently quite understanding the greater whole. > > Welcome. > > Sustainability and social justice is a big house. > > > > Eric Britton > > > > > >Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. >http://au.movies.yahoo.com Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 Email: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org From vlele at vsnl.net Sun Jul 4 15:33:49 2004 From: vlele at vsnl.net (VijayLele) Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:03:49 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] "Seven Sustainable Mayors":Profiles of Courage References: <007001c4600e$d581d1c0$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <40E7A4CD.2E5E03CD@vsnl.net> I think your "Profiles in Courage" is a commendable idea. Those who innovate and undertake challenges deserve recognition. It also inspires others. However, as far as India is concerned, it would be difficult to identify a mayor who has done something novel in the area we are talking about. The pattern of election/nomination here is party based. Usually, the character is a majority party cohort, and the parties themselves have a none-to- clean record in local governance in the matter we are talking about. Moreover, the mayor has little executive / discretionary power to achieve anything fundamental. It is more likely that in India one might find a dynamic or upright Muncipal Commissioner, or such bureacrat who, prompted by his vision and understanding, manages to achieve something despite the tangles created by politicians. Vijay Lele Pune Traffic and Transportation Forum eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > We have decided to work up a set of "Profiles of Courage", brief but > sharp reminders of how a handful of hard-headed, far sighted mayors in > (this list is in progress) Brazil, Britain, Colombia, Canada, France, > Germany, and yes even the United States of America, have managed to turn > around vital transport elements of their city and get them off the old > path and onto that of a sustainable system (bit by bit). We hope to be > able to share these with you before the end of the summer. > > Do you have candidates (let?s note that we have not yet identified > anyone from Asia or Africa in this lot)? Do you have information on any > of these mayors that should be integrated into the profiles? Let us > know. > > Several of these cases are well known to all of you here ? for example > the stories of Jaime Lerner and Enrique Pe?alosa ? but others are less > known. And in any event I think that what will be important about this > little collection is that by putting them next to each other and > searching out the communalities and lessons in terms specifically of > what is needed to break the old patterns, we will be able to help show > the way for others. After all, there have to be some mayors out there > who are ready to go and who may need just this nudge to greatness. > > I would intend to post these, possibly one by one on the site over the > two months ahead so that you will have an opportunity to comment, which > comments we shall of course take into fullest consideration. > > Note: Is there anyone out there who would like to take on this task for > us? Either the whole thing or individual profiles that I could then try > to whip into shape so that the whole lot reads as of a piece. I think > it?s a important and timely challenge, and all offers of help will be > gratefully received. > > Eric Britton > > PS. This could very nicely be sponsored by some international > organization of local government, mayors or what have you. Or a > foundation or anyone else who thinks this could be important and worth > doing. The only condition, in addition to our being pleased to take > their money and have a high profile public rostrum to get the news out, > is that they cannot in any way influence the work in progress or final > product. ;-) > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> > Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/2GfwlB/TM > --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> > > The New Mobility/World Transport Agenda > Consult at: http://wTransport.org > To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com > To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WorldTransport/ > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > From matthias_mueth at hotmail.com Tue Jul 6 18:23:37 2004 From: matthias_mueth at hotmail.com (matthias mueth) Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:23:37 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Urban Transport and Political Decision Making Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/49c61f15/attachment.html From matthias_mueth at hotmail.com Tue Jul 6 18:23:37 2004 From: matthias_mueth at hotmail.com (matthias mueth) Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:23:37 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Urban Transport and Political Decision Making Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/49c61f15/attachment-0001.html From arndt at wbcsd.org Tue Jul 6 18:26:50 2004 From: arndt at wbcsd.org (arndt@wbcsd.org) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:26:50 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Global action needed to make transport sustainable Message-ID: Global action needed to make transport sustainable -------------------------------------------------- Read the press release online: http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6097 Access the report: http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&DocId=6094 -------------------------------------------------- Brussels, 5 July 2004 - Global cooperation to limit the adverse social and environmental impact of motor vehicles, complemented by further technology advances, is needed to fulfil transport's vital role in the development of modern society, states Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability, a report released by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) today. The report was developed by 12 global automotive and energy companies who have worked together over the past four years, under the sponsorship of the WBCSD to assess the sustainability of their products and to envision the future of mobility, with special focus on road transport. The report defines sustainable mobility as "the ability to meet the needs of society to move freely, gain access, communicate, trade and establish relationships without sacrificing other essential human or ecological values today or in the future." According to the report, if current mobility trends were to continue, social, economic and environmental costs worldwide would be unacceptably high. However, those costs can be avoided if society as a whole focuses on the achievement of seven goals set out in the report. (Please refer to notes to editors) The report says that mobility can be made sustainable. However, this is beyond the capabilities of any one company, one industry or one country to resolve, and will require cooperation and effort from every level of society. The report identifies no 'magic bullet' solution. In addition, it says some mobility challenges will take up to half a century to resolve, but action should be started now. The project was undertaken in early 2000 to develop a clearer understanding of how both developed and developing societies can most effectively address the adverse effects of increasing levels of transport activity. Project Co-chair, Jeroen van der Veer, Chairman of the Committee of Managing Directors, Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies said, "This project represents a major milestone in our industries facing up to the scale of the challenge to make transport sustainable in the 21st century." The report's seven goals include: ensuring conventional emissions from transport are not a significant health concern anywhere; limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport to sustainable levels; significantly reducing traffic-related deaths and serious injuries worldwide; reducing transport-related noise; mitigating traffic congestion; narrowing the divide in mobility opportunities that exists between and within different societies and regions of the world; and preserving and improving existing mobility opportunities. Dr. Shoichiro Toyoda, Honorary Chairman of Toyota, and also a project co-chair, emphasizes the report's finding that, "the key to sustainable mobility on a global basis will be achieving it in the developing world. Fundamental to achieving this is the need to narrow the mobility opportunity divides that exist within countries as well as between the world's poorest countries and the developed world." Senior executives of the member companies met on a periodic basis to review the project's progress. In addition, an Assurance Group, selected by the WBCSD and chaired by the Rt. Hon. Simon Upton, former environmental minister of New Zealand, commented regularly on the quality and integrity of the project's work. The project research included an extensive stakeholder dialogue process, beginning in November 2000, with dialogues convened in Tokyo, Brussels, Washington, D.C., Sao Paulo, Prague, Beijing, Cape Town and Manila. Mobility workshops were held in several locations, including , Shanghai, Paris, Mexico City and Nagoya. According to GM's Executive Vice President Tom Gottschalk, a project co-chair, the dialogues and workshops were designed to tap professional opinion around the world and to develop a clearer understanding and appreciation of the mobility challenges faced by different countries and regions. Mr. Gottschalk also stated that Mobility 2030 is intended to be a catalyst. "The challenges to sustaining mobility are significant," he said, "but they can be met over time, provided society supports constructive approaches and solutions and encourages real understanding and cooperation among stakeholders." He added, "This report contributes positively toward that goal." Further information +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Download the report (5.9 MB) http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/mobility-full.pdf Download the media pack (2.6 MB) http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/media.zip +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Contact: -------------------------------------------------- London Dirk van Eeden, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7080 Tania Menegatti, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7038 Mary Whenman, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7036 Brussels Sylvain Lhote, GPC International +32 2 285 46 14 Juliet Albiac, GPC International +32 2 282 09 85 Geneva Claudia Schweitzer, WBCSD +41 (22) 839 31 50 -------------------------------------------------- Notes to Editors +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Goal one: Ensure emissions of conventional pollutants from transport do not constitute a significant health concern anywhere in the world: Technology could drive conventional emissions down in developing countries. In the developed world, on the other hand, the focus will shift from setting standards towards making sure prescribed emission levels are met. "High emitter" vehicles are likely to attract the focus of attention. Goal two: Limit greenhouse gas emissions from transport to sustainable levels: The SMP members argue that society's long-term goal should be to eliminate transport as a major source of GHG emissions but warn that this cannot be achieved until much later than 2030. In addition, the members believe that the portfolio of technology options they are currently pursuing for vehicle fuels and powertrains will be a significant factor in achieving stabilization of CO2 emissions. Stabilizing CO2 emissions from transport should form part of a larger strategy of policy measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions from all major sources. Goal three: Reduce significantly the number of transport related deaths and serious injuries worldwide: Programs to reduce deaths and serious injuries from road vehicle crashes should focus on at least four factors: driver behaviour, improvements in infrastructure, better technologies for crash avoidance, and injury mitigation. Goal Four: Reduce transport-related noise: Overall, traffic noise is not likely to decrease. However, local authorities can address the increase in traffic noise through a combination of road surfaces and barriers that dampen noise, and by restricting the modification of vehicles by owners and others. Manufacturers are also continuing to improve the noise performance of transport vehicles. Goal Five: Mitigate traffic congestion: Congestion cannot be eliminated entirely, but its effects can be lessened substantially. Actions aimed at relieving congestion would need to include increasing infrastructure capacity, eliminating infrastructure choke-points and making more efficient use of existing mobility systems and infrastructure. Information Technology Systems should play a key role in enabling this. Goal Six: Narrow mobility opportunity divides that inhibit inhabitants of poorest countries and economically and socially disadvantaged groups within most countries from achieving better lives. This divide inhibits growth and works against the efforts of the very poorest countries and peoples to escape poverty. Sustainable mobility requires that the gap be narrowed. Goal Seven: Preserve and enhance mobility opportunities for the general populations in developed and developing countries: Improved mobility opportunities for all societies - developed and developing - is an important pre-requisite for future economic growth as well as forming the basis of a more sustainable global mobility system based on wider access and greater affordability. The SMP encourages the development of inexpensive motorized vehicles that are appropriate to the harsh road environments typically found in some developing countries. In urban areas, pricing strategies will be needed to encourage the effective use of existing conventional public transport systems. Thorsten Arndt Online Communications Manager World Business Council for Sustainable Development 4, chemin de Conches 1231 Conches, Geneva, Switzerland Phone: +41 (22) 8393 170 Fax: +41 (22) 8393 131 E-mail: arndt@wbcsd.org Visit the "Best source of information on business and SD" (2003 Earthscan survey): www.wbcsd.org Sign up for our Business & Sustainable Development newsletters! http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/mywbcsd/default.asp From arndt at wbcsd.org Tue Jul 6 18:26:50 2004 From: arndt at wbcsd.org (arndt@wbcsd.org) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:26:50 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Global action needed to make transport sustainable Message-ID: Global action needed to make transport sustainable -------------------------------------------------- Read the press release online: http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6097 Access the report: http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&DocId=6094 -------------------------------------------------- Brussels, 5 July 2004 - Global cooperation to limit the adverse social and environmental impact of motor vehicles, complemented by further technology advances, is needed to fulfil transport's vital role in the development of modern society, states Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability, a report released by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) today. The report was developed by 12 global automotive and energy companies who have worked together over the past four years, under the sponsorship of the WBCSD to assess the sustainability of their products and to envision the future of mobility, with special focus on road transport. The report defines sustainable mobility as "the ability to meet the needs of society to move freely, gain access, communicate, trade and establish relationships without sacrificing other essential human or ecological values today or in the future." According to the report, if current mobility trends were to continue, social, economic and environmental costs worldwide would be unacceptably high. However, those costs can be avoided if society as a whole focuses on the achievement of seven goals set out in the report. (Please refer to notes to editors) The report says that mobility can be made sustainable. However, this is beyond the capabilities of any one company, one industry or one country to resolve, and will require cooperation and effort from every level of society. The report identifies no 'magic bullet' solution. In addition, it says some mobility challenges will take up to half a century to resolve, but action should be started now. The project was undertaken in early 2000 to develop a clearer understanding of how both developed and developing societies can most effectively address the adverse effects of increasing levels of transport activity. Project Co-chair, Jeroen van der Veer, Chairman of the Committee of Managing Directors, Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies said, "This project represents a major milestone in our industries facing up to the scale of the challenge to make transport sustainable in the 21st century." The report's seven goals include: ensuring conventional emissions from transport are not a significant health concern anywhere; limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport to sustainable levels; significantly reducing traffic-related deaths and serious injuries worldwide; reducing transport-related noise; mitigating traffic congestion; narrowing the divide in mobility opportunities that exists between and within different societies and regions of the world; and preserving and improving existing mobility opportunities. Dr. Shoichiro Toyoda, Honorary Chairman of Toyota, and also a project co-chair, emphasizes the report's finding that, "the key to sustainable mobility on a global basis will be achieving it in the developing world. Fundamental to achieving this is the need to narrow the mobility opportunity divides that exist within countries as well as between the world's poorest countries and the developed world." Senior executives of the member companies met on a periodic basis to review the project's progress. In addition, an Assurance Group, selected by the WBCSD and chaired by the Rt. Hon. Simon Upton, former environmental minister of New Zealand, commented regularly on the quality and integrity of the project's work. The project research included an extensive stakeholder dialogue process, beginning in November 2000, with dialogues convened in Tokyo, Brussels, Washington, D.C., Sao Paulo, Prague, Beijing, Cape Town and Manila. Mobility workshops were held in several locations, including , Shanghai, Paris, Mexico City and Nagoya. According to GM's Executive Vice President Tom Gottschalk, a project co-chair, the dialogues and workshops were designed to tap professional opinion around the world and to develop a clearer understanding and appreciation of the mobility challenges faced by different countries and regions. Mr. Gottschalk also stated that Mobility 2030 is intended to be a catalyst. "The challenges to sustaining mobility are significant," he said, "but they can be met over time, provided society supports constructive approaches and solutions and encourages real understanding and cooperation among stakeholders." He added, "This report contributes positively toward that goal." Further information +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Download the report (5.9 MB) http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/mobility-full.pdf Download the media pack (2.6 MB) http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/media.zip +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Contact: -------------------------------------------------- London Dirk van Eeden, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7080 Tania Menegatti, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7038 Mary Whenman, Fleishman-Hillard +44 (0)20 7395 7036 Brussels Sylvain Lhote, GPC International +32 2 285 46 14 Juliet Albiac, GPC International +32 2 282 09 85 Geneva Claudia Schweitzer, WBCSD +41 (22) 839 31 50 -------------------------------------------------- Notes to Editors +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Goal one: Ensure emissions of conventional pollutants from transport do not constitute a significant health concern anywhere in the world: Technology could drive conventional emissions down in developing countries. In the developed world, on the other hand, the focus will shift from setting standards towards making sure prescribed emission levels are met. "High emitter" vehicles are likely to attract the focus of attention. Goal two: Limit greenhouse gas emissions from transport to sustainable levels: The SMP members argue that society's long-term goal should be to eliminate transport as a major source of GHG emissions but warn that this cannot be achieved until much later than 2030. In addition, the members believe that the portfolio of technology options they are currently pursuing for vehicle fuels and powertrains will be a significant factor in achieving stabilization of CO2 emissions. Stabilizing CO2 emissions from transport should form part of a larger strategy of policy measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions from all major sources. Goal three: Reduce significantly the number of transport related deaths and serious injuries worldwide: Programs to reduce deaths and serious injuries from road vehicle crashes should focus on at least four factors: driver behaviour, improvements in infrastructure, better technologies for crash avoidance, and injury mitigation. Goal Four: Reduce transport-related noise: Overall, traffic noise is not likely to decrease. However, local authorities can address the increase in traffic noise through a combination of road surfaces and barriers that dampen noise, and by restricting the modification of vehicles by owners and others. Manufacturers are also continuing to improve the noise performance of transport vehicles. Goal Five: Mitigate traffic congestion: Congestion cannot be eliminated entirely, but its effects can be lessened substantially. Actions aimed at relieving congestion would need to include increasing infrastructure capacity, eliminating infrastructure choke-points and making more efficient use of existing mobility systems and infrastructure. Information Technology Systems should play a key role in enabling this. Goal Six: Narrow mobility opportunity divides that inhibit inhabitants of poorest countries and economically and socially disadvantaged groups within most countries from achieving better lives. This divide inhibits growth and works against the efforts of the very poorest countries and peoples to escape poverty. Sustainable mobility requires that the gap be narrowed. Goal Seven: Preserve and enhance mobility opportunities for the general populations in developed and developing countries: Improved mobility opportunities for all societies - developed and developing - is an important pre-requisite for future economic growth as well as forming the basis of a more sustainable global mobility system based on wider access and greater affordability. The SMP encourages the development of inexpensive motorized vehicles that are appropriate to the harsh road environments typically found in some developing countries. In urban areas, pricing strategies will be needed to encourage the effective use of existing conventional public transport systems. Thorsten Arndt Online Communications Manager World Business Council for Sustainable Development 4, chemin de Conches 1231 Conches, Geneva, Switzerland Phone: +41 (22) 8393 170 Fax: +41 (22) 8393 131 E-mail: arndt@wbcsd.org Visit the "Best source of information on business and SD" (2003 Earthscan survey): www.wbcsd.org Sign up for our Business & Sustainable Development newsletters! http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/mywbcsd/default.asp From czegras at MIT.EDU Wed Jul 7 05:59:07 2004 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (P. Christopher Zegras) Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 16:59:07 -0400 Subject: [sustran] BRT in the land of casinos... Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040706165422.02ca9de8@po9.mit.edu> http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2004/Jul-01-Thu-2004/news/24218704.html Las Vegas Review-Journal Thursday, July 01, 2004 MAX service gets under way New system draws attention from other cities By OMAR SOFRADZIJA REVIEW-JOURNAL -------------------------------------------------------------- [PHOTO] The Metropolitan Area Express bus line, known as MAX, pulls out of a stop on Las Vegas Boulevard North of Cheyenne Avenue on its first day of service Wednesday Photo by John Gurzinski. -------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- [PHOTO] Cynthia Demers carries Yasameen Janfada as the rest of the Janfada family checks out the interior of a new MAX bus Wednesday in North Las Vegas. Photo by John Gurzinski. -------------------------------------------------------------- The launch of the Las Vegas Valley's first rapid transit system Wednesday is expected to usher in an era of new, fast mass transit links in Southern Nevada and beyond. The Metropolitan Area Express bus line, known as MAX, began trips along Las Vegas Boulevard North and will be joined on July 15 by the ballyhooed Las Vegas Monorail running behind the Strip. Over the next few years, transit planners are looking at an expansion of the MAX network; extensions of the monorail to downtown Las Vegas and McCarran International Airport, and construction of a light-rail system from Henderson to North Las Vegas. But the eyes of the public transit world are more closely following the progress of the less heralded MAX. Since it doesn't need tracks, it could be a much cheaper alternative to light rail lines being contemplated elsewhere. "Everybody in America is going to be watching Las Vegas. We've already had about a dozen visits from other transit agencies," said Jacob Snow, general manager of the Regional Transportation Commission, which is operating MAX. Added Leslie Rogers, a regional administrator for the Federal Transit Administration: "We really believe it has the potential to revolutionize transit systems throughout the country." Transit agencies from Los Angeles, Boston, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Tampa, Fla., and Reno are among those keeping tabs on MAX, Snow said. And representatives from Washoe County and Phoenix were on hand for MAX opening ceremonies Wednesday morning in North Las Vegas. "There's a lot of medium-sized cities that are trying to decide whether to go (with) light rail" or a MAX-type system, Snow said. "And there's a lot of big cities that are interested in doing this to tie into their heavy rail systems." Although express bus systems have operated throughout the United States for years, MAX incorporates a unique combination of traits intended to maximize its speed. It operates on bus-only lanes, allowing it to avoid traffic congestion. It will make stops only at "stations" along its route, where commuters buy tickets from automated kiosks before boarding. That will minimize stop times. The MAX line also will be able to extend green lights at intersections. All those factors will allow MAX to travel its initial boulevard route from downtown Las Vegas to Nellis Air Force Base in 28 minutes, compared to 47 minutes for regular buses on that route. "We designed the Metropolitan Area Express system to be as much like a train as possible," Snow said. "It has its own right-of-way, so it doesn't have to get stuck in traffic." The high-tech, bullet-shaped buses use environmentally friendly, diesel-electric hybrid engines and optically guided computers to make precise station stops. MAX cost $19.4 million to set up here, or about $2.7 million a mile for its seven-mile route. That is far cheaper than $20 million to $30 million per mile typically needed for light rail, or the $148.6 million per mile needed for the monorail. Federal officials hope programs like MAX will give cities an affordable alternative to traditional rail when trying to improve mass transit. "We recognize as local communities respond to congestion, there is not one size that fits all. There is not one handy and convenient solution," Rogers said. "We want to provide choices. We believe the MAX system provides that sort of choice." Systems similar to the French-built MAX are in operation in Europe, but not in America. The system has drawn praise from the Sierra Club, which has been a big booster of light rail plans in the valley. "It's a service concept rather than the type of vehicle that's important," said Jane Feldman, a conservation chairwoman with the organization. "It's one of the better solutions for air quality problems, for congestion problems. It's great that we have it here in Las Vegas today." Most riders on the initial MAX route are expected to come from the existing Citizens Area Transit Route 113, the fourth-busiest CAT route in the valley with about 9,000 riders per day. The existing ridership on the route was one reason it was picked for MAX use, along with a high concentration of low-income service industry workers in that area who rely on mass transit to get to work in the resort corridor or Nellis, according to the RTC. Future MAX routes are expected along Boulder Highway, Rancho Drive, Flamingo Road, Charleston Boulevard and Tropicana and Sahara avenues. But it might be a while before those routes get buses. "I think it's probably another three or four years before we see another one (route)," Snow said. From dguruswamy at hotmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:45:15 2004 From: dguruswamy at hotmail.com (Dharm Guruswamy) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 10:45:15 -0400 Subject: [sustran] (Seoul, Korea) New traffic measures cause chaos Message-ID: New traffic measures cause chaos Seoul city introduced new traffic measures yesterday which left many people angry and late for work or school because of major congestion on roads caused by hiccups with pre-paid fare cards and changed bus routes. Many grumbled at inconveniences caused by lack of information from the Seoul Metropolitan Government on the new measures: higher subway and bus fares, bus-only lanes, bus-route changes, colored buses and a revamped prepaid traffic card. But while the majority of the city's more than 10 million residents may have suffered problems, some did get free rides on the subway in the morning and others did not have to pay bus fares. And, many said they had trouble-free and quicker bus journeys because of the exclusive bus lanes. The new T-money prepaid traffic card malfunctioned from around 7 a.m., angering many in a rush to get to work, school or other appointments. NEW TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN SEOUL - Buses run on bus-only lanes in Seongsan-ro, western Seoul while cars and trucks are stuck in a traffic jam on the first day of the new mass transport system. [The Korea Herald] The interruptions continued through the morning in many areas, but while the problem was being fixed the fare gates at subway stations were kept open so people could move in and out without paying. The problem was caused by the omission of computer data on the new transportation program transmitted by the Korean Smart Card, the company which manages the T-money card, officials said. Although the company and city government acted to bring the situation under control in about 1-1/2 hours, people who had problems said they find it hard to trust the cards. "I reached the office late due to the problem with my card. I am angry about the city government for handling the transportation system so shabbily," office worker Chung Jae-yoon said. The traffic card was not the only problem. People were confused by changes in bus routes and the color of buses. The city government decided to repaint its local buses in four colors - red, yellow, blue and green - to symbolize routes and areas where they operate, and changed all local bus routes. Many people unfamiliar with the new bus routes because of lack of information did not know what number color or bus to ride. "As usual, I waited for the bus at the stop near my house in the morning. But I could not find the bus that I always ride to go to the office," said 27-year old company worker Kim Dong-hwan. "Finally, a volunteer at the bus stop came up to me and said I have to wait at a different place for the bus I need." There were rare scenes at bus stops because of the confusion. Normally packed in the morning rush hour, many buses had no passengers as people stood around studying route guide maps with confused expressions on their faces. Citizens read transit information yesterday, the first day of the new transportation system in Seoul. Travelers who did not understand the routes were allowed to travel free on several bus routes, officials said. The bus-only lanes did not work well for drivers of cars and other vehicles. Although many bus drivers welcomed the new bus-only lanes, saying they could move more quickly because no other vehicles blocked them, car and taxi drivers wound up in big traffic jams. "All areas in Seoul were extremely congested because car drivers cannot turn or move freely due to the bus lanes. Especially bad were traffic jams in southern Seoul and Mapo, western Seoul," police said. The Bus Management System, a computer monitoring unit in each bus that assesses the traffic situation on a minute-to-minute basis, also played up. The BMS in some blue buses did not operate well and caused confusion among bus drivers and passengers alike. Adding to the woes are higher fares for subways and buses. The basic fare for a bus ride is now 800 won, compared to 650 won previously. Connections to satellite cities now range from 500 won to 1,400 won. The subway fares are up according to distance traveled, and in some cases, can raise a person's daily subway costs by as much as 50 percent. Many bus passengers, however, were pleased with the new traffic system, saying they had arrived at work or school early because of the bus-only lanes. "Every day, I experience terrible traffic. But I was able to arrive at school well in time today because of the bus lane," graduate school student Nah Geum-shil said. The Seoul government said it's too early to criticize the new traffic system. "We want citizens to wait for a while until the new transportation system settles down," the Metropolitan Government said. (younhee@heraldm.com) By O Youn-hee 2004.07.02 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/1e233115/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/1e233115/attachment-0004.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 21170 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/1e233115/attachment-0005.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 31192 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/1e233115/attachment-0006.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 26194 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/1e233115/attachment-0007.bin From dguruswamy at hotmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:52:50 2004 From: dguruswamy at hotmail.com (Dharm Guruswamy) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 10:52:50 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Congested Bangkok opens metro Message-ID: Congested Bangkok opens metro Bangkok is attempting to challenge its reputation as one of the world's most congested cities with the opening of a new subway system. On Saturday, Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulydej opened the first part of the network which officials hope will cut traffic by 50%. It is also hoped the Metro will cut pollution in the city. The trains are expected to carry up to 100,000 people an hour through Bangkok's most densely populated areas. Integrated transport Building the line has been an engineering feat, with tunnels cut deep into hard clay to avoid the waterlogged soil. Station entrances jut 90cm (three feet) above the pavement to prevent the annual flood waters streaming in. The line, built by a public-private partnership, will run 20 kilometres (12 miles) through the city. The $2.5bn route is the first of four planned routes, which officials hope will form part of an integrated transport network in the city. Taxi drivers have complained that the new network will harm their business. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/3862739.stm Published: 2004/07/03 12:04:09 GMT ? BBC MMIV -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/214fb43b/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1123 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040706/214fb43b/attachment.bin From roelof.wittink at cycling.nl Wed Jul 7 18:58:40 2004 From: roelof.wittink at cycling.nl (roelof.wittink@cycling.nl) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:58:40 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage In-Reply-To: <007001c4600e$d581d1c0$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <40EBE570.18389.9B7146@localhost> Eric, I have two candidates. One is Tasneem Essop, who is now Minister for the Environment of the province of the Western Cape, but she was minister of Transport and she established in close cooperation with the authorities of the city of Cape Town a team to develop planning of a BRT system in combination with cycling and walking facilities on the Klipfontein Road in Cape Town. As well she announced to develop a provincial strategy for NMT and organised twice a car free day on Klipfontein Road. The other is Lord Mayor Kleist A. Sykes from Dar Es Salaam who set up also the planning of a BRT system in combination with cycling and walking facilities, on Morogoro Road . For more information on them, please contact Andrew Wheeldon in Cape Town and Asteria Mlambo in Dar. I copied this mail to them. best regards roelof wittink On 2 Jul 2004 at 10:30, eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > > Friday, July 02, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > We have decided to work up a set of "Profiles of Courage", brief but > sharp reminders of how a handful of hard-headed, far sighted mayors in > (this list is in progress) Brazil, Britain, Colombia, Canada, France, > Germany, and yes even the United States of America, have managed to > turn around vital transport elements of their city and get them off > the old path and onto that of a sustainable system (bit by bit). We > hope to be able to share these with you before the end of the summer. > > Do you have candidates (let?s note that we have not yet identified > anyone from Asia or Africa in this lot)? Do you have information on > any of these mayors that should be integrated into the profiles? Let > us know. > > Several of these cases are well known to all of you here ? for example > the stories of Jaime Lerner and Enrique Pe?alosa ? but others are less > known.? And in any event I think that what will be important about > this little collection is that by putting them next to each other and > searching out the communalities and lessons in terms specifically of > what is needed to break the old patterns, we will be able to help show > the way for others. ?After all, there have to be some mayors out there > who are ready to go and who may need just this nudge to greatness. > > I would intend to post these, possibly one by one on the site over the > two months ahead so that you will have an opportunity to comment, > which comments we shall of course take into fullest consideration. > > Note: Is there anyone out there who would like to take on this task > for us? Either the whole thing or individual profiles that I could > then try to whip into shape so that the whole lot reads as of a piece. > ?I think it?s a important and timely challenge, and all offers of help > will be gratefully received. > > Eric Britton > > PS. This could very nicely be sponsored by some international > organization of local government, mayors or what have you.? Or a > foundation or anyone else who thinks this could be important and worth > doing. The only condition, in addition to our being pleased to take > their money and have a high profile public rostrum to get the news > out, is that they cannot in any way influence the work in progress or > final product. ?;-) > > ******************************************************* Roelof Wittink, Director I-ce = Interface for Cycling Expertise Trans 3, 3512 JJ Utrecht, The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)30 2304521 fax: +31 (0)30 2312384 email (general): i-ce@cycling.nl email (personal): roelof.wittink@cycling.nl website: www.i-ce.info ******************************************************* From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jul 7 19:28:19 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 12:28:19 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Mobility Report Message-ID: <005b01c4640d$203d0980$6501a8c0@home> Toward Sustainable Mobility Reprinted from Innovation Briefs, July/August 2004 Four years ago, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, a loose coalition of 170 international companies drawn from 35 countries, launched an ambitious new project to investigate "pathways to sustainable mobility." The 12 sponsoring member companies read like a Who's Who in the world of energy and automotive enterprises. They include BP, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Nissan, Michelin, Norsk Hydro, Renault, Shell, Toyota and Volkswagen. "It is our collective view that the mobility sector will not be healthy over the long term unless mobility is made sustainable," the consortium members declared in a joint statement. Since the publication of its initial MIT-authored report, "Mobility 2001: World Mobility at the End of the Twentieth Century," in October 2001, (see, "Can Mobility be Made Sustainable?" Innovation Briefs, Nov/Dec 2001), the consortium, ably assisted by its lead consultant, George C. Eads, Vice President of Charles River Associates, has engaged in a broad inquiry of how the mobility-related trends identified in the MIT report might evolve over the next several decades and what approaches might be available to influence this evolution in ways that would make mobility more sustainable. The results have just been published in a 180-page report entitled "Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainable Mobility," released in Brussels on the fifth of July. For the full text, see below C. Kenneth Orski korski@erols.com tel: 301.299.1996 fax: 301.299.4425 http://www.innobriefs.com Vol. 15, No. 5 Automobile-Related/Environmental Issues Jul/Aug 2004 Toward Sustainable Mobility Reprinted from Innovation Briefs, July/August 2004 T he project adopted a four-stage methodology. In the first stage, it developed a set of 12 key indicators that could be used to measure the conditions of "sustainable mobility." The next task involved projecting how these indicators might evolve over the next several decades if present trends continued. These projections were then used to assess whether mobility is likely to become more or less sustainable than it is today. The report's conclusion was unambiguous: "Today's system of mobility is not sustainable; nor is it likely to become so if present trends continue." While the report conceded that not all indicators point to a worsening of the situation, enough of them do, to indicate that societies need to act to alter direction. Among the goals the project considered the most important to improving the prospects for sustainable mobility were reductions in conventional and greenhouse gas emissions, a decrease in highway injuries, reduction in traffic congestion, provision of a wider range of personal transport options, and a narrowing of the "mobility opportunities divide" between the developed and developing countries. Turning to specifics, the report devotes a separate chapter to assessing the potential contribution of alternative vehicle technologies and fuels. It sees considerable promise in diesel and hybrid electric propulsion systems but is more skeptical about the prospects for fuel cell systems. "Substantial obstacles must be overcome before the fuel cell can be considered to be a realistic commercial alternative to conventional propulsion systems," the report states, reflecting the preponderant opinion of the world scientific community. The initial market launch of fuel-cell passenger cars is predicted to occur no earlier than 2015, with significant high volume production not until 2020. The report devotes the final chapter to a discussion of the likelihood of achieving the goals of sustainable mobility by 2030 and beyond. In the developed world, the report speculates, "conventional" pollutants (CO, HC, NOx) are likely to decline sharply during the next few decades-but less so in developing countries, unless the cost of emission control equipment and cleaner fuels can be reduced significantly. As for transport-related greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions, the report estimates they are likely to more than double worldwide by 2050, which, it contends, would be "clearly unsustainable." There follows a lengthy discussion on how this scenario might be avoided. The report concludes that a widespread adoption of advanced fuel and vehicle technologies plus aggressive travel demand management policies throughout the world would be required to return 2050 transport-related CO2 emission levels to their 2000 levels. Given the developing world's time lag in adopting new technologies, even that projection could turn out to be overly optimistic. Road safety improvements and congestion mitigation are given a somewhat more cursory treatment, considering how much more attention these two issues command in the member countries compared to greenhouse gas emissions. On the other hand, a discussion of how to increase mobility options and narrow the "mobility opportunity divide" between developed and developing nations is thorough and imaginative. Of particular interest is the treatment of the potential contribution of paratransit and car sharing-both playing a marginal role in developed countries-to increasing personal mobility in the developing world. The report concludes with a short but revealing discussion of the limitations of governments and the private sector to move toward more sustainable patterns of mobility. Limits on institutional capacity rather than limits on technology will likely determine the speed with which the sustainable mobility challenges will be addressed-or whether they get addressed at all. "Achieving sustainable mobility is almost certain to require changes in transport systems and in how society uses them...and the changes that may be needed may put great pressures on some societies' political, cultural and economic institutions," the report states. "There is no guarantee that different societies will be able (or willing) to undergo these changes." The report is equally sober in assessing the contribution of private industry in achieving sustainable mobility. It frankly recognizes the limited role that the member companies can play in reducing greenhouse emissions, improving road safety, narrowing the mobility gap between developed and developing countries or achieving any of the other goals. To quote the report, "Our ability to act independently in many areas is extremely limited.... We cannot justify the production of vehicles that customers won't buy or produce and distribute fuels for which there is little or no demand.... We have limited leverage in narrowing the "mobility opportunity divide" and little influence over whether societies will choose to adopt new mobility options. But U.S. representatives to the Sustainable Mobility Project took a more upbeat view. "We have a lot that we can do, and we are already hard at work in many areas, especially technology," said Lewis Dale, Director of Environment and Energy at GM's Public Policy Center. "The important point to understand is that sustainability in mobility requires cooperative efforts on the part of many elements of society, including consumers, businesses and governments." Deborah Zemke, Director of Corporate Governance at the Ford Motor Company, echoed these sentiments: the report is "a call to action for more sectors and stakeholders to engage with us," she told us. The report will surely be used by the international automotive industry to counter criticism that it "does not care about the environment." However, the report's contention that the industry has only limited powers to affect progress toward sustainability is surely going to be challenged by environmental critics pointing out the U.S. automakers' long-standing opposition to raising fuel efficiency standards. Although the report glosses over the considerable differences among the sponsoring companies about prospects for different fuels and propulsion technologies and the time needed for commercializing them (the main contenders being hybrid-electric systems, fuel cells, hydrogen-burning internal combustion engines and new-generation diesels), member companies deserve credit for reaching a consensus on many of the potential strategies to reach sustainable mobility. It remains to be seen whether the report will have a lasting impact. Will it serve as a catalyst for advancing the sustainable mobility agenda within the sponsoring member companies? Will it set an example for other transport-related industries, as the GM and Ford representatives hope, to undertake similar assessments to build a more complete picture? Will it influence government policies of the participants' countries? Or will the report, after a short burst of publicity, be quietly laid to rest and quickly forgotten? While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and good faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on the environment. # -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040707/a19728ef/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jul 7 19:30:24 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 12:30:24 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? Message-ID: <006201c4640d$6a8f1190$6501a8c0@home> Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original caretaker of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit years ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us an abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite commentary on it here. He writes: "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and good faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on the environment." Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the solution (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as I keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and good faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular exercise. I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, isn't the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that we need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should that take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty much the way it looks around here.) Eric Britton The Commons, Paris " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant administrators and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the path to a more sustainable and more just society." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040707/81c973fe/attachment-0001.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jul 7 21:46:44 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:46:44 +0200 Subject: [sustran] For more on WBCSD report Message-ID: <00a901c46420$76ba52f0$6501a8c0@home> If you go to the New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org and click NewMob News, you can scroll through there and see a number of recent/current commentaries and views on this. Some examples (most of which just rehash the media releases, but later we should start to see some real action): * http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&DocId=NjA 5Nw (The formal release) * http://www.socialfunds.com/news/release.cgi/2860.html * http://www.euractiv.com/cgi-bin/cgint.exe?204&OIDN=1507979&-tt=tp * http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 * http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/news/industry_news/news-55dojo070d If nothing else, this serves us as a reminder of how good they are at getting their word out. And us? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040707/954f9a7b/attachment.html From arndt at wbcsd.org Wed Jul 7 21:51:18 2004 From: arndt at wbcsd.org (arndt@wbcsd.org) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:51:18 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: For more on WBCSD report Message-ID: Hi Eric, here are two more articles that may be of interest: Subsidies urged for environmentally friendly cars Financial Times, 6 July 2004 - Environmentally friendly cars will only be a success if governments reform tax and subsidy regimes to encourage consumers to buy them, a report backed by leading motor manufacturers warned yesterday. http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6170 World Business Council Sees Cars As A Global Problem IPS, 5 July 2004 - Global cooperation is needed to limit the impact of motor vehicles, according to a new report released Monday. http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6206 Thorsten Arndt Online Communications Manager World Business Council for Sustainable Development 4, chemin de Conches 1231 Conches, Geneva, Switzerland Phone: +41 (22) 8393 170 Fax: +41 (22) 8393 131 E-mail: arndt@wbcsd.org Visit the "Best source of information on business and SD" (2003 Earthscan survey): www.wbcsd.org Sign up for our Business & Sustainable Development newsletters! http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/mywbcsd/default.asp Sent by: sustran-discuss-bounces+arndt=wbcsd.org@list.jca.apc.org 07/07/2004 02:46 PM Please respond to Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport To: cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] For more on WBCSD report If you go to the New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org and click NewMob News, you can scroll through there and see a number of recent/current commentaries and views on this. Some examples (most of which just rehash the media releases, but later we should start to see some real action): http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&DocId=NjA5Nw (The formal release) http://www.socialfunds.com/news/release.cgi/2860.html http://www.euractiv.com/cgi-bin/cgint.exe?204&OIDN=1507979&-tt=tp http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/news/industry_news/news-55dojo070d If nothing else, this serves us as a reminder of how good they are at getting their word out. And us? From roelof.wittink at cycling.nl Wed Jul 7 22:10:05 2004 From: roelof.wittink at cycling.nl (roelof.wittink@cycling.nl) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 15:10:05 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? In-Reply-To: <006201c4640d$6a8f1190$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <40EC124D.12214.14AF15A@localhost> Dear Eric I had a short look at their conclusions and could not trace anywehre the word pedestrian or cycling. I am sure that they will defend their own agenda which easily comes in conflict with mine, but still I would hope they would be afraid if their efforts in producing such a report would be undermined by a coalition that points at some very obvious shortcomings and make them responsible to compensate for this by adopting some parts of the really sustainable transport agenda. roelof wittink ******************************************************* Roelof Wittink, Director I-ce = Interface for Cycling Expertise Trans 3, 3512 JJ Utrecht, The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)30 2304521 fax: +31 (0)30 2312384 email (general): i-ce@cycling.nl email (personal): roelof.wittink@cycling.nl website: www.i-ce.info ******************************************************* From roelof.wittink at cycling.nl Wed Jul 7 22:10:05 2004 From: roelof.wittink at cycling.nl (roelof.wittink@cycling.nl) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 15:10:05 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? In-Reply-To: <006201c4640d$6a8f1190$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <40EC124D.12214.14AF15A@localhost> Dear Eric I had a short look at their conclusions and could not trace anywehre the word pedestrian or cycling. I am sure that they will defend their own agenda which easily comes in conflict with mine, but still I would hope they would be afraid if their efforts in producing such a report would be undermined by a coalition that points at some very obvious shortcomings and make them responsible to compensate for this by adopting some parts of the really sustainable transport agenda. roelof wittink ******************************************************* Roelof Wittink, Director I-ce = Interface for Cycling Expertise Trans 3, 3512 JJ Utrecht, The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)30 2304521 fax: +31 (0)30 2312384 email (general): i-ce@cycling.nl email (personal): roelof.wittink@cycling.nl website: www.i-ce.info ******************************************************* From robert_cowherd at yahoo.com Thu Jul 8 01:10:32 2004 From: robert_cowherd at yahoo.com (Robert Cowherd) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? In-Reply-To: <006201c4640d$6a8f1190$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <20040707161032.65312.qmail@web11203.mail.yahoo.com> Of course reducing the impact of individual automobiles is a worthy goal. However, investments in lowering impacts threaten to only make matters worse if they merely serve to rationalize rising automobile use. I have yet to delve into Mobility 2003 but I'm concerned in general by the missing analysis of the considerable spatial impacts of transport choices and in particular that Goal Six: "Narrow mobility opportunity divides" can be taken as a euphemism for expanding markets for automobiles to the developing world. To the extent that this report displaces concern over land use impacts of automobility it deserves to be confronted by a more serious and broadly considered analysis. Robert Cowherd Rhode Island School of Design +1 617 491-8198 eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > > Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original > caretaker > of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit > years > ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us > an > abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. > His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite > commentary on it here. He writes: > > > > "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, > the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at > the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and > good > faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on > the environment." > > > > Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy > industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive > thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the > solution > (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as > I > keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in > helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that > reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and > good > faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular > exercise. > > > > > I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be > interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, > isn't > the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that > we > need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about > that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm > leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should > that > take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' > for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty > much the way it looks around here.) > > > > Eric Britton > > The Commons, Paris > > > > > > " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant > administrators > and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community > groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, > energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on > the > path to a more sustainable and more just society." > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe Thu Jul 8 01:31:59 2004 From: ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Carlos_Cordero_Vel=E1squez?=) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:31:59 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: For more on WBCSD report References: Message-ID: <001101c46440$0f32f9a0$a4b501c8@pentiumiii> I produce high toxic potatoes, but also a less high toxic potatoes. I also spend tons of money advertising my high toxic potatoes and a lot less advertising my less high toxic potatoes. Some other part of of the money we make goes to lobbies for contracts related to war in some distant countries. I am also part of the confederation of high toxic potatoes producers, and since we are unable to redirect our unsustainable investment pattern, we want the goverment to give us some subsidies. Because the problem is not with us, is a consumer problem. Does it not sound great? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 7:51 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: For more on WBCSD report > Hi Eric, > > here are two more articles that may be of interest: > > Subsidies urged for environmentally friendly cars > Financial Times, 6 July 2004 - Environmentally friendly cars will only be > a success if governments reform tax and subsidy regimes to encourage > consumers to buy them, a report backed by leading motor manufacturers > warned yesterday. > http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6170 > > > World Business Council Sees Cars As A Global Problem > IPS, 5 July 2004 - Global cooperation is needed to limit the impact of > motor vehicles, according to a new report released Monday. > http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTarget.asp?type=DocDet&id=6206 > > > Thorsten Arndt > Online Communications Manager > World Business Council for Sustainable Development > 4, chemin de Conches > 1231 Conches, Geneva, Switzerland > Phone: +41 (22) 8393 170 > Fax: +41 (22) 8393 131 > E-mail: arndt@wbcsd.org > > Visit the "Best source of information on business and SD" (2003 Earthscan > survey): www.wbcsd.org > > Sign up for our Business & Sustainable Development newsletters! > http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/mywbcsd/default.asp > > > > > > > > > Sent by: sustran-discuss-bounces+arndt=wbcsd.org@list.jca.apc.org > 07/07/2004 02:46 PM > Please respond to Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > > > To: > cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] For more on WBCSD report > > > If you go to the New Mobility Agenda at http://newmobility.org and click NewMob News, you can scroll through there and see a number of > recent/current commentaries and views on this. > > Some examples (most of which just rehash the media releases, but later we > should start to see some real action): > http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&DocId=NjA5Nw (The formal release) > http://www.socialfunds.com/news/release.cgi/2860.html > http://www.euractiv.com/cgi-bin/cgint.exe?204&OIDN=1507979&-tt=tp > http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 > http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/news/industry_news/news-55dojo070d > > If nothing else, this serves us as a reminder of how good they are at > getting their word out. And us? > > > From SCHIPPER at wri.org Wed Jul 7 21:17:32 2004 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 08:17:32 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? Message-ID: I was a strong supporter of the idea of the WBCSD, helping informally to set it up when I was at the IEA and then Shell Int'l. Long conversations with organizers at both auto and oil companies, potential consultants. Organized 1 of the expert forums (Mexico City, last year) and participated in a few others. I will read the material and report back here -- rumors fly that the final report is weak -- seems like the fuel companies are very agressive about clean fuels, which is the easy part, but the car makers are wont to say "less cars than otherwise", and that's really what all gazes into the future are all about. But let me look carefully first. >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 7/7/2004 6:30:24 AM >>> Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original caretaker of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit years ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us an abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite commentary on it here. He writes: "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and good faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on the environment." Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the solution (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as I keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and good faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular exercise. I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, isn't the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that we need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should that take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty much the way it looks around here.) Eric Britton The Commons, Paris " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant administrators and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the path to a more sustainable and more just society." From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Thu Jul 8 18:19:07 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:19:07 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Fwd: Shenzhen's first Car-free Day- 11 June 2004 Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F072@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:18:17 +0200 From: Subject: Shenzhen's first Car-free Day- 11 June 2004 Full text at: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-06/15/content_339364.htm Car-free Day drives home city's pollution concern Zheng Lifei 2004-06-15 06:39 While Beijing is staging the nation's largest auto show, South China's Shenzhen has taken the lead in trying to stay away from vehicles. It held its first Car-free Day on Friday. The two events - one intended to drive up car sales and the other designed to heighten awareness about the environmental toll the increasing number of cars is taking on the city - epitomizes a typical economic development dilemma. Since the world's first Car-free Day was held in France with the slogan "In Town Without My Car" in 1998, two Chinese cities have decided to take a stance - Chengdu in the southwestern province of Sichuan and now Shenzhen. Shenzhen's decision to hold the event was a direct response to its declining air quality, which was once one of the best in the country. Showing their support, more than 100,000 people, instead of driving their cars, walked, pedaled or rode buses to work that day. The soaring number of cars is the main culprit behind the deteriorating air quality in Shenzhen, which is similar to all other big metropolises in China. Obviously, a single car-free day is too symbolic to really improve the air pollution situation, as the rising number of cars leads to more exhaust emissions. The current backward exhaust emission standard, Euro II, is also adding to the problem. But hopefully, such a day can be the first step in making us realize how we have to take care of where we live. While it is impossible to discourage consumers from buying cars, as the car industry has already been designated as one of country's pillar industries, the government should take more concrete steps to address the worsening exhaust emission pollution situation as more people buy cars. Tightened controls over exhaust emissions and the speedy adoption of strict, environmentally friendly emission standards, for example, would be more effective in helping curb air pollution. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040708/8bba1a6f/attachment.html From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Thu Jul 8 19:16:00 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 12:16:00 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Shenzhen's first Car-free Day- comments In-Reply-To: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F072@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <00e101c464d4$93cd0db0$6501a8c0@home> Thursday, July 08, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Thank you Paul for posting that release to our fine group. I am afraid that I neglected to do so when posting it to our World Car-Free Days Consortium forum, somehow thinking that this news was already known to Sustran. Which brings me to the entire concept of Car/Free Days specifically in the context of our Asia/Pacific region. The truth is that it is a potentially powerful instrument for change, but if it is really to make the impact there the concept will basically have to be reinvented for the Asia/Pacific region. And that is a real team work project that can build on the experience in other parts of the world a well as the several projects that have thus afar been tried in the region. I would love to find either a city that would be willing to give this a real try, and/or some organization that would be willing to back a broader program for the region. For further background on accomplishments and thoughts thus far, let me invite you all to check into http://WorldCarFreeDay.com from time to time. It opens with the words: " Cities around the world are beginning to work with this ice-breaking sustainability approach. It's not research or theory; it is policy and practice. But proper preparations and follow-up are critical for success. WC/FD offers information, discussion space and an open forum for ideas, exchange and collaboration for people who care about sustainable transport and aren't afraid to work at it. " Anything we can do to help from here will be done. All you have to do is ask. With all good wishes, Eric Britton The Commons __ technology, economy, society__ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara 75006 Paris, France, Europe T: +331 4326 1323 Fax/Voicemail hotline: +331 5301 2896 W : http://www.ecoplan.org IP Videoconference: 81.65.50.149 E: Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org Personal webpage: www.EricBritton.org --- Outgoing mail certified Virus Free. Checked by Norton Anti-Virus. Version 9.05.15 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040708/6ea70969/attachment.html From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Jul 9 00:23:29 2004 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 11:23:29 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution, but how? References: Message-ID: <007101c464ff$8a0c0c60$32fa45cf@earthlink.net> I think that Lee is on to something. Maybe the main reason for this study is to be able to say that, thanks to efforts initiated by this study, the damage from growing car use will not be as bad as it would have been otherwise. I want to raise a few other points which I think are relevant: 1) There is massive overcapacity worldwide in the auto industry. There is intense pressure to increase car sales. The situation will only get worse, as China probably plans on trying to export huge numbers of cars and put some of the higher wage countries out of the business. 2) Why should any developing country be asked to conserve when the US, which has 4 percent of the world's population, consumes 25 percent of the world's gasoline? There isn't much hope of persuasion until the US starts to conserve. 3) Technology oriented people like to focus on fuel efficiency of vehicles. But this is roughly half the story. The other half is containing sprawl and not building auto-dependent communties. The US is such a fuel glutton because it has both very large vehicles AND weak land use planning. 4) Consuming land to accommodate autos is especially damaging near most of the great port/transportation hub cities. The reason they were located there in the first place is because of the superior farm land nearby or up river. So, low-density development also eliminates some of the world's best farmland. I give as an example Philadelphia, where I live. There are tens of thousands of empty lots and abandoned houses in the city proper, while McMansions are being built on rich farm land in the surrounding Delaware River basin. Eric Bruun ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Schipper" To: ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 8:17 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution, but how? > I was a strong supporter of the idea of the WBCSD, helping informally to > set it up when I was at the IEA and then Shell Int'l. Long conversations > with organizers at both auto and oil companies, potential consultants. > Organized 1 of the expert forums (Mexico City, last year) and > participated in a few others. > I will read the material and report back here -- rumors fly that the > final report is weak -- seems like the fuel companies are very agressive > about clean fuels, which is the easy part, but the car makers are wont > to say "less cars than otherwise", and that's really what all gazes into > the future are all about. But let me look carefully first. > > >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 7/7/2004 6:30:24 AM >>> > Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > > Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original > caretaker > of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit > years > ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us > an > abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. > His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite > commentary on it here. He writes: > > > > "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, > the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at > the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and > good > faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on > the environment." > > > > Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy > industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive > thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the > solution > (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as > I > keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in > helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that > reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and > good > faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular > exercise. > > > > > I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be > interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, > isn't > the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that > we > need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about > that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm > leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should > that > take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' > for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty > much the way it looks around here.) > > > > Eric Britton > > The Commons, Paris > > > > > > " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant > administrators > and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community > groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, > energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the > path to a more sustainable and more just society." > > > > > > > From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Jul 9 00:23:29 2004 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 11:23:29 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution, but how? References: Message-ID: <007101c464ff$8a0c0c60$32fa45cf@earthlink.net> I think that Lee is on to something. Maybe the main reason for this study is to be able to say that, thanks to efforts initiated by this study, the damage from growing car use will not be as bad as it would have been otherwise. I want to raise a few other points which I think are relevant: 1) There is massive overcapacity worldwide in the auto industry. There is intense pressure to increase car sales. The situation will only get worse, as China probably plans on trying to export huge numbers of cars and put some of the higher wage countries out of the business. 2) Why should any developing country be asked to conserve when the US, which has 4 percent of the world's population, consumes 25 percent of the world's gasoline? There isn't much hope of persuasion until the US starts to conserve. 3) Technology oriented people like to focus on fuel efficiency of vehicles. But this is roughly half the story. The other half is containing sprawl and not building auto-dependent communties. The US is such a fuel glutton because it has both very large vehicles AND weak land use planning. 4) Consuming land to accommodate autos is especially damaging near most of the great port/transportation hub cities. The reason they were located there in the first place is because of the superior farm land nearby or up river. So, low-density development also eliminates some of the world's best farmland. I give as an example Philadelphia, where I live. There are tens of thousands of empty lots and abandoned houses in the city proper, while McMansions are being built on rich farm land in the surrounding Delaware River basin. Eric Bruun ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Schipper" To: ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 8:17 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution, but how? > I was a strong supporter of the idea of the WBCSD, helping informally to > set it up when I was at the IEA and then Shell Int'l. Long conversations > with organizers at both auto and oil companies, potential consultants. > Organized 1 of the expert forums (Mexico City, last year) and > participated in a few others. > I will read the material and report back here -- rumors fly that the > final report is weak -- seems like the fuel companies are very agressive > about clean fuels, which is the easy part, but the car makers are wont > to say "less cars than otherwise", and that's really what all gazes into > the future are all about. But let me look carefully first. > > >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 7/7/2004 6:30:24 AM >>> > Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > > Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original > caretaker > of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit > years > ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us > an > abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. > His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite > commentary on it here. He writes: > > > > "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, > the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at > the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and > good > faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on > the environment." > > > > Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy > industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive > thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the > solution > (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as > I > keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in > helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that > reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and > good > faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular > exercise. > > > > > I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be > interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, > isn't > the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that > we > need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about > that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm > leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should > that > take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' > for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty > much the way it looks around here.) > > > > Eric Britton > > The Commons, Paris > > > > > > " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant > administrators > and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community > groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, > energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the > path to a more sustainable and more just society." > > > > > > > From ericbruun at earthlink.net Fri Jul 9 02:59:55 2004 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:59:55 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Fw: TfL press release - Jubilee Line Extension raises land value around 2 stations by estimated ?2.8billion Message-ID: <00c801c46515$63e224a0$32fa45cf@earthlink.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wetzel Dave" To: "'For Your Attention Personally'" Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 10:40 AM Subject: FW: TfL press release - Jubilee Line Extension raises land value around 2 stations by estimated ?2.8billion Hi Forgive me for bothering you but I'm forwarding this important press release as it confirms the work of Don Riley as published in his book "Taken For A Ride" where he claims that land values rose by ?13bn around the eleven new stations on the Jubilee Line Extension, here in London, UK. We now need to discuss how to access this value for transport purposes. I recommend we investigate Land Value Taxation (also called Site Value Rating) as an efficient and fair method for tapping into land values. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you require further information. Dave Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London. Windsor House. 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK Tel: 020 7941 4200 Windsor House is close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11, 24, 148, 211 and N11 pass the door. Nearest Tube: St. James's Park Underground station. Nearest mainline stations: Waterloo and Victoria (Both a walk or short bus ride). > From: TfL Press Office > Sent: 08 July 2004 09:32 > Subject: TfL press release - Jubilee line raises land value by > estimated ?2.8billion > > <<...OLE_Obj...>> > > <<...OLE_Obj...>> <<...OLE_Obj...>> > > No. 1084 > 08 July 2004 > > Jubilee line raises land value by estimated ?2.8billion at Canary Wharf > and Southwark Tube stations > > A report published today by Transport for London (TfL) suggests that the > uplift in land values attributed to the Jubilee Line Extension is in the > region of ?2.8billion in the proximity of Canary Wharf and Southwark > Underground stations. > > The pilot study, conducted by globally integrated real estate services and > money management firm Jones Lang LaSalle*, found that there has been a > positive impact on local property market values. > > The conclusions of the report, 'Land & Property Value Study - Assessing > the Change in Land & Property Values Attributable to the Jubilee Line > Extension' are that the estimated uplift in land values is in a wide > range, but in the order of: > > * ?2billion around Canary Wharf Underground station; > * > * ?800million around Southwark Underground station. > > Jones Lang LaSalle were commissioned by TfL to undertake a pilot study and > assess the impact of the Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) on land values at > two stations, Southwark and Canary Wharf. > > The methodology agreed at the outset with TfL involved using property > market evidence to assess value, applying this value appropriately to the > property stock in the defined study areas, and then estimating the effect > of the JLE by comparison with controls not materially affected by it. > > NOTES TO EDITORS: > For further information, please call the TfL Press Office on 020 7941 > 4141. > > *Jones Lang LaSalle is a globally integrated real estate services and > money management firm, operating across more than 100 markets around the > globe. The company provides comprehensive integrated expertise, including > management, transaction, advisory and real estate money management > services, to investors and occupiers locally, regionally and globally. > Jones Lang LaSalle is an industry leader in property and corporate > facility management services, with a portfolio of approximately 725 > million square feet (67 million square meters) under management worldwide. > LaSalle Investment Management, the company's real estate money management > business, is one of the world's largest and most diverse real estate money > management firms, with approximately $23 billion of assets under > management. For more information, visit www.joneslanglasalle.com. > > In deciding the extent of the study areas, it was assumed for the purposes > of this study that the majority of any value uplift would occur within a > 500m radius of each station for commercial uses and 750m for residential > uses. The areas used are loosely based on these dimensions. > > The pilot study examined value uplift from 1992 to 2002. It should be > noted that the results of the pilot study are sensitive to the start and > end dates chosen, and any different period adopted would give differing > results. > > Jones Lang LaSalle adopted controls based on indices covering large parts > of London in an attempt to isolate the effect of the JLE. This approach > has the defect of potentially underestimating the impact of the JLE > because they include, in some cases, the area affected by the JLE. > > The estimated land value uplift is sensitive to assumptions made in Jones > Lang LaSalle's analysis. These assumptions relate to both property stock > and value, because of the nature of the data available, and the need for > interpretation in the application of this data. For these reasons the > exercise is one of estimate and judgement, not calculation, hence the wide > range of figures reported. > > ATIS REAL Weatheralls were also commissioned to estimate the uplift in > land value as a result of the JLE using a different methodology and data > sets to those used by Jones Lang LaSalle. The consultants are expected to > finalise their work in summer 2004. > > The full report is available on the TfL website (www.tfl.gov.uk) at > www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/about/report-library/jle/extension.shtml. > > > > **************************************************************************** ******* The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******* From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Fri Jul 9 03:08:33 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:08:33 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <01b901c46516$96206d90$6501a8c0@home> Your thoughts on this? "Our" mayors, that handful of exceptional people who have not only done one or two good things for their city but who have by nature of their intervention changed the basic culture and the direction of their city - let's call that sustainability -- thus making it a very different place, had a certain number of things in common. One is that while able and ready to listen, when the action gets started they turn out to be especially hard headed people to make sure that the job gets done. Hard headed and thick skinned. Okay, we will see about that in time. But is it also true that these people are so different perhaps in part because they are not driven to work in their own car or their car of function, possibly with a driver. but that they either take the bus, bike, run/walk to somehow share a vehicle? Might that be part of the pattern? I know that some of the ones I happen to know best fall into that pattern. Because if it does, it would seem to lend another dimension to the phrase car-free. Since when we are freed of something we are also free to think without that encumbrance? And yes, kind thanks for those first notes of suggestion and your thoughts. Believe me I am taking all this very seriously. So thanks again. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040708/69919f5d/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Fri Jul 9 11:31:33 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 10:31:33 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F082@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> I keep hearing about remarkable changes in Seoul, Korea. Since the late 1990s there has been a remarkable increase in official attention to pedestrians and cyclists, much more bus priority (to complement subway expansions), parking restraint has been applied vigorously, and congestion charging was introduced on two major routes. And perhaps most amazing - an inner city elevated expressway was torn down and the buried stream beneath it has been brought back to the surface as a linear park. Now we hear about a new round of attempts to make public transport more integrated and have higher on-road priority. So three questions: - Where can we get more information on these changes? (Can anyone elaborate on the story? Maybe my impressions are not accurate? Can anyone point us towards a good written summary of these events and how they have come about?) - What triggered the changes in policy? - Which particular individuals ('Mayors' or otherwise) or organisations deserve recognition for these changes? (perhaps via Eric's "Profiles of Courage") All the best, Paul From lfwright at usa.net Fri Jul 9 18:33:33 2004 From: lfwright at usa.net (Lloyd Wright) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 05:33:33 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Message-ID: <452igiJhh5184S02.1089365613@uwdvg002.cms.usa.net> Dear Paul, Yes, Seoul has done some rather impressive improvements of late. The first phase of a bus priority scheme has just been launched with further BRT lines to be added. The destruction of the Cheonggyecheon elevated highway is quite remarkable, and certainly contrasts with the building of Segundo Piso in Mexico City (a massive elevated highway project) and the development of the Costanera Norte Highway in Santiago (which is essentially a highway replacing a river). The reclamation of the Cheonggyecheon waterway is still underway, as are some of the other projects that you have mentioned. Much of the credit goes to Mayor LEE Mung-Bak, who only took office in January 2003 (and most of the major projects such as Cheonggyecheon were quickly developed by his team). During his first week in office he took a team to Curitiba, and they have developed a nice exchange of ideas with other cities such as Curitiba. Much credit also goes to the team at Seoul Development Institute, which is a municipal agency providing designs and implementation concepts. I would recommend contacting Dr. KIM Gyeng-Chul at the SDI for more information on the progress in Seoul. If you are interested, let me know and I can provide contact details off list. Best regards, Lloyd Wright London "Barter, Paul" wrote: I keep hearing about remarkable changes in Seoul, Korea. Since the late 1990s there has been a remarkable increase in official attention to pedestrians and cyclists, much more bus priority (to complement subway expansions), parking restraint has been applied vigorously, and congestion charging was introduced on two major routes. And perhaps most amazing - an inner city elevated expressway was torn down and the buried stream beneath it has been brought back to the surface as a linear park. Now we hear about a new round of attempts to make public transport more integrated and have higher on-road priority. So three questions: - Where can we get more information on these changes? (Can anyone elaborate on the story? Maybe my impressions are not accurate? Can anyone point us towards a good written summary of these events and how they have come about?) - What triggered the changes in policy? - Which particular individuals ('Mayors' or otherwise) or organisations deserve recognition for these changes? (perhaps via Eric's "Profiles of Courage") All the best, Paul From townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au Fri Jul 9 23:56:37 2004 From: townsend at central.murdoch.edu.au (Craig Townsend) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 22:56:37 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage In-Reply-To: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F082@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> References: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F082@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <1089384997.40eeb225a613f@wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au> Dear Sustranners, I have been giving a fair amount of thought to the call for the nomination of ?profiles of courage? or ?heroes? who have transformed urban transport systems in cities around the world. I was looking for examples from North America and Southeast Asia, regions I know best, but I couldn?t come up with much. Based on some recent articles I?ve read on the emergence of Chicago as the putative ?most sustainable city? in the USA, I was thinking of nominating Mayor Richard Daley, who according to these reports has spearheaded many initiatives in that urban region of over 7 million inhabitants (http://www.newtopiamagazine.net/content/issue17/features/greencity.php). I was then thinking about appropriate nominees from Canada, where I?m from. However, I began having difficulty because there have been a number of good actions on urban transport in Canadian cities (particularly when compared against their counterparts to the south of the border), but they have rarely been associated with particular individuals or mayors. In fact, in many cases the actions taken toward more sustainable transport have involved members of local communities and neighbourhoods coming together to oppose the grandiose projects of charismatic and powerful politicians or ?great leaders?! I have a number of uestions that may be worth further discussion: -is it wise to emphasize the actions of ?great individuals? rather than the collective actions of members of communities joining together to make changes or oppose changes? -does a focus on great individuals encourage a sense of powerlessness, prevalent particularly in cities of the developing world among the poor masses, who are encouraged to sit around passively waiting for a charismatic and decisive leader, patron, or saviour? -in cities where mayors and political leaders come from small ruling elites and there are great chasms in wealth and power, is it wise to further elevate those people?s achievements over that of their less privileged city neighbours? What about nominating as ?profiles of courage? communities which have faced adversity and which have resisted in the face of power? What about the Baan Krua Muslim community in Bangkok where they (with the leadership of some community members and sympathetic outsiders) have resisted the efforts of a cabal of elite businessmen and politicians seeking to build an elevated expressway ramp which would have displaced their community and sacred grounds (but which would have increased the elite accessibility and property values of some central area land. This community has for over 15 years been fighting daily for their right not to be evicted, and they need all the help they can get because the current national government of Thailand (led by the country?s richest man) is seeking to revive the expressway project, which was supposedly cancelled by the previous administration. Similar ?profiles of courage? can be found in Canadian cities. In the 1960s the low income residents of the Downtown Eastside and Chinatown communities in Vancouver, Canada, resisted the plans of a charismatic and autocratic mayor and urban transport planners to build an expressway through their community. (It?s worth noting that these big infrastructure profiles are often routed through the communities of low income ethnic minorities with little representation on city councils or other governments.) Their heroic actions have shaped Vancouver?s urban transport system which among North American cities is exceptional because there is no expressway or highway through the inner city or inner suburbs (the communities made sure that a law was passed by the City Council ensuring that their victory would be preserved). I agree that there is a need to celebrate achievements in moving toward more sustainable urban transport, and that celebrating individual achievements has a role to play. But I feel there is a need for more deliberation about the kinds of achievements and individuals that should be elevated, and also how can we recognize collective actions of the less powerful? Thanks if you have read this far! Best regards, Craig From Davewetzel at tfl.gov.uk Sat Jul 10 07:05:21 2004 From: Davewetzel at tfl.gov.uk (Wetzel Dave) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 23:05:21 +0100 Subject: [sustran] FW: SEI Report- Aviation & Sustainability Message-ID: Does anyone have any work on auctioning airport landing slots? Dave Dave Wetzel Vice-chair, Transport for London Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK. Tel 020 7941 4200 Close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11,24,148,211,N11 pass the door. Nearest Underground - St James's Park tube station. *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** From kisansbc at vsnl.com Sun Jul 11 21:06:33 2004 From: kisansbc at vsnl.com (Kisan Mehta) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 17:36:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Cutting traffic jams in the UK and intensifying congestion in India Message-ID: <001101c4673f$82cd26e0$3226020a@im.eth.net> Dear Colleagues, Our authorities- Central and State - are spending huge public funds to build more and more roads for driving without interruption but without asking and expecting car owners to pay even a single paisa while the British Government is proposing a levy of 90p (appro Rs 65) on all cars registered in the United Kingdom to cut down traffic congestion with resultant improvement in the air quality. See the following article. In Mumbai, the Maharashtra Government which has spend Rs 20 billion on flyovers and elevated roads and took out a large slice of funds from the World Bank funded Mumbai Urban Transport Project costing Rs 60 billion for expressway and road building could not spare even one Rupee for pavement construction and has now finalised Mumbai Environment Improvement Project (MEIP) estimated at Rs 20 billion for constructing another chain of elevated roads. The declared object is to reduce citizen dependence on public transport. Traffic jams are a daily, hourly, experience in Mumbai. This is not going to change. The Maharashtra Chief Minister has sought a grant of Rs 150 billion from the Government lf India to build Sealinks and Trans Harbour Road Link but would not do anything to improve and expand Suburban Railway Service and the BEST Public Road Transport that account for 88% of journeys in Mumbai. So public resources are for providing more roads to motor cars free of charge putting citizens to great risk! Nothing for citizen safety or improving citizen movement. Kisan Mehta Save Bombay Committee Tel.. 00 91 22 2414 9688 E-Mail:kisansbc@vsnl.com ***************************** Special report: public services Crisis plan for tolls on all roads Juliette Jowit, transport editor Sunday July 11, 2004 The Observer The biggest shake-up in the history of British motoring is to be outlined in a government-funded study that proposes a national toll scheme to charge drivers up to 90p a kilometre (?1.45 a mile) for using the nation's roads. The Observer has obtained a draft copy of the year-long investigation into the feasibility of road-user charging, which reveals that the revolutionary new scheme could slash congestion in half, saving Britain from a devastating transport crisis. Compiled by motoring organisations, environmentalists, government officials, economists and transport experts, the study was ordered by Transport Secretary Alistair Darling last year in a clear signal that satellite charging could be the only way to tackle rising levels of traffic and delays. The scheme, which would involve fitting Britain's 30 million cars with electronic chips linked to satellite and charging for every kilometre travelled, could raise more than ?10 billion a year for the Treasury and boost the economy by another ?12bn through better transport links. The draft road-pricing report, due to be published this month, stresses it is up to the government to decide whether to press ahead with a national charging system, but says such pricing would 'unblock roads, to the benefit of the economy and the environment'. The report adds: 'The real issue is that, without road pricing, we all lose - by higher and higher amounts as the years go by and congestion grows.' The findings are likely to ignite a fierce battle between motoring groups, who want car taxes cut, and environmental lobbies and many transport experts, who argue charging must be implemented as soon as possible. 'The central issue is the recognition that road capacity is not going to be expanded to keep pace with traffic growth, and that means there's no alternative but to tackle growth. Road pricing is a powerful instrument to do that,' said Phil Goodwin, professor of transport studies at University College London. 'There isn't a more popular alternative on offer to [politicians] if they want to control or improve travelling conditions.' The documents, which also outline 10 other suggestions for cutting congestion, reveal most charges would be in urban areas and on trunk roads, especially in peak hours, while more than half of drivers could pay less than they do now to use the roads. They put forward 11 different models, most involving eight to 10 levels of charge, depending on traffic numbers on a particular road. At the highest price considered, with a cap of 87p per kilometre in today's terms, congestion could be cut by half in urban areas and one third on trunk roads. But the report says only 0.5 per cent of drivers would pay the top fee. Ministers have also indicated that some, if not all, of the money raised will be offset by cuts in fuel duty and possibly scrapping vehicle tax discs. Nor would it be necessary to set the prices so high: one model examined would charge no more than 20p a kilometre; another showed just having charges in London and other main conurbations would reduce urban delays by 44%, but trunk road hold-ups by only 10%. In a poll of motorists carried out for the study group, the 'vast majority' of drivers did not want to pay more, but six in 10 would accept a change if overall taxes did not rise, and two thirds would if there were good alternatives. Privacy worries about satellite-tracking was not a 'major issue' for 62%, but a sizeable minority held 'strong views'. Before then, more local authorities could be encouraged to introduce local charges - like those in London and Durham - by getting money for transport or cutting local taxes. New roads could also have tolls before then, it suggests. Last week the DoT appeared to have already acted on the last suggestion, announcing plans for a new 50-mile toll motorway between Birmingham and Manchester. Currently, it would cost ?3bn to fit the fleet of 30m vehicles with ?100 of equipment - plus the expense of collection and enforcement. Useful links Department for Transport Department for Transport road traffic figures 2001 Transport for London Street Management Street Works Motorists' Forum The AA International Road Federation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040711/83fa293e/attachment.html From ajb at A-B-O-U-T.com Sun Jul 11 22:31:24 2004 From: ajb at A-B-O-U-T.com (Andrew Braddock) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 14:31:24 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax In-Reply-To: <019901c4672b$33c15760$0200a8c0@MichaelVaio> Message-ID: <20040711133901.EF4832E82B@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> If you talk to anyone who has been a regular user of public transport elsewhere in Europe they will tell you very firmly that it is far better than in the UK. Passengers in Manchester would be staggered if they had a system as good as Vienna or Z?rich! There are, of course, a few exceptions - EG: London is pretty good and getting better (certainly in terms of surface public transport) and rural France or Spain has little outside of school buses. Andrew Braddock -----Original Message----- From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: 11 July 2004 10:41 To: Wetzel Dave; Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; diggers350@yahoogroups.com; NewMobility@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; scurader@comcast.net; UTSG; WorldCarfreeDays@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com; Yahoo! Groups Notification Cc: 'Andrew Braddock (ABOUT)'; 'Michael Schabas' Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax the short answer is that they don't mean much except that car usage in britain, germany and france is pretty similar. people drive a lot. There is no statistical basis (at least, not on this data) to support the view that french and german public transport systems are better than the british ones. lies, damned lies, and statistics. Michael@Schabas.net mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wetzel Dave" To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" ; ; ; ; ; "sustran discuss" ; "UTSG" ; ; ; ; "Yahoo! Groups Notification" Cc: "'Andrew Braddock (ABOUT)'" ; "'Michael Schabas'" Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 7:59 AM Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > Any further explanation for these figures? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 22:26 > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Found it: DfT provide data on car and taxi km, for EU states. > > France 6,700 km per person per year > Germany 6,510 kmpppy > UK 6,380 kmpppy > > Of course the English and Germans need to fly to get to the mediterranean, > whereas the french drive. But don't they also have a great railway system? > > Curious, UK bus mile is about double french and german figures. why? > > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Schabas" > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 9:35 PM > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Can't find comparative statistics on car useage but see > > http://europe.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/figures/pocketbook/doc/tran_m > eans_road_2003.pdf > > Germany - 539 cars per 1,000 people > UK - 464 cars per 1,000 people > > > http://europe.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/figures/pocketbook/doc/etif_2 > 003_down2.xls > > Final energy consumption - Transport (which includes rail) > > Germany 55.2 Mtoe > UK 38.7 Mtoe > > Mtoe = million tonnes oil equivalent > > So the Germans have 15% more cars and use about 30% more fuel for transport, > but drive less? > > Seems an interesting model to emulate! > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Braddock" > To: "'Michael Schabas'" Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk> > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 4:02 PM > > Subject: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > > The Economist - not for the first time - is only 50% right. > Car ownership per head of population in Germany is higher than in the UK > (even after > re-unification) but car use is significantly lower. The difference is > much greater use of public transport, especially in urban areas. In > Switzerland, car ownership is higher still but use is lower than in Germany. > With > excellent public transport throughout the country, and fully-integrated > user-friendly > tariff partnerships across all modes, the Swiss practically live on their > trams, buses and trains! > > Andrew Braddock > A B O U T > 4 Borderside > YATELEY > GU46 6LJ > > T: 01252 876295 > M: 07740 974167 > F: 01252 879924 > E: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com > W: www.A-B-O-U-T.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 11:52 > To: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com; 'Wetzel Dave' > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > My heart wants to agree with everyone but 1. the chances of adopting German > anything in the UK, at least related to fiscal matters, is close to zero. > Ask Gordon! > 2. according to data published last year in the economist, german car > ownership and usage is substantially higher than British (forget the > railway, have you seen their autobahns?). So I am not sure if it would > be such a good thing, either! > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Braddock" > To: "'Wetzel Dave'" > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 11:30 AM > > Subject: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > > Dave > Well said - the point about motoring costs falling in real terms is > absolutely crucial to the argument. We cannot go on with significant > above-inflation fares rises on bus and rail whilst the car gets > cheaper and cheaper. It is also essential that we adopt Swiss/German-style > pricing policies that make public transport cheaper for off peak family use > and engender a culture in which the tram, bus or train is the mode of > first choice and the car second. LVT can clearly provide the income to put > fares on a better-than-equal footing with motoring costs. > > Keep on fighting the good fight! > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > Andrew Braddock > A B O U T > 4 Borderside > YATELEY > GU46 6LJ > > T: 01252 876295 > M: 07740 974167 > F: 01252 879924 > E: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com > W: www.A-B-O-U-T.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wetzel Dave [mailto:Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 10:08 > To: 'Michael Schabas' > Cc: 'Sam Mullins (LT Museum)'; Kiley Bob; Walder Jay; +TfL F&P Group > Business Planning > Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > Michael > I respect your views particularly because of your previous involvement > with > Canary Wharf, the JLE and Anglia Railways. > > The problem with owners of new transport funding from land purchases > and > sales is, like Development Land Taxes, S106 Planning Gain, Kate > Barker's > proposed "Planning Gain Supplement", TIFs, Stamp Duty etc. they all > capture > some land rent but unlike "Land Value Taxation" (LVT), they are just a > one-off hit. > > This is why fares revenue is so important and we continue to put fares > up > to > pay for public transport when at the same time motoring costs are > being > reduced with cheaper cars, more mpg and fuel pump prices since the > 1960s > not > even keeping up with inflation. > > As long as people want to use the trains, LVT gives a permanent > revenue > stream from which not only can the construction of a new line be > financed > but also contribute to its future maintenance and operating costs. > Just imagine what would happen to property rental values and land > prices > in > London if the Tube, buses and National Rail were all permantly closed down. > If we collected (only some of this wealth) locally and nationally, > there > would be no need to argue about PPP, PFIs, funding CrossRail, funding > new > high speed lines, bringing our railway maintenance up to modern > standards > and paying for better road safety! > > > Dave > > Dave Wetzel > Vice-chair, > Transport for London > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 09 July 2004 22:58 > To: Wetzel Dave > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > yes - property was a good earner. but the railway still made its > money from fares. > > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wetzel Dave" > To: "'Michael Schabas'" > Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 9:20 PM > Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Michael > They developed nine estates along the line at places like Wembley Park > and > Pinner as well as Chiltern Court over > Baker Street Station. > > Dave > > Dave Wetzel > Vice-chair, > Transport for London > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 08 July 2004 15:29 > To: Wetzel Dave; Cohen Arnold (Exc) > Cc: Georgeson Neil > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > I think there is abit of a myth - MEPC was set up by the Metropolitan line > to develop surplus lands, but they never were able to acquire vast tracts > of property. Mostly, the railway was financed from passenger fares, not > property revenues. > > As should be Crossrail. The right scheme can generate large operating > surpluses. > > I am all for LVT, but there is no reason it should just be applied around > new railways. It should replace other less efficient taxes and be used > to fund general expenditure. > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > > **************************************************************************** ******* > The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. > > If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. > **************************************************************************** ******* > > > From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Sun Jul 11 22:11:26 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 15:11:26 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage Message-ID: <00af01c46748$943e8cd0$6501a8c0@home> Sunday, July 11, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Reference: Craig Townsend's good note of 7/9/2004. Dear Friends and Craig, Your point about ?emphasizing the actions of ?great individuals? rather than the collective actions of members of communities joining together to make changes or oppose changes?? strikes my commoner, activist, people loving, anarchist soul in more ways than you may think. It also brings up a point that has been lurking at the back of my mind even as I go ahead with this. My choice in these cases is ?all of the above? ? and certainly that in a world in which we need more options for sustainability and social justice. By which I mean that, yes, we must be very careful not to build a library of glowing profiles of seven Mussolini?s. But at the same time, one of the real accomplishments of people like Jaime Lerner, Neil Goldschmidt, Michel Cr?peau, Enrique Pe?alosa, and yes even our not always loved WTN award candidate Ken Livingstone, and others whose names are most agreeably starting to pop up here, has precisely been to reach out well beyond the usual political constituencies and bureaucracies and work directly with public interest groups and citizens who are ready for change and ready to take an active role in making it happen. That said, we certainly have plenty of materials for a second and probably at the end of the day more important Profiles of Courage, which starts with communities, precisely as you suggest. And there we have seen some very interesting examples in our work with the Stockholm Partnerships for Sustainable Cities ? http://www.partnerships.stockholm.se/jury_index.html - over the last several years). For dessert to this exchange, let me share with you this extract that just slipped in over the transom, form the every energetic, always passionate and always engaging Howard Zinn (thanks Soros!) It gives us a nice fit for the rest. Eric Britton -----Original Message----- From: Other News - Roberto Savio / IPS [mailto:soros@topica.email-publisher.com] Sent: woensdag 30 juni 2004 20:44 To: metz@integerconsult.org Subject: The Coming Revolt of the Guards /Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited, article sent for information purposes./ The Coming Revolt of the Guards By Howard Zinn The following are excerpts from A People's History of the United States ... the mountain of history books under which we all stand leans ... so tremblingly respectful [in the direction] of states and statesmen and so disrespectful, by inattention, to people's movements -that we need some counterforce to avoid being crushed into submission. All those histories of this country centered on the Founding Fathers and the Presidents weigh oppressively on the capacity of the ordinary citizen to act. They suggest that in times of crisis we must look to someone to save us: in the Revolutionary crisis, the Founding Fathers; in the slavery crisis, Lincoln; in the Depression, Roosevelt; in the Vietnam-Watergate crisis, Carter. And that between occasional crises everything is all right, and it is sufficient for us to be restored to that normal state. They teach us that the supreme act of citizenship is to choose among saviors, by going into a voting booth every four years to choose between two white and well-off Anglo-Saxon males of inoffensive personality and orthodox opinions. The idea of saviors has been built into the entire culture, beyond politics. We have learned to look to stars, leaders, experts in every field, thus surrendering our own strength, demeaning our own ability, obliterating our own selves. But from time to time, Americans reject that idea and rebel. These rebellions, so far, have been contained. The American system is the most ingenious system of control in world history. With a country so rich in natural resources, talent, and labor power the system can afford to distribute just enough wealth to just enough people to limit discontent to a troublesome minority. It is a country so powerful, so big, so pleasing to so many of its citizens that it can afford to give freedom of dissent to the small number who are not pleased. There is no system of control with more openings, apertures, lee ways, flexibilities, rewards for the chosen, winning tickets in lotteries. There is none that disperses its controls more complexly through the voting system, the work situation, the church, the family, the school, the mass media -none more successful in mollifying opposition with reforms, isolating people from one another, creating patriotic loyalty. One percent of the nation owns a third of the wealth. The rest of the wealth is distributed in such a way as to turn those in the 99 percent against one another: small property owners against the propertyless, black against white, native-born against foreign-born, intellectuals and professionals against the uneducated and unskilled. These groups have resented one another and warred against one another with such vehemence and violence as to obscure their common position as sharers of leftovers in a very wealthy country. ***** ... Madison feared a "majority faction" and hoped the new Constitution would control it. He and his colleagues began the Preamble to the Constitution with the words "We the people .," pretending that the new government stood for everyone, and hoping that this myth, accepted as fact, would ensure "domestic tranquillity." The pretense continued over the generations, helped by all-embracing symbols, physical or verbal: the flag, patriotism, democracy, national interest, national defense, national security... ***** The exile of Nixon, the celebration of the Bicentennial, the presidency of Carter, all aimed at restoration. But restoration to the old order was no solution to the uncertainty, the alienation, which was intensified in the Reagan-Bush years. The election of Clinton in 1992, carrying with it a vague promise of change, did not fulfill the expectations of the hopeful. With such continuing malaise, it is very important for the Establishment -that uneasy club of business executives, generals, and politicos- to maintain the historic pretension of national unity, in which the government represents all the people, and the common enemy is overseas, not at home, where disasters of economics or war are unfortunate errors or tragic accidents, to be corrected by the members of the same club that brought the disasters. It is important for them also to make sure this artificial unity of highly privileged and slightly privileged is the only unity- that the 99 percent remain split in countless ways, and turn against one another to vent their angers. How skillful to tax the middle class to pay for the relief of the poor, building resentment on top of humiliation! How adroit to bus poor black youngsters into poor white neighborhoods, in a violent exchange of impoverished schools, while the schools of the rich remain untouched and the wealth of the nation, doled out carefully where children need free milk, is drained for billion-dollar aircraft carriers. How ingenious to meet the demands of blacks and women for equality by giving them small special benefits, and setting them in competition with everyone else for jobs made scarce by an irrational, wasteful system. How wise to turn the fear and anger of the majority toward a class of criminals bred -by economic inequity- faster than they can be put away, deflecting attention from the huge thefts of national resources carried out within the law by men in executive offices. ***** However, the unexpected victories even temporary of insurgents show the vulnerability of the supposedly powerful. In a highly developed society, the Establishment cannot survive without the obedience and loyalty of millions of people who are given small rewards to keep the system going: the soldiers and police, teachers and ministers, administrators and social workers, technicians and production workers, doctors, lawyers, nurses, transport and communications workers, garbagemen and firemen. These people -the employed, the somewhat privileged- are drawn into alliance with the elite. They become the guards of the system, buffers between the upper and lower classes. If they stop obeying, the system falls. That will happen, I think, only when all of us who are slightly privileged and slightly uneasy begin to see that we are like the guards in the prison uprising at Attica expendable; that the Establishment, whatever rewards it gives us, will also, if necessary to maintain its control, kill us. Certain new facts may, in our time, emerge so clearly as to lead to general withdrawal of loyalty from the system. The new conditions of technology, economics, and war, in the atomic age, make it less and less possible for the guards of the system -the intellectuals, the home owners, the taxpayers, the skilled workers, the professionals, the servants of government- to remain immune from the violence (physical and psychic) inflicted on the black, the poor, the criminal, the enemy overseas. The internationalization of the economy, the movement of refugees and illegal immigrants across borders, both make it more difficult for the people of the industrial countries to be oblivious to hunger and disease in the poor countries of the world. ***** The system, in its irrationality, has been driven by profit to build steel skyscrapers for insurance companies while the cities decay, to spend billions for weapons of destruction and virtually nothing for children's playgrounds, to give huge incomes to men who make dangerous or useless things, and very little to artists, musicians, writers, actors. Capitalism has always been a failure for the lower classes. It is now beginning to fail for the middle classes. The threat of unemployment, always inside the homes of the poor, has spread to white-collar workers, professionals. A college education is no longer a guarantee against joblessness, and a system that cannot offer a future to the young coming out of school is in deep trouble. If it happens only to the children of the poor, the problem is manageable; there are the jails. If it happens to the children of the middle class, things may get out of hand. The poor are accustomed to being squeezed and always short of money, but in recent years the middle classes, too, have begun to feel the press of high prices, high taxes. In the seventies, eighties, and early nineties there was a dramatic, frightening increase in the number of crimes. It was not hard to understand, when one walked through any big city. There were the contrasts of wealth and poverty, the culture of possession, the frantic advertising. There was the fierce economic competition, in which the legal violence of the state and the legal robbery by the corporations were accompanied by the illegal crimes of the poor. Most crimes by far involved theft. A disproportionate number of prisoners in American jails were poor and non-white, with little education. Half were unemployed in the month prior to their arrest. The most common and most publicized crimes have been the violent crimes of the young, the poor -a virtual terrorization in the big cities- in which the desperate or drug-addicted attack and rob the middle class, or even their fellow poor. A society so stratified by wealth and education lends itself naturally to envy and class anger. The critical question in our time is whether the middle classes, so long led to believe that the solution for such crimes is more jails and more jail terms, may begin to see, by the sheer uncontrollability of crime, that the only prospect is an endless cycle of crime and punishment. They might then conclude that physical security for a working person in the city can come only when everyone in the city is working. And that would require a transformation of national priorities, a change in the system. ***** The prospect is for times of turmoil, struggle, but also inspiration. There is a chance that ... a movement could succeed in doing what the system itself has never done -bring about great change with little violence. This is possible because the more of the 99 percent that begin to see themselves as sharing needs, the more the guards and the prisoners see their common interest, the more the Establishment becomes isolated, ineffectual. The elite's weapons, money, control of information would be useless in the face of a determined population. The servants of the system would refuse to work to continue the old, deadly order, and would begin using their time, their space -the very things given them by the system to keep them quiet- to dismantle that system while creating a new one. The prisoners of the system will continue to rebel, as before, in ways that cannot be foreseen, at times that cannot be predicted. The new fact of our era is the chance that they may be joined by the guards. We readers and writers of books have been, for the most part, among the guards. If we understand that, and act on it, not only will life be more satisfying, right off, but our grandchildren, or our great grandchildren, might possibly see a different and marvelous world. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- - "Other News" is a personal initiative seeking to provide information that should be in the media but is not, because of commercial criteria. It welcomes contributions from everybody. Work areas include information on global issues, north-south relations, gobernability of globalization. The "Other News" motto is a phrase which appeared on the wall of Barcelona's old Customs Office, at the beginning of 2003:"What walls utter, media keeps silent". Roberto Savio ==================================================================== Update Your Profile: http://soros.f.topica.com/f/?b1dnYs.b7dKjY.bWV0ekBp Delivered by Topica: http://www.topica.com/?p=T3FOOTER -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040711/385eb9a1/attachment-0001.html From john.havercroft at theeastproject.com Sun Jul 11 20:53:13 2004 From: john.havercroft at theeastproject.com (EAST) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 12:53:13 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It is also instructive to remember that the original London Underground was built by a cowboy financier who went bust, losing all his backers' investment; which resulted in the railway's municipalisation. John H -----Original Message----- From: Wetzel Dave [mailto:Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk] Sent: 11 July 2004 08:16 To: 'Michael Schabas' Cc: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; diggers350@yahoogroups.com; NewMobility@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; scurader@comcast.net; sustran discuss; UTSG; WorldCarfreeDays@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport-Focus@yahoogroups.com; Yahoo!Groups Notification Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax DLR to Lewisham opened after 1997 and we now plan to go to Lewisham. I was midwife to the Docklands Light Railway. When I was Chair of the Greater London Transport Cttee (1981 to 1986) we wanted to build the Jubilee Line Extension but the Govt stopped us because of the cost (?600m then but actual cost ?3.5bn when it was eventually built. and opened in 1999). So we promised in our Labour Manifesto that we would build a light rail system from Fenchurch Street (now called Tower Gateway) to the Isle of Dogs. We had to do a deal with the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC created and appointed by the Thatcher Govt). Sir Nigel Broakes (then Chair of the LDDC and Chair of Trafalgar House) and I agreed to a compromise. He wanted a computerised railway and I agreed subject to a train captain on every train, full access for people with disability and stations for local working class people as well as the City types going to Canary Wharf. We raised ?77m from the Govt. I chaired all the public consultation meetings and dug the first clod of earth to start the construction. Why tax wages and trade when you can tax land rent? Dave Dave Wetzel Vice-chair, Transport for London Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK. Tel 020 7941 4200 Close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11,24,148,211,N11 pass the door. Nearest Underground - St James's Park tube station. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: 10 July 2004 21:53 To: Hudsonmi@aol.com; Wetzel Dave Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax for the first 60 years US railroads made money, off passengers and freight. And, after a rocky period in the middle of the century when they were badly regulated, they still make money off freight. Land grants were an incentive for construction, but only part of the price. And it was often many years before they the land was worth anything. Of course land grants were a real (And legitimate) incentive to build railways. there were no land grants at all for Britain's railways. Parliament never gave powers to acquire surplus land for development. The Metropolitan was one of the few that got into the development game, originally as a side line. It was only in the 1950s that US railroads started to give up on passengers. Even in Hong Kong, MTR only gets about 1/3 of its income from land and retail schemes, and there are significant offsetting costs. So development may pay 10% to 20% of MTR capital costs. Just the facts. I am a big fan of value capture and LVT, where it can work. But it is often a red herring. DLR, JLE, CTRL, Heathrow Express, Croydon Tramlink, all built by tory governments without LVT. What have we had since 1997? A short extension of the DLR to City Airport (with no value capture, I think!). Not a lot else. (not to diminish the merits of sensible bus fares, oyster, and congestion charging) Michael@Schabas.net mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 ----- Original Message ----- From: Hudsonmi@aol.com To: Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk ; michael@schabas.net Cc: samm@ltmuseum.co.uk ; Bobkiley@tfl.gov.uk ; jaywalder@tfl.gov.uk ; +TFLF &PBPP@Tfl.gov.uk Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 1:56 PM Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax Dear Dave, The point Mr. Shabas makes does not apply at all to America. Does it to Britain? He says that railways always have depended on fares for their financing. In America, their construction was financed by land grants -- vast giveaways that made the railroads the nation's largest landowners. What appears superficially as a railroad construction project actually was a land giveaway. In time, the railroads shirked their responsibilities, let PennCentral and other go bankrupt, and kept the rich urban property around their central stations. In London's case, the tube will not be financed by giving the tube land; but it will get the increased capital gain -- that is, the land-price gain -- from land values. Michael Hudson **************************************************************************** ******* The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. **************************************************************************** ******* From michael.schabas at blueyonder.co.uk Sun Jul 11 18:41:04 2004 From: michael.schabas at blueyonder.co.uk (Michael Schabas) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 10:41:04 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax References: Message-ID: <019901c4672b$33c15760$0200a8c0@MichaelVaio> the short answer is that they don't mean much except that car usage in britain, germany and france is pretty similar. people drive a lot. There is no statistical basis (at least, not on this data) to support the view that french and german public transport systems are better than the british ones. lies, damned lies, and statistics. Michael@Schabas.net mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wetzel Dave" To: "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport" ; ; ; ; ; "sustran discuss" ; "UTSG" ; ; ; ; "Yahoo! Groups Notification" Cc: "'Andrew Braddock (ABOUT)'" ; "'Michael Schabas'" Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 7:59 AM Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > Any further explanation for these figures? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 22:26 > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Found it: DfT provide data on car and taxi km, for EU states. > > France 6,700 km per person per year > Germany 6,510 kmpppy > UK 6,380 kmpppy > > Of course the English and Germans need to fly to get to the mediterranean, > whereas the french drive. But don't they also have a great railway system? > > Curious, UK bus mile is about double french and german figures. why? > > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Schabas" > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 9:35 PM > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Can't find comparative statistics on car useage but see > > http://europe.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/figures/pocketbook/doc/tran_m > eans_road_2003.pdf > > Germany - 539 cars per 1,000 people > UK - 464 cars per 1,000 people > > > http://europe.eu.int/comm/dgs/energy_transport/figures/pocketbook/doc/etif_2 > 003_down2.xls > > Final energy consumption - Transport (which includes rail) > > Germany 55.2 Mtoe > UK 38.7 Mtoe > > Mtoe = million tonnes oil equivalent > > So the Germans have 15% more cars and use about 30% more fuel for transport, > but drive less? > > Seems an interesting model to emulate! > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Braddock" > To: "'Michael Schabas'" Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk> > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 4:02 PM > > Subject: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > > The Economist - not for the first time - is only 50% right. > Car ownership per head of population in Germany is higher than in the UK > (even after > re-unification) but car use is significantly lower. The difference is > much greater use of public transport, especially in urban areas. In > Switzerland, car ownership is higher still but use is lower than in Germany. > With > excellent public transport throughout the country, and fully-integrated > user-friendly > tariff partnerships across all modes, the Swiss practically live on their > trams, buses and trains! > > Andrew Braddock > A B O U T > 4 Borderside > YATELEY > GU46 6LJ > > T: 01252 876295 > M: 07740 974167 > F: 01252 879924 > E: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com > W: www.A-B-O-U-T.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 11:52 > To: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com; 'Wetzel Dave' > > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > My heart wants to agree with everyone but 1. the chances of adopting German > anything in the UK, at least related to fiscal matters, is close to zero. > Ask Gordon! > 2. according to data published last year in the economist, german car > ownership and usage is substantially higher than British (forget the > railway, have you seen their autobahns?). So I am not sure if it would > be such a good thing, either! > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Braddock" > To: "'Wetzel Dave'" > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 11:30 AM > > Subject: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > > Dave > Well said - the point about motoring costs falling in real terms is > absolutely crucial to the argument. We cannot go on with significant > above-inflation fares rises on bus and rail whilst the car gets > cheaper and cheaper. It is also essential that we adopt Swiss/German-style > pricing policies that make public transport cheaper for off peak family use > and engender a culture in which the tram, bus or train is the mode of > first choice and the car second. LVT can clearly provide the income to put > fares on a better-than-equal footing with motoring costs. > > Keep on fighting the good fight! > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > Andrew Braddock > A B O U T > 4 Borderside > YATELEY > GU46 6LJ > > T: 01252 876295 > M: 07740 974167 > F: 01252 879924 > E: ajb@A-B-O-U-T.com > W: www.A-B-O-U-T.com > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wetzel Dave [mailto:Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk] > Sent: 10 July 2004 10:08 > To: 'Michael Schabas' > Cc: 'Sam Mullins (LT Museum)'; Kiley Bob; Walder Jay; +TfL F&P Group > Business Planning > Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > Michael > I respect your views particularly because of your previous involvement > with > Canary Wharf, the JLE and Anglia Railways. > > The problem with owners of new transport funding from land purchases > and > sales is, like Development Land Taxes, S106 Planning Gain, Kate > Barker's > proposed "Planning Gain Supplement", TIFs, Stamp Duty etc. they all > capture > some land rent but unlike "Land Value Taxation" (LVT), they are just a > one-off hit. > > This is why fares revenue is so important and we continue to put fares > up > to > pay for public transport when at the same time motoring costs are > being > reduced with cheaper cars, more mpg and fuel pump prices since the > 1960s > not > even keeping up with inflation. > > As long as people want to use the trains, LVT gives a permanent > revenue > stream from which not only can the construction of a new line be > financed > but also contribute to its future maintenance and operating costs. > Just imagine what would happen to property rental values and land > prices > in > London if the Tube, buses and National Rail were all permantly closed down. > If we collected (only some of this wealth) locally and nationally, > there > would be no need to argue about PPP, PFIs, funding CrossRail, funding > new > high speed lines, bringing our railway maintenance up to modern > standards > and paying for better road safety! > > > Dave > > Dave Wetzel > Vice-chair, > Transport for London > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 09 July 2004 22:58 > To: Wetzel Dave > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > yes - property was a good earner. but the railway still made its > money from fares. > > > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wetzel Dave" > To: "'Michael Schabas'" > Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 9:20 PM > Subject: RE: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > > Michael > They developed nine estates along the line at places like Wembley Park > and > Pinner as well as Chiltern Court over > Baker Street Station. > > Dave > > Dave Wetzel > Vice-chair, > Transport for London > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 08 July 2004 15:29 > To: Wetzel Dave; Cohen Arnold (Exc) > Cc: Georgeson Neil > Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax > > I think there is abit of a myth - MEPC was set up by the Metropolitan line > to develop surplus lands, but they never were able to acquire vast tracts > of property. Mostly, the railway was financed from passenger fares, not > property revenues. > > As should be Crossrail. The right scheme can generate large operating > surpluses. > > I am all for LVT, but there is no reason it should just be applied around > new railways. It should replace other less efficient taxes and be used > to fund general expenditure. > Michael@Schabas.net > mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 > > > **************************************************************************** ******* > The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. > > If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. > **************************************************************************** ******* > > > From Davewetzel at tfl.gov.uk Sun Jul 11 17:01:09 2004 From: Davewetzel at tfl.gov.uk (Wetzel Dave) Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 09:01:09 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax Message-ID: <001101c4671d$39a25930$0210a8c0@TWOFM.local> DLR to Lewisham opened after 1997 and we now plan to go to Lewisham. I was midwife to the Docklands Light Railway. When I was Chair of the Greater London Transport Cttee (1981 to 1986) we wanted to build the Jubilee Line Extension but the Govt stopped us because of the cost (?600m then but actual cost ?3.5bn when it was eventually built. and opened in 1999). So we promised in our Labour Manifesto that we would build a light rail system from Fenchurch Street (now called Tower Gateway) to the Isle of Dogs. We had to do a deal with the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC created and appointed by the Thatcher Govt). Sir Nigel Broakes (then Chair of the LDDC and Chair of Trafalgar House) and I agreed to a compromise. He wanted a computerised railway and I agreed subject to a train captain on every train, full access for people with disability and stations for local working class people as well as the City types going to Canary Wharf. We raised ?77m from the Govt. I chaired all the public consultation meetings and dug the first clod of earth to start the construction. Why tax wages and trade when you can tax land rent? Dave Dave Wetzel Vice-chair, Transport for London Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK. Tel 020 7941 4200 Close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11,24,148,211,N11 pass the door. Nearest Underground - St James's Park tube station. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Schabas [mailto:michael.schabas@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: 10 July 2004 21:53 To: Hudsonmi@aol.com; Wetzel Dave Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax for the first 60 years US railroads made money, off passengers and freight. And, after a rocky period in the middle of the century when they were badly regulated, they still make money off freight. Land grants were an incentive for construction, but only part of the price. And it was often many years before they the land was worth anything. Of course land grants were a real (And legitimate) incentive to build railways. there were no land grants at all for Britain's railways. Parliament never gave powers to acquire surplus land for development. The Metropolitan was one of the few that got into the development game, originally as a side line. It was only in the 1950s that US railroads started to give up on passengers. Even in Hong Kong, MTR only gets about 1/3 of its income from land and retail schemes, and there are significant offsetting costs. So development may pay 10% to 20% of MTR capital costs. Just the facts. I am a big fan of value capture and LVT, where it can work. But it is often a red herring. DLR, JLE, CTRL, Heathrow Express, Croydon Tramlink, all built by tory governments without LVT. What have we had since 1997? A short extension of the DLR to City Airport (with no value capture, I think!). Not a lot else. (not to diminish the merits of sensible bus fares, oyster, and congestion charging) Michael@Schabas.net mobile +44 7973 241 214 land +44 20 8442 0777 ----- Original Message ----- From: Hudsonmi@aol.com To: Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk ; michael@schabas.net Cc: samm@ltmuseum.co.uk ; Bobkiley@tfl.gov.uk ; jaywalder@tfl.gov.uk ; +TFLF &PBPP@Tfl.gov.uk Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 1:56 PM Subject: Re: Financing Transport Infrastructure through Land Value Tax Dear Dave, The point Mr. Shabas makes does not apply at all to America. Does it to Britain? He says that railways always have depended on fares for their financing. In America, their construction was financed by land grants -- vast giveaways that made the railroads the nation's largest landowners. What appears superficially as a railroad construction project actually was a land giveaway. In time, the railroads shirked their responsibilities, let PennCentral and other go bankrupt, and kept the rich urban property around their central stations. In London's case, the tube will not be financed by giving the tube land; but it will get the increased capital gain -- that is, the land-price gain -- from land values. Michael Hudson *********************************************************************************** The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@tfl.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. *********************************************************************************** From andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id Mon Jul 12 10:30:55 2004 From: andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id (andi_rahmah@pelangi.or.id) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:30:55 -0000 (GMT) Subject: [sustran] Re: In-Reply-To: <452igiJhh5184S02.1089365613@uwdvg002.cms.usa.net> References: <452igiJhh5184S02.1089365613@uwdvg002.cms.usa.net> Message-ID: <1399.202.155.158.244.1089595855.squirrel@webmail.pelangi.or.id> Dear Lloyd, I'm glad to hear about Seoul and it's raise a curiosity to know further story about that. If you have the article about that, would you mind to share the information with us? Thanks a bunch for your kindly attention. Best, Rahmah > Dear Paul, > > Yes, Seoul has done some rather impressive improvements of late. The > first > phase of a bus priority scheme has just been launched with further BRT > lines > to be added. The destruction of the Cheonggyecheon elevated highway is > quite > remarkable, and certainly contrasts with the building of Segundo Piso in > Mexico City (a massive elevated highway project) and the development of > the > Costanera Norte Highway in Santiago (which is essentially a highway > replacing > a river). The reclamation of the Cheonggyecheon waterway is still > underway, > as are some of the other projects that you have mentioned. > > Much of the credit goes to Mayor LEE Mung-Bak, who only took office in > January > 2003 (and most of the major projects such as Cheonggyecheon were quickly > developed by his team). During his first week in office he took a team to > Curitiba, and they have developed a nice exchange of ideas with other > cities > such as Curitiba. > > Much credit also goes to the team at Seoul Development Institute, which is > a > municipal agency providing designs and implementation concepts. I would > recommend contacting Dr. KIM Gyeng-Chul at the SDI for more information on > the > progress in Seoul. If you are interested, let me know and I can provide > contact details off list. > > Best regards, > > Lloyd Wright > London > From andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id Mon Jul 12 11:12:52 2004 From: andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id (andi_rahmah@pelangi.or.id) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 02:12:52 -0000 (GMT) Subject: [sustran] the recipient's list of permitted email addresses. Message-ID: <1573.202.155.158.244.1089598372.squirrel@webmail.pelangi.or.id> Dear moderator, I've just receive the email which is advice me that my email address is not on the the recipient's list of permitted email addresses. would you mind to incorporate my email address on the list? thank you for your kindly assistance to me best, Rahmah From pascaldesmond at eircom.net Tue Jul 13 22:02:16 2004 From: pascaldesmond at eircom.net (Pascal Desmond) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:02:16 +0100 Subject: [sustran] "World Transport Policy & Practice" Volume 10, Number 2 (2004) now available Message-ID: Volume 10, Number 2 (2004) of "World Transport Policy & Practice", a quarterly journal edited by Professor John Whitelegg, is available free of charge as an Adobe Acrobat PDF file at http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/WTPPhome.html Contents of Volume 10, Number 2, 2004: Time, Sustainable Transport and the Politics of Speed by Peter Harris, Jamie Lewis and Barbara Adam Emerging European-style planning in the USA: Transit-oriented development by John L. Renne and Jan S. Wells New localism and transport: a local perspective by Stephen Joseph Co-operative paratransit transport schemes appropriate for a developing economy by F.O. Ogunwolu & J.O. Akanmu ***** DOWNLOAD ADVICE If you are using Windows, please ensure that you 'right click' your mouse. This will download the file to your desktop for viewing off-line. This is standard Windows procedure for downloading files. ***** World Transport Policy & Practice ISSN 1352-7614 Eco-Logica Ltd., 53 Derwent Road, LANCASTER, LA1 3ES. U.K. telephone +44 1524 63175 Editor: Professor John Whitelegg Business Manager: Pascal Desmond As an anti-spam measure you need to replace the '%' sign with the '@' sign in the above e-mail addresses http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/WTPPhome.html From gbathan at adb.org Tue Jul 13 19:20:03 2004 From: gbathan at adb.org (gbathan@adb.org) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:20:03 +0800 Subject: [sustran] First Announcement - Better Air Quality (BAQ) 2004, 6-8 December 2004, Agra, India Message-ID: BAQ 2004, now in its 4th year, will be held this year in Agra, India at the Jaypee Palace hotel (Agra, India) from December 6 to 8. The 3-day event will be jointly hosted by India's Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) and the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia). The Organizing Committee for BAQ 2004 is formed by the CAI-Asia Secretariat, the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers and the Central Pollution Control Board in India. BAQ 2004 will give representatives from national and local governments, civil society, academe, and the private sector the unique opportunity to interact with other stakeholders and share their experiences on better air quality management in the Asian region. OBJECTIVES OF BAQ 2004 General - Discuss air quality management and control techniques in Asia and how stakeholders can benefit from worldwide experiences Technical - Expose participants to new technological developments in air quality monitoring, and discuss recommendations on appropriate technical solutions for different countries Policy - Share innovative and effective examples of air quality management, and adopt a strategic framework for air quality management and control in Asia PARTICIPANTS AND REGISTRATION self-funded participants Self-funded participants (private sector, development agencies and non Asia based participants) are encouraged to register online and avail of special early-bird registration fees (until 1 October 2004). Private sector participants from India are also requested to register online to make use of the special registration fee for India-based participants. Register now at http://www.cleanairnet.org/baq2004/1527/form-main.html sponsored participants The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee will provide some funding for participants to attend BAQ 2004. These sponsorships are available for representatives from national government, local government, NGO's, academe and media in Asia. Participants from the private sector will have to fund themselves. Persons in India, who would like to be considered for sponsorship, are requested to email the BAQ 2004 Secretariat, attention: Parthaa Bosu (pbosu@siamindia.com) Persons from other countries in Asia, who would like to be considered for sponsorship are requested to email the BAQ 2004 Secretariat, attention: Glynda Bathan (gbathan@adb.org) Priority will be given to applicants with accepted abstracts for presentation in BAQ 2004. CALL FOR PAPERS The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee invites interested persons to submit abstracts for presentation in the BAQ plenary sessions, sub-workshops, or poster session. Abstracts on all themes related to ambient and indoor air quality management in Asia are welcome. Commerical presentations will not be allowed. Abstracts due: 31 August 2004 Authors advised: 30 September 2004 Papers due: 31 October 204 Email your abstract and/or queries to Mr. Herbert Fabian (hfabian@adb.org). Remember to limit the length of your abstract to 25 lines (or about 350 words). Submission guidelines: http://www.cleanairnet.org/baq2004/1527/articles-58516_call4abstracts.pdf SPONSORSHIP PACKAGES The BAQ 2004 Organizing Committee invites applications from private sector firms for sponsorship of BAQ 2004. The three sponsorship packages -- Diamond, Platinum, and Gold -- entitle sponsors to an exhibit booth, free tickets to the conference, and their corporate logos on the BAQ 2004 website, CD, and BAQ collateral materials. For details, contact Mr. Cornie Huizenga (chuizenga@adb.org). To get updates about BAQ 2004, log on to www.baq2004.org - BAQ 2004 Secretariat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040713/635f7270/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Wed Jul 14 12:33:30 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:33:30 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Fwd: Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F111@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Any comments from those closer to the action in Jakarta? Paul ------------- http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/asia/story/0,4386,261373,00.html? Straits Times JULY 14, 2004 Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway Lack of supporting facilities makes it unattractive to car owners while management's integrity is in doubt By Devi Asmarani JAKARTA - In operation for just six months, Jakarta's public bus system has already proven to be the most reliable and comfortable means of getting around the congested capital. But its sustainability is in question: most commuters are still unwilling to leave their cars at home and the busway's management is allegedly fraught with graft. Observers are worried that - like other ambitious, multi-million-dollar government projects in the capital - the system will eventually wither from mismanagement and a lack of funds. The busway system is one of several controversial policies that Jakarta Governor Sutiyoso has implemented. Others include the eviction of illegal squatters from slums. Analysts say these policies - seen as insensitive to public opinion - have hurt President Megawati Sukarnoputri's popularity in Jakarta. Her PDI-P party was behind the Governor's re-election two years ago. The 250-billion-rupiah (S$48.5-million) Trans-Jakarta Busway system is the first phase of a seven-year project to build a mass transportation system that includes a monorail and subway. Fifty-six specially built buses, each with a capacity of 85 passengers, ply the 12.9km route that runs from the bus terminal in the popular Blok M shopping complex to the bustling Chinatown area. The buses travel along dedicated bus lanes, which reduces travel times. Around 51,000 people use them daily. The system was especially helpful during the campaigning leading up to April's legislative election, when up to 65,000 people a day used it to avoid the massive jams caused by street parades. However, a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this year showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using the busway. State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. 'With the current bus fare of 2,500 rupiah per trip, we are still heavily subsidised by the city budget,' said company spokesman Ajar Aedi. 'But the purpose is to provide a service that is affordable for everyone, so we can't stress too much on the business side for now.' The Jakarta city administration is planning two more routes for the busway system. But public policy analyst Agus Pambagio said the system was poorly managed and prone to corruption. The cost of bus procurement and bus shelter construction may have been falsely marked up, he said, and the ticketing system is also not transparent enough, making it prone to irregularities. Most car owners are also reluctant to take the bus because of a lack of good supporting facilities, said Mr Agus. Feeder buses serving routes not covered by the Trans-Jakarta buses are in a decrepit state. The city's pavements are also in need of repair and there are no parking facilities for car owners who want to take the bus. 'To encourage people to take the bus, the government must do more than just buy buses,' said Mr Agus. 'There must be supporting facilities as well as integrated traffic and car ownership policies. Right now, there is no long-term initiative other than to finish the projects.' ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- Copyright @ 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved. Forwarded for the purpose of education and research -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040714/afd3e145/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jul 14 14:50:38 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 07:50:38 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakartabusway In-Reply-To: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F111@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <002501c46966$7ea46460$6501a8c0@home> Wednesday, July 14, 2004, Paris, France, Europe It will be interesting to see what the Japanese International Cooperation Agency will propose or have proposed to solve this dilemma. ;-) - for those of you who have seen them at work. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040714/052e9efd/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Wed Jul 14 17:23:22 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:23:22 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: the recipient's list of permitted email addresses. Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F118@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Dear Rahmah and anyone else who has posted to the list I believe you are referring to a message from the "i-permit" service. It seems that someone on the list is using this as a method to prevent spam. Unfortunately it means that most of us who post to this list will get a message as Rahmah has. Please just ignore such messages. If this proliferates then we will need to do something about it. For the moment it is an annoyance only. I suspect whoever devised the i-permit system was not thinking about the implications email discussion lists. Your message almost certainly did get through to sustran-discuss itself. By the way, if anyone has any similar problems, it is best to contact the list managers (Karl and myself) off-list via sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org and one of us will try our best to help. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: > sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org > > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca > .apc.org] On Behalf Of andi_rahmah@pelangi.or.id > Sent: Monday, 12 July 2004 10:13 AM > To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Subject: [sustran] the recipient's list of permitted email addresses. > > > Dear moderator, > > I've just receive the email which is advice me that my email > address is not on the the recipient's list of permitted email > addresses. would you mind to incorporate my email address on the list? > > thank you for your kindly assistance to me > > best, > > > Rahmah > From itdpasia at adelphia.net Thu Jul 15 05:26:18 2004 From: itdpasia at adelphia.net (John Ernst) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:26:18 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway In-Reply-To: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F111@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu. sg> References: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F111@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040714085808.01c3cde8@pop.abs.adelphia.net> Hi Paul, ITDP has been providing technical assistance to the City of Jakarta on the TransJakarta busway, so I can give a brief update. There are some interesting points in the news article you sent (copied at the end of this message). 1) It's true the long-term future of the busway is threatened by what appear to be corrupt procedures. In addition to equipment purchasing irregularities, to date the City of Jakarta has not established adequate control mechanisms on revenue. They have installed a high-tech contactless farecard system which functions poorly and is not yet set up to provide any control on revenues. By our estimates, the initial 13km corridor of the busway now operating is not likely to capture sufficient demand to cover costs on its own. However, once the second/third corridor -- now beginning construction -- are operational, the system should be able to operate at a profit. (This means covering all costs except for the initial infrastructure -- primarily stations, road improvements and lane separators.) Note that we are now in the process of developing an improved public transport demand model for Jakarta, so all our estimates are preliminary. Clearly, it is important to have a functioning mechanism to control ticket sales and revenue. We are hopeful the current investigations underway in Jakarta will help to achieve this. 2) Although the City of Jakarta has a master plan which includes 14 busway corridors, 2 monorail lines and 1 subway line; these 3 public transport projects are not comparable. To the extent either the monorail or subway is built, ITDP is encouraging integration with the busway. However, while the busway can be financially self-sustaining, there is practically no chance for the monorail or subway to be so. The monorail has officially started development with private financing. We estimate the monorail might capture from 1-2000 trips/direction/hour. While there is the ticket price to consider, it would be reasonable to expect that a monorail would need 10 times that ridership to break-even. 3) We have found that the press is generally negative about the busway, regardless of the statistics. (A fact which can be attributed to Governor Sutiyoso's negative reputation, especially with the press.) A couple of statistics cited could be looked at much differently: >State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since >the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly >operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. I cannot confirm the cost and revenue figures cited here. (Keep in mind there is no control to verify revenue.) However, since the busway only began collecting revenue in February 2004, the 18b figure would imply they have been collecting 3b rp/month, a number that does not exactly "dwarf" monthly costs "exceeding 3 billion..." Note also that Transjakarta has only become sensitive to costs in recent months, and thus has now implemented some basic cost measures such as reducing the number of bus-km during off-peak. >... a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this year >showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using the busway. I view the purpose of the busway as primarily to prevent further switching of trips from public to private transportation -- a situation that has been occurring in Jakarta and most Asian cities for decades. Hence, the busway fare needs to be priced so as capture existing public transport passengers -- which it now is. That the JICA survey shows 14% of riders used to take a private car for the same trip seems great to me! (Incidentally, the JICA survey also shows a roughly 6 percent switch from motorcycles.) Without TDM measures of some kind, it's unlikely that someone who owns a private vehicle would switch to public transit. Jakarta does have a HOV measure in effect for the corridor (3 passengers per car are required during peak hours, although hiring riders for 1000 rp each (USD 0.12) is still fairly easy). The effectiveness of this "3-in-1" measure has not been fully evaluated. I would like to know: does anyone have comparison figures of the previous mode used by travelers on new public transit systems in other cities? John Ernst Asia Regional Director ITDP At 09:33 PM 7/13/2004, Barter, Paul wrote: >Any comments from those closer to the action in Jakarta? >Paul >------------- > >http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/asia/story/0,4386,261373,00.html? > >Straits Times >JULY 14, 2004 >Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway >Lack of supporting facilities makes it unattractive to car owners while >management's integrity is in doubt > >By Devi Asmarani > >JAKARTA - In operation for just six months, Jakarta's public bus system >has already proven to be the most reliable and comfortable means of >getting around the congested capital. > >But its sustainability is in question: most commuters are still unwilling >to leave their cars at home and the busway's management is allegedly >fraught with graft. > >Observers are worried that - like other ambitious, multi-million-dollar >government projects in the capital - the system will eventually wither >from mismanagement and a lack of funds. > >The busway system is one of several controversial policies that Jakarta >Governor Sutiyoso has implemented. Others include the eviction of illegal >squatters from slums. > >Analysts say these policies - seen as insensitive to public opinion - have >hurt President Megawati Sukarnoputri's popularity in Jakarta. Her PDI-P >party was behind the Governor's re-election two years ago. > >The 250-billion-rupiah (S$48.5-million) Trans-Jakarta Busway system is the >first phase of a seven-year project to build a mass transportation system >that includes a monorail and subway. > >Fifty-six specially built buses, each with a capacity of 85 passengers, >ply the 12.9km route that runs from the bus terminal in the popular Blok M >shopping complex to the bustling Chinatown area. > >The buses travel along dedicated bus lanes, which reduces travel times. >Around 51,000 people use them daily. > >The system was especially helpful during the campaigning leading up to >April's legislative election, when up to 65,000 people a day used it to >avoid the massive jams caused by street parades. > >However, a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this >year showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using the >busway. > >State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since >the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly >operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. > >'With the current bus fare of 2,500 rupiah per trip, we are still heavily >subsidised by the city budget,' said company spokesman Ajar Aedi. > >'But the purpose is to provide a service that is affordable for everyone, >so we can't stress too much on the business side for now.' > >The Jakarta city administration is planning two more routes for the busway >system. > >But public policy analyst Agus Pambagio said the system was poorly managed >and prone to corruption. > >The cost of bus procurement and bus shelter construction may have been >falsely marked up, he said, and the ticketing system is also not >transparent enough, making it prone to irregularities. > >Most car owners are also reluctant to take the bus because of a lack of >good supporting facilities, said Mr Agus. Feeder buses serving routes not >covered by the Trans-Jakarta buses are in a decrepit state. > >The city's pavements are also in need of repair and there are no parking >facilities for car owners who want to take the bus. > >'To encourage people to take the bus, the government must do more than >just buy buses,' said Mr Agus. > >'There must be supporting facilities as well as integrated traffic and car >ownership policies. Right now, there is no long-term initiative other than >to finish the projects.' > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Copyright @ 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved. > >Forwarded for the purpose of education and research - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Ernst - Director, Asia Region ITDP - The Institute for Transport and Development Policy Direct Fax +1 (801) 365-5914 Subscribe to ITDP's Sustainable Transport e-update at www.itdp.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From dguruswamy at hotmail.com Thu Jul 15 03:00:03 2004 From: dguruswamy at hotmail.com (Dharm Guruswamy) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:00:03 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Subway cheers Bangkok commuters Message-ID: Subway cheers Bangkok commuters By Tony Cheng BBC News, Bangkok The early morning rush hour is not a good time to be out and about in Bangkok. The roads are jammed and irritated faces glare out from behind the wheels of cars, buses and taxis, all struck in the heavy traffic. But on Monday the traffic seemed a little lighter, and the commuters on foot even seemed to have a spring in their step. For many in this vast sprawling metropolis, the morning commute has just become much easier - thanks to Bangkok's new subway system. Opened on Saturday by Thailand's revered King Bhumipol Adulyadej, more than 200,000 curious passengers travelled on the 32 km of underground network over the weekend. Overall we've had a very favourable response Chairman of the MRTA, Prapat Chongsanguan But the real test came on Monday, when the crowds of morning commuters tried out the new system. "It's great," said Wallaya. "It used to take me more than an hour to get to work. Today the journey only took 30 minutes, and I had to queue at the ticket office for quite a long time. It's going to mean I can spend longer in bed!" Security guard Wattana was equally impressed. "Normally I travel on the bus, and it takes at least half an hour, even though I don't live very far from here. Today it took about 10 minutes." 'Legendary congestion' It is not just a question of speed. Many Bangkokians are impressed by the slick stations, the German-engineered trains and the banks of escalators carrying passengers into the bowels of the city. "It's much easier than the Skytrain," said businessman Steve, referring to the city's other major public transport network. "I can take my son to school and we don't have to climb up all the stairs. The escalators make things much more convenient," he said. The metro runs in a semi-circle from the north to the south of the city. Although the 18 stations on its route are still out of reach for many people who live in Bangkok's suburbs, the network penetrates much further than the above-ground Skytrain, which only runs through the city's business district. There are also plans to extend the metro network to reach more commuters. The authorities plan to build another 60km of tunnels within the next six years, which the government hopes will cut Bangkok's legendary traffic congestion by 50%. Idle The Chairman of the MRTA ( Mass Rapid Transport Authority), Prapat Chongsanguan, is optimistic about the future of the network. "We've had a few problems, and we need to educate the public about how to use the ticket tokens, but overall we've had a very favourable response from people," he said. "I think the big test will come in a month's time, when the proper ticket prices are introduced. "When the price goes up to 30 baht (75 cents) per journey, we will get a true reflection of how many passengers are really using the system." But not everyone was thrilled with the new subway network. Just outside Saladaeng interchange station, a rank of motorcycle taxis stood idle. The drivers, who would normally be winding through the traffic, were chatting about Sunday's Euro 2004 football final. And another Bangkok institution might be under threat. "I haven't had a fare all morning", complained Somchai, as he sat in his colourful Tuk-Tuk. "If this goes on, I'll have to look for another job. "Or maybe I should just move to another city." Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/3866145.stm Published: 2004/07/05 12:08:14 GMT ? BBC MMIV -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1123 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040714/7c544cf5/attachment.bin From andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id Fri Jul 16 13:14:24 2004 From: andi_rahmah at pelangi.or.id (andi_rahmah@pelangi.or.id) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 04:14:24 -0000 (GMT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Fwd: Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakartabusway In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040714085808.01c3cde8@pop.abs.adelphia.net> References: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F111@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> <6.1.0.6.0.20040714085808.01c3cde8@pop.abs.adelphia.net> Message-ID: <1561.202.155.158.244.1089951264.squirrel@webmail.pelangi.or.id> Dear John and Paul, Here it is an article from The Jakarta Post that made by interview and cited our Press Release. Actually, our press release emphasized on making pressure to BP Transjakarta in order to publish the actual calculation of operation cost Transjakarta Busway as well as their actual income. Best, Rahmah Observers urge better busway setup Evi Mariani and Bambang Nurbianto, Jakarta[ TheJakarta Post,July 16, 2004] Transportation observers have deemed the service of the six-month-old busway has improved, but urged the administration to provide the expected supporting infrastructure to maintain good services. "The busway service should implement a feeder system and comfortable pedestrian facilities," said Andi Rahmah of the Pelangi Foundation in an evaluation of the busway since its launch on Jan. 15. Rahmah said inadequate pedestrian facilities to and from busway stops had discouraged some potential passengers. "Train passengers who alight at the elevated Sudirman station in Central Jakarta opt for other public transportation, like minibuses, rather than the busway because no proper sidewalk connects the railway station to the Tosari or Dukuh Atas busway stops," she told The Jakarta Post on Thursday. However, Rahmah lauded busway operator Transjakarta for its continued efforts in improving services. "I have observed that Transjakarta responds quickly to complaints received via its hotline," she said. Six months into its operation, the Transjakarta busway has recorded an average 46,000 passengers a day, exceeding its estimated target of 20,000 passengers. The latest data from the city transportation agency shows that 60,000 people commute between Blok M, South Jakarta, and Kota, West Jakarta, along the busway's first line. "Calculations show that Transjakarta has reaped Rp 3.49 billion (US$392,134) in net profit in 160 days. This has proven that public transportation can be a profitable business that does not necessarily require a government subsidy," Rahmah said. Ernst & Young (E&Y), which consulted the administration on the busway, earlier reported that Transjakarta could fully cover its daily operation cost of Rp 6,500 per kilometer if it could attract an average of 37,565 passengers per day. Another observer's report showed the number of passengers had grown by 27 percent from 1.15 million people in February -- its first month of operation -- to 1.47 million passengers in June. Pelangi executive director Kuki Soejachmoen added the busway had the potential to be a gold mine for the capital. For the busway to help reduce air pollution, Rahmah said buses along the planned east-west lines connecting Pulogadung-Monas-Kalideres should utilize environmentally friendly fuel, such as compressed natural gas. Meanwhile, head of TransJakarta operations Sr. Comr. Rene Nunumete said on Thursday the management would resume the deployment of public order officers in response to reports of pickpockets, who are targeting passengers on buses when guards are not aboard. "We will deploy officers posing as passengers on each bus," he said. The busway runs daily from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. Rene advised passengers to alert the driver immediately if they felt they had lost something on a bus. "The driver would seal the bus and contact security officers at the nearest busway stop to conduct a search... Don't wait until you have arrived at your destination stop to make a complaint," he added. > Hi Paul, > > ITDP has been providing technical assistance to the City of Jakarta on the > TransJakarta busway, so I can give a brief update. There are some > interesting points in the news article you sent (copied at the end of this > message). > > 1) It's true the long-term future of the busway is threatened by what > appear to be corrupt procedures. In addition to equipment purchasing > irregularities, to date the City of Jakarta has not established adequate > control mechanisms on revenue. They have installed a high-tech > contactless > farecard system which functions poorly and is not yet set up to provide > any > control on revenues. > > By our estimates, the initial 13km corridor of the busway now operating is > not likely to capture sufficient demand to cover costs on its > own. However, once the second/third corridor -- now beginning > construction > -- are operational, the system should be able to operate at a > profit. (This means covering all costs except for the initial > infrastructure -- primarily stations, road improvements and lane > separators.) Note that we are now in the process of developing an > improved > public transport demand model for Jakarta, so all our estimates are > preliminary. > > Clearly, it is important to have a functioning mechanism to control ticket > sales and revenue. We are hopeful the current investigations underway in > Jakarta will help to achieve this. > > 2) Although the City of Jakarta has a master plan which includes 14 > busway > corridors, 2 monorail lines and 1 subway line; these 3 public transport > projects are not comparable. > > To the extent either the monorail or subway is built, ITDP is encouraging > integration with the busway. However, while the busway can be financially > self-sustaining, there is practically no chance for the monorail or subway > to be so. > > The monorail has officially started development with private > financing. We estimate the monorail might capture from 1-2000 > trips/direction/hour. While there is the ticket price to consider, it > would be reasonable to expect that a monorail would need 10 times that > ridership to break-even. > > > 3) We have found that the press is generally negative about the busway, > regardless of the statistics. (A fact which can be attributed to Governor > Sutiyoso's negative reputation, especially with the press.) > > A couple of statistics cited could be looked at much differently: > >>State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since >>the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly >>operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. > > I cannot confirm the cost and revenue figures cited here. (Keep in mind > there is no control to verify revenue.) However, since the busway only > began collecting revenue in February 2004, the 18b figure would imply they > have been collecting 3b rp/month, a number that does not exactly "dwarf" > monthly costs "exceeding 3 billion..." Note also that Transjakarta has > only become sensitive to costs in recent months, and thus has now > implemented some basic cost measures such as reducing the number of bus-km > during off-peak. > >>... a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this year >>showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using the >> busway. > > I view the purpose of the busway as primarily to prevent further switching > of trips from public to private transportation -- a situation that has > been > occurring in Jakarta and most Asian cities for decades. Hence, the busway > fare needs to be priced so as capture existing public transport passengers > -- which it now is. > > That the JICA survey shows 14% of riders used to take a private car for > the > same trip seems great to me! (Incidentally, the JICA survey also shows a > roughly 6 percent switch from motorcycles.) > > Without TDM measures of some kind, it's unlikely that someone who owns a > private vehicle would switch to public transit. Jakarta does have a HOV > measure in effect for the corridor (3 passengers per car are required > during peak hours, although hiring riders for 1000 rp each (USD 0.12) is > still fairly easy). The effectiveness of this "3-in-1" measure has not > been fully evaluated. > > I would like to know: does anyone have comparison figures of the previous > mode used by travelers on new public transit systems in other cities? > > John Ernst > Asia Regional Director > ITDP > > > At 09:33 PM 7/13/2004, Barter, Paul wrote: > >>Any comments from those closer to the action in Jakarta? >>Paul >>------------- >> >>http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/asia/story/0,4386,261373,00.html? >> >>Straits Times >>JULY 14, 2004 >>Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway >>Lack of supporting facilities makes it unattractive to car owners while >>management's integrity is in doubt >> >>By Devi Asmarani >> >>JAKARTA - In operation for just six months, Jakarta's public bus system >>has already proven to be the most reliable and comfortable means of >>getting around the congested capital. >> >>But its sustainability is in question: most commuters are still unwilling >>to leave their cars at home and the busway's management is allegedly >>fraught with graft. >> >>Observers are worried that - like other ambitious, multi-million-dollar >>government projects in the capital - the system will eventually wither >>from mismanagement and a lack of funds. >> >>The busway system is one of several controversial policies that Jakarta >>Governor Sutiyoso has implemented. Others include the eviction of illegal >>squatters from slums. >> >>Analysts say these policies - seen as insensitive to public opinion - >> have >>hurt President Megawati Sukarnoputri's popularity in Jakarta. Her PDI-P >>party was behind the Governor's re-election two years ago. >> >>The 250-billion-rupiah (S$48.5-million) Trans-Jakarta Busway system is >> the >>first phase of a seven-year project to build a mass transportation system >>that includes a monorail and subway. >> >>Fifty-six specially built buses, each with a capacity of 85 passengers, >>ply the 12.9km route that runs from the bus terminal in the popular Blok >> M >>shopping complex to the bustling Chinatown area. >> >>The buses travel along dedicated bus lanes, which reduces travel times. >>Around 51,000 people use them daily. >> >>The system was especially helpful during the campaigning leading up to >>April's legislative election, when up to 65,000 people a day used it to >>avoid the massive jams caused by street parades. >> >>However, a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this >>year showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using >> the >>busway. >> >>State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since >>the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly >>operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. >> >>'With the current bus fare of 2,500 rupiah per trip, we are still heavily >>subsidised by the city budget,' said company spokesman Ajar Aedi. >> >>'But the purpose is to provide a service that is affordable for everyone, >>so we can't stress too much on the business side for now.' >> >>The Jakarta city administration is planning two more routes for the >> busway >>system. >> >>But public policy analyst Agus Pambagio said the system was poorly >> managed >>and prone to corruption. >> >>The cost of bus procurement and bus shelter construction may have been >>falsely marked up, he said, and the ticketing system is also not >>transparent enough, making it prone to irregularities. >> >>Most car owners are also reluctant to take the bus because of a lack of >>good supporting facilities, said Mr Agus. Feeder buses serving routes not >>covered by the Trans-Jakarta buses are in a decrepit state. >> >>The city's pavements are also in need of repair and there are no parking >>facilities for car owners who want to take the bus. >> >>'To encourage people to take the bus, the government must do more than >>just buy buses,' said Mr Agus. >> >>'There must be supporting facilities as well as integrated traffic and >> car >>ownership policies. Right now, there is no long-term initiative other >> than >>to finish the projects.' >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>Copyright @ 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved. >> >>Forwarded for the purpose of education and research > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > John Ernst - Director, Asia Region > ITDP - The Institute for Transport and Development Policy > Direct Fax +1 (801) 365-5914 > Subscribe to ITDP's Sustainable Transport e-update at www.itdp.org > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Fri Jul 16 13:29:55 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:29:55 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Enquiry on masters degrees in sustainable transport policy Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F13E@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Dear sustranners Does anyone have any suggestions on this question from a colleague in Indonesia? My mind in momentarily a blank on this... :-( Paul "I would like to ask you where do I have to go if I want to take master degree in Sustainable Transportation Policy Study? I prefer a school that is using English. How about NUS? Thanks for your attention and kindness." From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 16 21:26:48 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:26:48 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Value Capture - The other shoe of sustainable transportation Message-ID: <010101c46b30$2b68b0a0$6501a8c0@home> Friday, July 16, 2004 If you go to The Commons today at http://ecoplan.org/com_index.htm you will see a new program announcement: Value Capture Initiative, introducing itself as follows: "When our public servants invest our hard earned taxpayer dollars in investments that improve our communities and increase the value of real estate in the impacted areas, some or all of this increment should be recouped in order to fund much needed public services. This is easy to say but hard to do. So tune in here and lend a hand in this important task." One can only wonder why it has taken us so long to get around to this important set of issues with no less than huge implications for sustainable development and social justice, but finally here we are. And we think this is going to prove an important contribution, above all because as in all programs grouped under The Commons the contribution is a result of a vigorous and convivial international group effort. If you like what you see there, we invite you to join the Land Caf?, for which you will see all the necessary information on the site. It is there where the support materials and interactive discussions will unfold. Know someone who might be interested to join these discussions? Please share this note with them. Kind thanks. With all good wishes, Eric Britton "The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant administrators and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the path to a more sustainable and more just society." The Commons __ technology, economy, society__ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara 75006 Paris, France, Europe T: +331 4326 1323 Fax/Voicemail hotline: +331 5301 2896 W : http://www.ecoplan.org IP Videoconference: 81.65.50.149 E: Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org Personal webpage: www.EricBritton.org --- Outgoing mail certified Virus Free. Checked by Norton Anti-Virus. Version 9.05.15 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040716/37fd55d2/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 16 22:02:08 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:02:08 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Congestion Pricing overview Message-ID: <010601c46b35$1ac9ad80$6501a8c0@home> There is a good quick summary article in Transportation Alternatives at http://www.transalt.org/campaigns/sensible/congestion.html If you do not know it, you may want to have a look and consider subscribing to their free newsletter. We find it a useful reference. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040716/78ed1b70/attachment.html From dguruswamy at hotmail.com Fri Jul 16 22:34:01 2004 From: dguruswamy at hotmail.com (Dharm Guruswamy) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 09:34:01 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway Message-ID: JULY 14, 2004 Poor planning and graft pose threat to new Jakarta busway Lack of supporting facilities makes it unattractive to car owners while management's integrity is in doubt By Devi Asmarani JAKARTA - In operation for just six months, Jakarta's public bus system has already proven to be the most reliable and comfortable means of getting around the congested capital. But its sustainability is in question: most commuters are still unwilling to leave their cars at home and the busway's management is allegedly fraught with graft. Observers are worried that - like other ambitious, multi-million-dollar government projects in the capital - the system will eventually wither from mismanagement and a lack of funds. The busway system is one of several controversial policies that Jakarta Governor Sutiyoso has implemented. Others include the eviction of illegal squatters from slums. Analysts say these policies - seen as insensitive to public opinion - have hurt President Megawati Sukarnoputri's popularity in Jakarta. Her PDI-P party was behind the Governor's re-election two years ago. The 250-billion-rupiah (S$48.5-million) Trans-Jakarta Busway system is the first phase of a seven-year project to build a mass transportation system that includes a monorail and subway. Fifty-six specially built buses, each with a capacity of 85 passengers, ply the 12.9km route that runs from the bus terminal in the popular Blok M shopping complex to the bustling Chinatown area. The buses travel along dedicated bus lanes, which reduces travel times. Around 51,000 people use them daily. The system was especially helpful during the campaigning leading up to April's legislative election, when up to 65,000 people a day used it to avoid the massive jams caused by street parades. However, a study by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency this year showed that only 14 per cent of car owners have switched to using the busway. State-owned Trans-Jakarta has recorded 18 billion rupiah in revenue since the busway's launch, an amount it says is still dwarfed by monthly operating costs exceeding 3 billion rupiah. 'With the current bus fare of 2,500 rupiah per trip, we are still heavily subsidised by the city budget,' said company spokesman Ajar Aedi. 'But the purpose is to provide a service that is affordable for everyone, so we can't stress too much on the business side for now.' The Jakarta city administration is planning two more routes for the busway system. But public policy analyst Agus Pambagio said the system was poorly managed and prone to corruption. The cost of bus procurement and bus shelter construction may have been falsely marked up, he said, and the ticketing system is also not transparent enough, making it prone to irregularities. Most car owners are also reluctant to take the bus because of a lack of good supporting facilities, said Mr Agus. Feeder buses serving routes not covered by the Trans-Jakarta buses are in a decrepit state. The city's pavements are also in need of repair and there are no parking facilities for car owners who want to take the bus. 'To encourage people to take the bus, the government must do more than just buy buses,' said Mr Agus. 'There must be supporting facilities as well as integrated traffic and car ownership policies. Right now, there is no long-term initiative other than to finish the projects.' -------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright @ 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040716/ade6833a/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 49 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040716/ade6833a/attachment-0002.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 5061 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040716/ade6833a/attachment-0003.bin From lpeterson at itdp.org Sat Jul 17 04:34:30 2004 From: lpeterson at itdp.org (Lisa Peterson) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:34:30 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution, but how? In-Reply-To: <007101c464ff$8a0c0c60$32fa45cf@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <001301c46b6b$eab66070$6901a8c0@Lisa> Eric and all, Thanks for raising this import issue. As many of you have pointed out, the Mobility 2030 report is disappointing at best, if not a dangerous attempt to greenwash the industry's expansion into developing countries. We'd like to develop a critique of the report, and invite any of you to submit points for inclusion. I can compile them and circulate a combined critique to the list for comment and feedback. Some general points of criticism, to add to what you've all been saying: - The intended audience and purpose of the report is unclear. After 150 pages of discussing the current status of transport and putting forward its proposed sustainability goals, the report spends less than two pages discussing "how companies like ours can contribute to achieving the goals we have identified." Then, the focus is heavy on tailpipe solutions to emissions problems. - The report approaches "sustainable mobility" with the assumption that expansion of private car use is inevitable and even desirable. It includes troubling recommendations - including the export of cheap cars to developing countries as a solution to mobility constraints. Public transit, bicycling and walking are barely mentioned. - The report either avoids taking a stance or comes out against anything that might limit private automobile use, such as congestion pricing and policies to limit urban sprawl. So, we welcome your comments and contributions, either off-list or on. Please get back to us by Friday, July 30. Thanks and best, Lisa Lisa Peterson Communications Director Institute for Transportation and Development Policy Subscribe to Sustainable Transport: www.itdp.org 115 West 30th Street, Suite 1205 New York, NY 10001 Ph: 212-629-8001 Fax: 212-629-8033 e-mail: lpeterson@itdp.org *-----Original Message----- *From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lpeterson=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org *[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+lpeterson=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On *Behalf Of Eric Bruun *Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 11:23 AM *To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; eric.britton@ecoplan.org; *WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com *Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org *Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & theauto industry - part of the solution,but *how? * * * *I think that Lee is on to something. Maybe the main reason for this study *is *to be able to say that, thanks to efforts initiated by this study, the *damage from growing car use will not be as bad as it would have been *otherwise. * *I want to raise a few other points which I think are relevant: * *1) There is massive overcapacity worldwide in the auto industry. There is *intense pressure to increase car sales. The situation will only get worse, *as China probably plans on trying to export huge numbers of cars and put *some of the higher wage countries out of the business. * *2) Why should any developing country be asked to conserve when the US, *which *has 4 percent of the world's population, consumes 25 percent of the world's *gasoline? There isn't much hope of persuasion until the US starts to *conserve. * *3) Technology oriented people like to focus on fuel efficiency of vehicles. *But this is roughly half the story. The other half is containing sprawl and *not building auto-dependent communties. The US is such a fuel glutton *because it has both very large vehicles AND weak land use planning. * *4) Consuming land to accommodate autos is especially damaging near most of *the great port/transportation hub cities. The reason they were located *there *in the first place is because of the superior farm land nearby or up river. *So, low-density development also eliminates some of the world's best *farmland. I give as an example Philadelphia, where I live. There are tens *of *thousands of empty lots and abandoned houses in the city proper, while *McMansions are being built on rich farm land in the surrounding Delaware *River basin. * *Eric Bruun * * * *----- Original Message ----- *From: "Lee Schipper" *To: ; *Cc: *Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 8:17 AM *Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] WBCSD & theauto *industry - part of the solution, but how? * * *> I was a strong supporter of the idea of the WBCSD, helping informally to *> set it up when I was at the IEA and then Shell Int'l. Long conversations *> with organizers at both auto and oil companies, potential consultants. *> Organized 1 of the expert forums (Mexico City, last year) and *> participated in a few others. *> I will read the material and report back here -- rumors fly that the *> final report is weak -- seems like the fuel companies are very agressive *> about clean fuels, which is the easy part, but the car makers are wont *> to say "less cars than otherwise", and that's really what all gazes into *> the future are all about. But let me look carefully first. *> *> >>> eric.britton@ecoplan.org 7/7/2004 6:30:24 AM >>> *> Wednesday, July 07, 2004, Paris, France, Europe *> *> *> *> Our old friend and colleague, Ken Orski, formerly the original *> caretaker *> of the urban transport environment of the OECD's environment unit *> years *> ago when it was just getting started, has just kindly shared with us *> an *> abstract of and commentary on the just published report of the WBCSD. *> His closing phrase caught my attention, and I would like to invite *> commentary on it here. He writes: *> *> *> *> "While it is too early to predict the report's longer term influence, *> the sponsoring companies clearly hope that their initiative will, at *> the very least, help to establish the auto industry's sincerity and *> good *> faith in trying to come to grips with the impact of its activities on *> the environment." *> *> *> *> Now, I for one get no great pleasure in bashing the auto or energy *> industry - indeed I think it's a pretty dumb and counter-productive *> thing to do since one way or another they are also part of the *> solution *> (indeed they are important clients for my personal consulting work as *> I *> keep trying to edge them toward a more truly proactive approach in *> helping create and advance the New Mobility Agenda - I am not that *> reassured about either (a) the usefulness or (b) the sincerity and *> good *> faith - precisely! - of their participation in this particular *> exercise. *> *> *> *> *> I have my own thoughts on this as you can imagine, but I would be *> interested to hear what others of you might have to say. Indeed, *> isn't *> the main issue behind this from our shared perspectives here is that *> we *> need to make them part of the solution. There can be no doubt about *> that. The question of course is: will they do it without firm *> leadership from the public policy end. And if so, what form should *> that *> take? (I attach to this note our short original 'mission statement' *> for The Commons which goes back now to several decades. Still pretty *> much the way it looks around here.) *> *> *> *> Eric Britton *> *> The Commons, Paris *> *> *> *> *> *> " The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant *> administrators *> and politicians, pioneering new concepts for activists, community *> groups, entrepreneurs and business, and through our joint efforts, *> energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the *> path to a more sustainable and more just society." *> *> *> *> *> *> *> From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jul 19 05:02:03 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 22:02:03 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD Mobility 2030 report - general commentary Message-ID: <003b01c46d02$18e79990$6501a8c0@home> -----Original Message----- From: Paul Metz [mailto:metz@integerconsult.org] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 9:21 PM To: Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org Dear Eric, Thank you for this initiative. If July 30 is indeed the end, I can only now make some remarks and wish they serve you in these 2 weeks. 1. In the early stage of this WBCSD-project I met with the organisers and told them that their focus cannot credibly claim to cover "mobility". The report should be named more correctly "some first steps towards sustainable AUTOmobility". If not, I urged them to include public transport and the potentials for reduction of physical mobility by ICT, telework, teleconsults, telemeetings, ... Some other members of the same associations should be invited, not only the cars and fuels interests. And how can e.g. city design be included, if 'urban sprawl' is not accepted as a fact of nature ? 2. The (inofficial) strategy of the WBCSD is to 'defend the licenses to operate' of its members as as long and cheaply as possible. It does so by presenting success stories, which support its lobby for voluntary and subsidised actions and against legislation. It mainly - if not only - represents transnational companies and usually agrees with the general business lobby ICC. In 1996 I co-founded and since then represent the pro-active European Business Council for Sustainable Energy. See www.e5.org for its agenda, which includes active support for Kyoto, carbon taxes and trading, elimination of perverse subsidies, etc. also on behalf of small and midsized companies. Also on my own website you find more. 3. This report should be confronted with the Millennium Development Goals - should there be "access to mobility" in it ? - and with the Climate Convention. It is unlikely that the scenario until 2030 projected in this study is compatible with these global superpriorities. It may be a good start, but does not show the appropriate sense of urgency. And how can mobility in developing countries 'leapfrog' and avoid repetition of the fossil, land-intensive route we try to end here ? Finally, I am convinced of the good intentions of the experts involved in the WBCSD project group. My questions here aim at their bosses, the strategy of the companies and at the governmental decision makers they try to influence. Good luck and please explain why we have only 2 weeks. In August more experts may have time to contribute. Paul Metz _____________________________________________ INTEGeR... consult Dr Paul E. Metz Managing Consultant Phone +31 26 362 04 50 Mobile +31 653 76 58 85 Email Metz@integerconsult.org URL http://www.integerconsult.org Market intelligence for profitable green business -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040718/0e774641/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jul 19 01:48:45 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 18:48:45 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD Mobility 2030 - International Peer Review Message-ID: <005701c46ce7$1872fa10$6501a8c0@home> Sunday, July 18, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Subject: WBCSD Mobility 2030 report - International Peer Review Note 1: It will be good if possible to retain this subject heading for future reference Note 2: ITDP is asking for our full feedback by 30 July (a bit tight for an interactive review? Maybe one month from today?) Dear Friends, This cooperation with the ITDP and all of us in this cooperative venture strikes me as an truly admirable example of a concrete way in which we can put our long and carefully developed, highly knowledgeable and fully independent world policy and practice network to work in the cause of sustainable development and social justice. I think we all agree that the WBCSD report and its recommendations needs to be put into the proper perspective of the real issues and choices that together constitute the sustainability agenda. And that as it stands this is a job which has yet to be done. Our ultimate goal is of course not to trash the WBCSD report - nobody's perfect - but rather to see if we can seize this opportunity to set what they have done in a much needed broader, true activist sustainability perspective. The sponsors offer it as a step in a process which has yet to be engaged. There I think we are all in full agreement with them. So let's engage. I am sure that we are all pretty much agreed that when we want to do is achieve useful positive results. Thus, rather than nag them, I propose that we seize this deliberately as a rare opportunity to lay the base for a real international coalition in favor of sustainable development - and sustainable mobility - with a strong commitment to the real bottom line. Our view of sustainability is that the contrary conditions are there, pressing terribly hard, and that all the trends are in the wrong direction. Sustainability will not wait. But where, if this is so important, is this huge and one would hope spirited public dialogue taking place? For my part, I have scanned for critical articles that take an honest whack at the issues but thus far have been unable to come up with any. (See below for a quick summary of articles identified in the process.) Such an important problem area, and such little honest informed discussion. Hmm. Let me not push this further for now, since my role here is not to blab but to help as I can in simulating and facilitating the discussions and process which we are now engaging. So, in addition to Lisa's three good points below, along with those brought up by Eric Bruun and Lee Schipper (also below), let me propose the following points and questions that it may be worthwhile commenting: 1. Sub-text: There is a huge hidden sub-text which I believe is vital here. It is this: "Every day that the present transportation paradigm continues without radical overhaul is money in the bank for the report's auto and energy industry sponsors: BP, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Michelin, Nissan, Norsk Hydro, Renault, Shell, Toyota and Volkswagen". If this is true, it means that the level of both urgency - and their responsibility at the major financial beneficiaries of the present arrangements - becomes quite other than what we see in those pages. 2. Missing issues? The report deals with a fairly long list of issues, targets. Good. But what are the issues that it is failing to address? Can we make a good list of these? And what are the consequences of this/these failures? 3. Surprising recommendations? Can we - can they? - point up any surprising recommendations that might not have been anticipated, given who they are, what they are doing, and where their interests lie. 4. Time horizon? What about the time horizon chosen? Is 2030 the right time horizon to focus on for issues such as these? For the decisions that need to be taken today - if the issues are indeed urgent. What is the implication of this choice? The cost? 5. Gravitas and quieting: And what about the implications of the report coming as it does from a respected international group like the WBCSD whose announced mission is "To provide business leadership as a catalyst for change toward sustainable development, and to promote the role of eco-efficiency, innovation and corporate social responsibility." * I.e., does their report have the effect of "quieting uncertainty about the dilemma of our present unsustainability and hence via sub-text delaying action and encouraging passivity in the face of challenges that need to have highest profile and be addressed with real urgency starting today". 6. The process: The sponsors indicate that they have put four years of work with some two hundred participants in to this report, but as I look over their process I for one cannot spot any surprises,. It looks to me like the usual "managed outreach" approach which we see go0vts and industry engaging in all too often. But is that right? (I invite comment on this point, since we are in effect breaking their intended pattern, and perhaps if anyone ever does this again, they should be using a deeper and more opening critical model for pulling their information and recommendations together). 7. $50 oil? What about $50 oil? Does that make any difference? Can it be harnessed as not so much part of the problem but an element of the solution? 8. Slamming session? Should we in addition to the more measured discussions have a wide open slamming and criticism session aimed at somewhat cruelly commenting (a) the current transportation paradigm and (b) the sponsors' role in locking it in? And jokes (including black humor). I think so because we need to open up the debate - something which they appear to have rigorously avoided despite their claims to the contrary - and even if most of this will never make it into our final report and recommendations, it nonetheless scan be a source of energy and new idea. So let's have at it, without ever forgetting that we are ladies and gentlemen. 9. Inviting sponsors and authors: I am asking Thorsten Arndt, Online Communications Manager of the WBCSD to be so kind as to inform all of those concerned within their network, including the authors and participants in the report and the process behind it, to come into this open international discussion and take active part. The program officer for the project is Miss. Claudia Schweizer. I very much hope that they will join in this important group venture. Indeed their report invites just this, 10. Why are we doing this? Finally, what's our message and to whom do we address it? I would suggest that there will be several eventual audiences, each of whom/which need to be addressed briefly in a final report. Positive messages to which they can respond! Among them: * The WBCSD itself * The report's twelve auto and energy industry sponsors * The world of industry and finance that constitutes the world auto and energy sector. * The international organizations and groups that are giving the report generally uncritical acceptance and public notice. Among them, the OECD, IEA, EC, ECMT and others whom we can usefully identify and target for our collective kind words and counsel. * All those groups world wide that say they are working on the sustainability agenda. * And since we are above all talking about cities here, the mayors, local government and the concerned citizens and groups who are ready to take an active role in shaping their cities. That's where it all has to begin. The only other thing that comes to mind to kick this off is the importance of ensuring that once we have a solid piece of work with creative recommendations, we need to ensure that it gets highest levels of media coverage. Of course the ITDP team is well placed to do this, but given the large number of us in this network and our wide international presence, I vote that we all have a go at this when the time comes. Ladies, gentelmen. To your pens. Eric Britton Some background: * The full 180 report and various pieces of it asre avialble as PDF files from http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet &DocId=6094 * The 17 page Overview - minimum reading for comment? (The 7 page Ex Sum is less useful.) * Some press coverage: (Are they all saying basically the same thing? Have they bought in? Without really thinking about it? Hmm.) o http://www.euractiv.com/cgi-bin/cgint.exe?204 &OIDN=1507979&-tt=in o http://www.iht.com/articles/36023.html o http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/news/industry_news/news-55dojo070d o http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 o http://www.hydro.com/en/press_room/news/archive/2004_07/mobility2030_en. html o http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 o http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html &R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/8584.cfm -----Original Messages ----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+ecoplan.adsl=wanadoo.fr@list.jca.apc.org Behalf Of Lisa Peterson Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 9:35 PM To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport'; eric.britton@ecoplan.org WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? Eric and all, Thanks for raising this import issue. As many of you have pointed out, the Mobility 2030 report is disappointing at best, if not a dangerous attempt to greenwash the industry's expansion into developing countries. We'd like to develop a critique of the report, and invite any of you to submit points for inclusion. I can compile them and circulate a combined critique to the list for comment and feedback. Some general points of criticism, to add to what you've all been saying: - The intended audience and purpose of the report is unclear. After 150 pages of discussing the current status of transport and putting forward its proposed sustainability goals, the report spends less than two pages discussing "how companies like ours can contribute to achieving the goals we have identified." Then, the focus is heavy on tailpipe solutions to emissions problems. - The report approaches "sustainable mobility" with the assumption that expansion of private car use is inevitable and even desirable. It includes troubling recommendations - including the export of cheap cars to developing countries as a solution to mobility constraints. Public transit, bicycling and walking are barely mentioned. - The report either avoids taking a stance or comes out against anything that might limit private automobile use, such as congestion pricing and policies to limit urban sprawl. So, we welcome your comments and contributions, either off-list or on. Please get back to us by Friday, July 30. Thanks and best, Lisa Peterson, Communications Director Institute for Transportation and Development Policy -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lpeterson=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org Behalf Of Eric Bruun Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 11:23 AM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; eric.britton@ecoplan.org; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? I think that Lee is on to something. Maybe the main reason for this study Is to be able to say that, thanks to efforts initiated by this study, the damage from growing car use will not be as bad as it would have been otherwise. I want to raise a few other points which I think are relevant: 1) There is massive overcapacity worldwide in the auto industry. There is intense pressure to increase car sales. The situation will only get worse, as China probably plans on trying to export huge numbers of cars and put some of the higher wage countries out of the business. 2) Why should any developing country be asked to conserve when the US, which has 4 percent of the world's population, consumes 25 percent of the world's gasoline? There isn't much hope of persuasion until the US starts to conserve. 3) Technology oriented people like to focus on fuel efficiency of vehicles. But this is roughly half the story. The other half is containing sprawl and not building auto-dependent communities. The US is such a fuel glutton because it has both very large vehicles AND weak land use planning. 4) Consuming land to accommodate autos is especially damaging near most of the great port/transportation hub cities. The reason they were located there in the first place is because of the superior farm land nearby or up river. So, low-density development also eliminates some of the world's best farmland. I give as an example Philadelphia, where I live. There are tens of thousands of empty lots and abandoned houses in the city proper, while McMansions are being built on rich farm land in the surrounding Delaware River basin. Eric Bruun ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Schipper" The Dutch EU Presidency is sponsoring a by-invitaiton meeting on this issue 18/19 October in Amsterdam. The focus may be mostly on CO2 in EU, but the themes and concerns echoed below will certainly emerge. I think there are other discussions and presentaitons. I finally had time to download the report and I'll read it..I also had an informal role in setting up (in part when I was at the IEA, partly when I was at Shell Int'l) >>> metz@integerconsult.org 7/18/2004 4:02:03 PM >>> -----Original Message----- From: Paul Metz [mailto:metz@integerconsult.org] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 9:21 PM To: Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org Dear Eric, Thank you for this initiative. If July 30 is indeed the end, I can only now make some remarks and wish they serve you in these 2 weeks. 1. In the early stage of this WBCSD-project I met with the organisers and told them that their focus cannot credibly claim to cover "mobility". The report should be named more correctly "some first steps towards sustainable AUTOmobility". If not, I urged them to include public transport and the potentials for reduction of physical mobility by ICT, telework, teleconsults, telemeetings, ... Some other members of the same associations should be invited, not only the cars and fuels interests. And how can e.g. city design be included, if 'urban sprawl' is not accepted as a fact of nature ? 2. The (inofficial) strategy of the WBCSD is to 'defend the licenses to operate' of its members as as long and cheaply as possible. It does so by presenting success stories, which support its lobby for voluntary and subsidised actions and against legislation. It mainly - if not only - represents transnational companies and usually agrees with the general business lobby ICC. In 1996 I co-founded and since then represent the pro-active European Business Council for Sustainable Energy. See www.e5.org for its agenda, which includes active support for Kyoto, carbon taxes and trading, elimination of perverse subsidies, etc. also on behalf of small and midsized companies. Also on my own website you find more. 3. This report should be confronted with the Millennium Development Goals - should there be "access to mobility" in it ? - and with the Climate Convention. It is unlikely that the scenario until 2030 projected in this study is compatible with these global superpriorities. It may be a good start, but does not show the appropriate sense of urgency. And how can mobility in developing countries 'leapfrog' and avoid repetition of the fossil, land-intensive route we try to end here? Finally, I am convinced of the good intentions of the experts involved in the WBCSD project group. My questions here aim at their bosses, the strategy of the companies and at the governmental decision makers they try to influence. Good luck and please explain why we have only 2 weeks. In August more experts may have time to contribute. Paul Metz _____________________________________________ INTEGeR... consult Dr Paul E. Metz Managing Consultant Phone +31 26 362 04 50 Mobile +31 653 76 58 85 Email Metz@integerconsult.org URL http://www.integerconsult.org Market intelligence for profitable green business ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/2GfwlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> The New Mobility/World Transport Agenda Consult at: http://wTransport.org To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WorldTransport/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Mon Jul 19 16:43:16 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:43:16 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: WBCSD Mobility 2030 - International Peer Review Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F176@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> This didn't get through from Eric yesterday (too long for poor old sustran-discuss I think). So I am forwarding to the list now. -----Original Message----- From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org [mailto:eric.britton@ecoplan.org] Sent: Monday, 19 July 2004 12:49 AM To: Sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Cc: Barter, Paul Subject: WBCSD Mobility 2030 - International Peer Review Sunday, July 18, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Subject: WBCSD Mobility 2030 report - International Peer Review Note 1: It will be good if possible to retain this subject heading for future reference Note 2: ITDP is asking for our full feedback by 30 July (a bit tight for an interactive review? Maybe one month from today?) Dear Friends, This cooperation with the ITDP and all of us in this cooperative venture strikes me as an truly admirable example of a concrete way in which we can put our long and carefully developed, highly knowledgeable and fully independent world policy and practice network to work in the cause of sustainable development and social justice. I think we all agree that the WBCSD report and its recommendations needs to be put into the proper perspective of the real issues and choices that together constitute the sustainability agenda. And that as it stands this is a job which has yet to be done. Our ultimate goal is of course not to trash the WBCSD report - nobody's perfect - but rather to see if we can seize this opportunity to set what they have done in a much needed broader, true activist sustainability perspective. The sponsors offer it as a step in a process which has yet to be engaged. There I think we are all in full agreement with them. So let's engage. I am sure that we are all pretty much agreed that when we want to do is achieve useful positive results. Thus, rather than nag them, I propose that we seize this deliberately as a rare opportunity to lay the base for a real international coalition in favor of sustainable development - and sustainable mobility - with a strong commitment to the real bottom line. Our view of sustainability is that the contrary conditions are there, pressing terribly hard, and that all the trends are in the wrong direction. Sustainability will not wait. But where, if this is so important, is this huge and one would hope spirited public dialogue taking place? For my part, I have scanned for critical articles that take an honest whack at the issues but thus far have been unable to come up with any. (See below for a quick summary of articles identified in the process.) Such an important problem area, and such little honest informed discussion. Hmm. Let me not push this further for now, since my role here is not to blab but to help as I can in simulating and facilitating the discussions and process which we are now engaging. So, in addition to Lisa's three good points below, along with those brought up by Eric Bruun and Lee Schipper (also below), let me propose the following points and questions that it may be worthwhile commenting: 1. Sub-text: There is a huge hidden sub-text which I believe is vital here. It is this: "Every day that the present transportation paradigm continues without radical overhaul is money in the bank for the report's auto and energy industry sponsors: BP, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Michelin, Nissan, Norsk Hydro, Renault, Shell, Toyota and Volkswagen". If this is true, it means that the level of both urgency - and their responsibility at the major financial beneficiaries of the present arrangements - becomes quite other than what we see in those pages. 2. Missing issues? The report deals with a fairly long list of issues, targets. Good. But what are the issues that it is failing to address? Can we make a good list of these? And what are the consequences of this/these failures? 3. Surprising recommendations? Can we - can they? - point up any surprising recommendations that might not have been anticipated, given who they are, what they are doing, and where their interests lie. 4. Time horizon? What about the time horizon chosen? Is 2030 the right time horizon to focus on for issues such as these? For the decisions that need to be taken today - if the issues are indeed urgent. What is the implication of this choice? The cost? 5. Gravitas and quieting: And what about the implications of the report coming as it does from a respected international group like the WBCSD whose announced mission is "To provide business leadership as a catalyst for change toward sustainable development, and to promote the role of eco-efficiency, innovation and corporate social responsibility." * I.e., does their report have the effect of "quieting uncertainty about the dilemma of our present unsustainability and hence via sub-text delaying action and encouraging passivity in the face of challenges that need to have highest profile and be addressed with real urgency starting today". 6. The process: The sponsors indicate that they have put four years of work with some two hundred participants in to this report, but as I look over their process I for one cannot spot any surprises,. It looks to me like the usual "managed outreach" approach which we see go0vts and industry engaging in all too often. But is that right? (I invite comment on this point, since we are in effect breaking their intended pattern, and perhaps if anyone ever does this again, they should be using a deeper and more opening critical model for pulling their information and recommendations together). 7. $50 oil? What about $50 oil? Does that make any difference? Can it be harnessed as not so much part of the problem but an element of the solution? 8. Slamming session? Should we in addition to the more measured discussions have a wide open slamming and criticism session aimed at somewhat cruelly commenting (a) the current transportation paradigm and (b) the sponsors' role in locking it in? And jokes (including black humor). I think so because we need to open up the debate - something which they appear to have rigorously avoided despite their claims to the contrary - and even if most of this will never make it into our final report and recommendations, it nonetheless scan be a source of energy and new idea. So let's have at it, without ever forgetting that we are ladies and gentlemen. 9. Inviting sponsors and authors: I am asking Thorsten Arndt, Online Communications Manager of the WBCSD to be so kind as to inform all of those concerned within their network, including the authors and participants in the report and the process behind it, to come into this open international discussion and take active part. The program officer for the project is Miss. Claudia Schweizer. I very much hope that they will join in this important group venture. Indeed their report invites just this, 10. Why are we doing this? Finally, what's our message and to whom do we address it? I would suggest that there will be several eventual audiences, each of whom/which need to be addressed briefly in a final report. Positive messages to which they can respond! Among them: * The WBCSD itself * The report's twelve auto and energy industry sponsors * The world of industry and finance that constitutes the world auto and energy sector. * The international organizations and groups that are giving the report generally uncritical acceptance and public notice. Among them, the OECD, IEA, EC, ECMT and others whom we can usefully identify and target for our collective kind words and counsel. * All those groups world wide that say they are working on the sustainability agenda. * And since we are above all talking about cities here, the mayors, local government and the concerned citizens and groups who are ready to take an active role in shaping their cities. That's where it all has to begin. The only other thing that comes to mind to kick this off is the importance of ensuring that once we have a solid piece of work with creative recommendations, we need to ensure that it gets highest levels of media coverage. Of course the ITDP team is well placed to do this, but given the large number of us in this network and our wide international presence, I vote that we all have a go at this when the time comes. Ladies, gentelmen. To your pens. Eric Britton Some background: * The full 180 report and various pieces of it asre avialble as PDF files from http://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet &DocId=6094 * The 17 page Overview - minimum reading for comment? (The 7 page Ex Sum is less useful.) * Some press coverage: (Are they all saying basically the same thing? Have they bought in? Without really thinking about it? Hmm.) o http://www.euractiv.com/cgi-bin/cgint.exe?204 &OIDN=1507979&-tt=in o http://www.iht.com/articles/36023.html o http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/news/industry_news/news-55dojo070d o http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 o http://www.hydro.com/en/press_room/news/archive/2004_07/mobility2030_en. html o http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2015 o http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html &R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/8584.cfm -----Original Messages ----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+ecoplan.adsl=wanadoo.fr@list.jca.apc.org Behalf Of Lisa Peterson Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 9:35 PM To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport'; eric.britton@ecoplan.org WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? Eric and all, Thanks for raising this import issue. As many of you have pointed out, the Mobility 2030 report is disappointing at best, if not a dangerous attempt to greenwash the industry's expansion into developing countries. We'd like to develop a critique of the report, and invite any of you to submit points for inclusion. I can compile them and circulate a combined critique to the list for comment and feedback. Some general points of criticism, to add to what you've all been saying: - The intended audience and purpose of the report is unclear. After 150 pages of discussing the current status of transport and putting forward its proposed sustainability goals, the report spends less than two pages discussing "how companies like ours can contribute to achieving the goals we have identified." Then, the focus is heavy on tailpipe solutions to emissions problems. - The report approaches "sustainable mobility" with the assumption that expansion of private car use is inevitable and even desirable. It includes troubling recommendations - including the export of cheap cars to developing countries as a solution to mobility constraints. Public transit, bicycling and walking are barely mentioned. - The report either avoids taking a stance or comes out against anything that might limit private automobile use, such as congestion pricing and policies to limit urban sprawl. So, we welcome your comments and contributions, either off-list or on. Please get back to us by Friday, July 30. Thanks and best, Lisa Peterson, Communications Director Institute for Transportation and Development Policy -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lpeterson=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org Behalf Of Eric Bruun Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 11:23 AM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; eric.britton@ecoplan.org; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD & the auto industry - part of the solution, but how? I think that Lee is on to something. Maybe the main reason for this study Is to be able to say that, thanks to efforts initiated by this study, the damage from growing car use will not be as bad as it would have been otherwise. I want to raise a few other points which I think are relevant: 1) There is massive overcapacity worldwide in the auto industry. There is intense pressure to increase car sales. The situation will only get worse, as China probably plans on trying to export huge numbers of cars and put some of the higher wage countries out of the business. 2) Why should any developing country be asked to conserve when the US, which has 4 percent of the world's population, consumes 25 percent of the world's gasoline? There isn't much hope of persuasion until the US starts to conserve. 3) Technology oriented people like to focus on fuel efficiency of vehicles. But this is roughly half the story. The other half is containing sprawl and not building auto-dependent communities. The US is such a fuel glutton because it has both very large vehicles AND weak land use planning. 4) Consuming land to accommodate autos is especially damaging near most of the great port/transportation hub cities. The reason they were located there in the first place is because of the superior farm land nearby or up river. So, low-density development also eliminates some of the world's best farmland. I give as an example Philadelphia, where I live. There are tens of thousands of empty lots and abandoned houses in the city proper, while McMansions are being built on rich farm land in the surrounding Delaware River basin. Eric Bruun ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Schipper" Monday, July 19, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Friends, As you can see from the first round of responses in hours after the original call, we are off to a strong start. Couple of quick organizational suggestions in an attempt to facilitate all this as we move ahead. 1. Subject headings for systematic citation: After some discussion we propose the following subject headings for organizing future entries on what is likely to be a quite extensive commentary. (Notes in parenthesis only for clarification here.) Overall subject heading: WBCSD report (bit shorter, hence better?) Discussion headings for consistent citation: * WBCSD report - General commentary * WBCSD report - Report contributions (to the debate, understanding and remedial action) * WBCSD report - Targeting/Omissions * WBCSD report - Error (factual or of interpretation) * WBCSD report - Wit (including a series of short 'book blurb' comments by us to accompany eventual revised version publication) * WBCSD report - Action recommendations to WBCSD (including to report sponsors, associates, etc.) * WBCSD report - Next steps (Our recommendations) * WBCSD report - Media leads (to get greatest impact of our hard work on this) My hope is that this structure may encourage you to comment on one or more of these, which clearly should feed rather nicely into any eventual report or recommendations. 2. Self-identification: It would be much appreciated if with each posting you remind us as to your full name, title, organizational affiliation, etc. Why? Because we want this to carry the weight of our considerable background and credentials. This indeed is the power of this international peer review approach, making it I believe rather hard to ignore. 3. Presentation of our materials: All of this will inevitably be somewhat ragged, spread out and hard to access efficiently if we leave it for the Yahoo Forum alone -- so I will get to work on this in the next 48 hours and create a cleaner presentation on the New Mobility Agenda website. 4. Schedule: I propose that we aim to tie this up with a final report from this end (probably short with the whole discussion in annex) by the end of August from this end - with attention to giving our friends at the ITDP as much as we/you conveniently can by their next week deadline. My hope is that this two level approach will serve the cause best. (in fact it may lead to more levels than that, since these raw materials may find many good uses in many places. Or so I very much hope.) Since all of this is still early days, if you have any suggestions about modifying or extending any of this better, please let me know off group via Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org. Best, Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040719/55fb138a/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jul 19 18:31:19 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:31:19 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD report - general commentary Message-ID: <005801c46d73$26649890$6501a8c0@home> Monday, July 19, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Sustran Friends, To avoid unnecessary doubling up of messages to you on this, if you are interested in following these group discussions of the WBCSD Moblity 2030 report, I would invite you to drop me a line via Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org with your email address so that we can sign you into the New Mobility Agenda Forum where this critical peer review is being carried out. Regards, Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040719/49224322/attachment.html From richmond at alum.mit.edu Mon Jul 19 18:43:44 2004 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:43:44 +0700 (SE Asia Standard Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <005801c46d73$26649890$6501a8c0@home> References: <005801c46d73$26649890$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: Yes, I am interested in the discussion -- Jonathan ----- Jonathan E. D. Richmond 02 524-5510 (office) Visiting Fellow Intl.: 662 524-5510 Transportation Engineering program School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B 02 524-8257 (home) Asian Institute of Technology Intl.: 662 524-8257 PO Box 4 Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120 02 524-5509 (fax) Thailand Intl: 662 524-5509 e-mail: richmond@ait.ac.th Secretary: Ms. Nisarat Hansuksa richmond@alum.mit.edu 02 524-6051 Intl: 662 524-6051 http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Mon Jul 19 18:51:26 2004 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Barter, Paul) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:51:26 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary Message-ID: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F183@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> I think Jonathan inadvertently hit 'reply'. To avoid a flood of similar messages on the list can I suggest that it might be better for anyone responding to Eric's offer to do so directly to him rather than to the whole list - you will need to paste his email address (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) into the To: field when you respond. All the best, Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: > sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org > > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca > .apc.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan E. D. Richmond > Sent: Monday, 19 July 2004 5:44 PM > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary > > > > Yes, I am interested in the discussion -- Jonathan > > ----- > > Jonathan E. D. Richmond 02 > 524-5510 (office) > Visiting Fellow Intl.: 662 524-5510 > Transportation Engineering program > School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B 02 > 524-8257 (home) > Asian Institute of Technology Intl.: 662 524-8257 > PO Box 4 > Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120 02 > 524-5509 (fax) > Thailand Intl: 662 524-5509 > > e-mail: richmond@ait.ac.th Secretary: Ms. > Nisarat Hansuksa > richmond@alum.mit.edu 02 524-6051 > Intl: 662 > 524-6051 http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > From richmond at alum.mit.edu Mon Jul 19 18:57:54 2004 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:57:54 +0700 (SE Asia Standard Time) Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F183@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> References: <00876017F2EE604292F94DA40323E47506F183@MBOX02.stf.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: Paul, I am indeed guilty of that crime -- I thought I was replying to the author -- and will live in fear of the flogging I shall deservedly receive next time I set foot in Singapore! --Jonathan On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Barter, Paul wrote: > I think Jonathan inadvertently hit 'reply'. > > To avoid a flood of similar messages on the list can I suggest that it > might be better for anyone responding to Eric's offer to do so directly > to him rather than to the whole list - you will need to paste his email > address (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) into the To: field when you respond. > > All the best, > > Paul > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: > > sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org > > > > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+paulbarter=nus.edu.sg@list.jca > > .apc.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > Sent: Monday, 19 July 2004 5:44 PM > > To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport > > Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary > > > > > > > > Yes, I am interested in the discussion -- Jonathan > > > > ----- > > > > Jonathan E. D. Richmond 02 > > 524-5510 (office) > > Visiting Fellow Intl.: 662 524-5510 > > Transportation Engineering program > > School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B 02 > > 524-8257 (home) > > Asian Institute of Technology Intl.: 662 524-8257 > > PO Box 4 > > Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120 02 > > 524-5509 (fax) > > Thailand Intl: 662 524-5509 > > > > e-mail: richmond@ait.ac.th Secretary: Ms. > > Nisarat Hansuksa > > richmond@alum.mit.edu 02 524-6051 > > Intl: 662 > > 524-6051 http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > > > ----- Jonathan E. D. Richmond 02 524-5510 (office) Visiting Fellow Intl.: 662 524-5510 Transportation Engineering program School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B 02 524-8257 (home) Asian Institute of Technology Intl.: 662 524-8257 PO Box 4 Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120 02 524-5509 (fax) Thailand Intl: 662 524-5509 e-mail: richmond@ait.ac.th Secretary: Ms. Nisarat Hansuksa richmond@alum.mit.edu 02 524-6051 Intl: 662 524-6051 http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From lpeterson at itdp.org Mon Jul 19 23:16:54 2004 From: lpeterson at itdp.org (Lisa Peterson) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 10:16:54 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <003001c46d71$82c4e3d0$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <000001c46d9b$0b85e7e0$6901a8c0@Lisa> Dear all, Thanks for your input so far. The end of August is fine for us too - let's give everyone enough time to contribute. All the best, Lisa Lisa Peterson Communications Director Institute for Transportation and Development Policy Subscribe to Sustainable Transport: www.itdp.org 115 West 30th Street, Suite 1205 New York, NY 10001 Ph: 212-629-8001 Fax: 212-629-8033 e-mail: lpeterson@itdp.org -----Original Message----- From: eric.britton@ecoplan.org [mailto:eric.britton@ecoplan.org] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 5:20 AM To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org; lpeterson@itdp.org; whook@itdp.org Subject: WBCSD report - general commentary Monday, July 19, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Friends, As you can see from the first round of responses in hours after the original call, we are off to a strong start. Couple of quick organizational suggestions in an attempt to facilitate all this as we move ahead. 1. Subject headings for systematic citation: After some discussion we propose the following subject headings for organizing future entries on what is likely to be a quite extensive commentary. (Notes in parenthesis only for clarification here.) Overall subject heading: WBCSD report (bit shorter, hence better?) Discussion headings for consistent citation: * WBCSD report - General commentary * WBCSD report - Report contributions (to the debate, understanding and remedial action) * WBCSD report - Targeting/Omissions * WBCSD report - Error (factual or of interpretation) * WBCSD report - Wit (including a series of short 'book blurb' comments by us to accompany eventual revised version publication) * WBCSD report - Action recommendations to WBCSD (including to report sponsors, associates, etc.) * WBCSD report - Next steps (Our recommendations) * WBCSD report - Media leads (to get greatest impact of our hard work on this) My hope is that this structure may encourage you to comment on one or more of these, which clearly should feed rather nicely into any eventual report or recommendations. 2. Self-identification: It would be much appreciated if with each posting you remind us as to your full name, title, organizational affiliation, etc. Why? Because we want this to carry the weight of our considerable background and credentials. This indeed is the power of this international peer review approach, making it I believe rather hard to ignore. 3. Presentation of our materials: All of this will inevitably be somewhat ragged, spread out and hard to access efficiently if we leave it for the Yahoo Forum alone -- so I will get to work on this in the next 48 hours and create a cleaner presentation on the New Mobility Agenda website. 4. Schedule: I propose that we aim to tie this up with a final report from this end (probably short with the whole discussion in annex) by the end of August from this end - with attention to giving our friends at the ITDP as much as we/you conveniently can by their next week deadline. My hope is that this two level approach will serve the cause best. (in fact it may lead to more levels than that, since these raw materials may find many good uses in many places. Or so I very much hope.) Since all of this is still early days, if you have any suggestions about modifying or extending any of this better, please let me know off group via Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org. Best, Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040719/e6c5d135/attachment-0001.html From michaelm at myoffice.net.au Tue Jul 20 11:11:15 2004 From: michaelm at myoffice.net.au (Michael Yeates) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:11:15 +1000 Subject: [sustran] Re: [New Mobility/WorldTransport Forum] WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <003001c46d71$82c4e3d0$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20040720111428.01f57cf8@mail.myoffice.net.au> Dear Eric and all ... Before going to the Report, it is often useful to start such a discussion with some fundamentals ie including some attempts to create some (or even a number of slightly different) semi-agreed definitions or descriptions, including of the "problems". While I suggest this with humility and trepidation, it can be said that too often, it is these "fundamental" concepts or meanings that are uncritically accepted or (mis)understood because they are not made explicit, if not better resolved. So what is "sustainable", "sustainability" and also should "more sustainable" be accepted but defined ie as incremental or temporal steps "in the right direction"? If these are (semi-)agreed, it is necessary to show where are they located and how do they relate to the Report ... as a starting point. Some basic "concerns" (coming from the very car dominated "world" of Brisbane, in Australia and for this discussion, excluding many other relevant issues, for example, global equity issues), relate to the following which need to be addressed by any claim to "sustainable" including the Report. Clearly, they may also provide indicators to measure achievements of goals over time. 1. Despite tailpipe and energy (eg solar powered vehicles) improvements, we are still left with huge and totally unresolved questions and in my view "unsustainable" solutions relating to congestion and parking issues whether cars, buses, trucks, trains or aircraft related to expectations based on the movement of huge loads over huge distances. 2. Thus we are also left with the danger, exclusion, barriers etc of high travel speed in various settings whether urban, suburban, rural or whatever ... and especially by aircraft. 3. There is the carbon problem ... from local and regional ie pollution (C compounds and CO) right through to national, international and global (eg "greenhouse") but also the trade in cheap coal and other fuels. 4. Others have mentioned it, but there is also the question of urban planning where current lifestyles either resist or encourage change from the status quo ... so extreme care needs to be addressed as to how land use <> transport "policy" is addressed otherwise we will all be able to find excuses (rationale) for being "less than sustainable" and primarily to reduce any incentive to change the current dominant behaviours, policies etc. 5. This leaves (me with) the view that walking (including for people with mobility disabilities) and various forms of HPVs (human powered vehicles) are the ONLY modes with any claim to "sustainable mobility" (perhaps plus the addition of human or sail powered boats and some form of "sustainable aircraft" ) ... 6. Interestingly, humankind is either "there", or has been there, as most cultures and cities predate car-dominance ... the urban form of cities can be reclaimed for people and HPVs at no cost if "car dominance" is removed or reduced. So do these "concerns" actually form the basis for a critique/debate of the issues of "sustainability" ... as once the discussion moves on, then it seems to be about something else ...eg how to get to "sustainability" or "moving towards more sustainability", or "becoming more sustainable" ? Perhaps the question of "sustainable transport" is about whether to depend on human or solar/wind/water energy and to prioritise human safety, health and development over all other issues ... or not? Surely we can accept that using public transport or car-pooling or car-sharing etc is NOT "sustainable", but rather is a move towards being "more sustainable" and then only under a whole raft of conditions, including not putting people using human power at any risk at all. The use of public transport or car-pooling or car-sharing etc does not encourage much change in the demand for these "less than sustainable" modes and/or therefore, may and probably will decrease, rather than increase, demand for less unsustainable lifestyles and settings ie "car free" urban areas may need to be "pedestrian priority" to ensure public transport or car-pooling or car-sharing etc do not provide a reason to continue to not give pedestrians and cyclists priority. Thus as this is almost impossible "sustainably", is using public transport etc, an answer, but perhaps to the wrong question? A considerable task but one that cannot be postponed if the issues are to be addressed. It should be technically possible to create a "car" that cannot harm or threaten pedestrians and cyclists. I can guess where this leaves the car industry as we see it in practice and in its history and tradition. A return to making simple, "sustainable", practical, disability aids, bicycles, and other HPVs? Michael Yeates Convenor Public Transport Alliance and Bicycle User Research Group Brisbane Australia At 07:19 PM 19/07/2004, eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: >Monday, July 19, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > >Dear Friends, > > > >As you can see from the first round of responses in hours after the >original call, we are off to a strong start. Couple of quick >organizational suggestions in an attempt to facilitate all this as we move >ahead. > > > >1. Subject headings for systematic citation: After some discussion we >propose the following subject headings for organizing future entries on >what is likely to be a quite extensive commentary. (Notes in parenthesis >only for clarification here.) > > > >Overall subject heading: WBCSD report (bit shorter, hence better?) > >Discussion headings for consistent citation: > >? WBCSD report General commentary > >? WBCSD report Report contributions (to the debate, understanding >and remedial action) > >? WBCSD report Targeting/Omissions > >? WBCSD report Error (factual or of interpretation) > >? WBCSD report Wit (including a series of short book blurbcomments >by us to accompany eventual revised version publication) > >? WBCSD report Action recommendations to WBCSD (including to >report sponsors, associates, etc.) > >? WBCSD report Next steps (Our recommendations) > >? WBCSD report Media leads (to get greatest impact of our hard >work on this) > > > >My hope is that this structure may encourage you to comment on one or more >of these, which clearly should feed rather nicely into any eventual report >or recommendations. > > > >2. Self-identification: It would be much appreciated if with each posting >you remind us as to your full name, title, organizational affiliation, >etc. Why? Because we want this to carry the weight of our considerable >background and credentials. This indeed is the power of this >international peer review approach, making it I believe rather hard to ignore. > >3. Presentation of our materials: All of this will inevitably be somewhat >ragged, spread out and hard to access efficiently if we leave it for the >Yahoo Forum alone -- so I will get to work on this in the next 48 hours >and create a cleaner presentation on the New Mobility Agenda website. > > > >4. Schedule: I propose that we aim to tie this up with a final report >from this end (probably short with the whole discussion in annex) by the >end of August from this end with attention to giving our friends at the >ITDP as much as we/you conveniently can by their next week deadline. My >hope is that this two level approach will serve the cause best. (in fact >it may lead to more levels than that, since these raw materials may find >many good uses in many places. Or so I very much hope.) > > > >Since all of this is still early days, if you have any suggestions about >modifying or extending any of this better, please let me know off group >via Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org. > > > >Best, > > > >Eric Britton > > > > > > > > >The New Mobility/World Transport Agenda >Consult at: http://wTransport.org >To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com >To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com >To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor >ADVERTISEMENT >8e60a.jpg >8e6b4.jpg > > >---------- >Yahoo! Groups Links > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > * > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WorldTransport/ > > * > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > * > WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > * > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > Yahoo! Terms of Service. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040720/b26fb60d/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 8e60a.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1845 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040720/b26fb60d/8e60a.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 8e6b4.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 633 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040720/b26fb60d/8e6b4.jpg From robert_cowherd at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 00:00:35 2004 From: robert_cowherd at yahoo.com (Robert Cowherd) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:00:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <005801c46d73$26649890$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <20040721150035.17451.qmail@web11202.mail.yahoo.com> Eric, Please include me in the forum emails. Robert Cowherd, BArch (Cooper Union), UDC, PhD (MIT) Adjunct Professor, Rhode Island School of Design Cowherd@alum.mit.edu --- eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > Monday, July 19, 2004, Paris, France, Europe > > > > Dear Sustran Friends, > > > > To avoid unnecessary doubling up of messages to you on this, if you > are > interested in following these group discussions of the WBCSD Moblity > 2030 report, I would invite you to drop me a line via > Eric.Britton@ecoplan.org with your email address so that we can sign > you > into the New Mobility Agenda Forum where this critical peer review is > being carried out. > > > > Regards, > > > > Eric Britton > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu Jul 22 01:20:26 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:20:26 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD report - general commentary Message-ID: <013101c46f3e$a3a372f0$6501a8c0@home> Wednesday, July 21, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Colleagues, The following note just in from Professor Peter Newman, a leading figure on the international sustainability scene and currently Chair of the Western Australian Sustainability Roundtable and Sustainability Commissioner in New South Wales (Australia) "Eric. I think the report is very disappointing as they do not follow their own rhetoric on eco-efficiency. I am a strong supporter of WBCSD on many things which it is pioneering but they are going nowhere on mobility. "It seems that mobility is the last sacred cow of modernism. We can apparently now decouple wealth from energy, from greenhouse, from waste but not from mobility. In our cities the wealthy are choosing to live where they can travel less and the poor are the mobile ones. Its not such a sacred cow if we push hard enough to show that there are real sustainability gains if we set stretch targets for reduced mobility. Peter Newman" To my mind this gives us a great starting place on what I regard as the strategic bottom line issues here - i.e., what are we trying to accomplish with all this anyway. Let me share my thoughts with you on this briefly: 1. Like Peter I am a long time supporter of the WBCSD, glad that they are there and trying to do the tough job of doing something about the Great Sustainability Divide between the present-oriented economic interests of international business (think of it as" the old"), and their longer term responsibility to the planet and to the people who live on it (vs. "the new"). And indeed, there does seem to be an as yet unbridged problem when it is time for them to pick up their sustainability cudgels and apply them to the transport/mobility sector. Which of course is why we are all here today. TO help them with this. 2. It is my view on this that, thus far at least, the price of real responsible behaviour is not only so new and so very different, but it is so high in terms of both their institutional mindset and $$$ that they will, as long as they can, continue to revert to this kind of rather old fashioned pre-narrowing and scenarios ploy when it comes to 'facing the facts of sustainability and mobility'. My own quick back of the envelope calculation suggests that current arrangements are bringing in some ten(s) of billions of dollars into their coffers each day that nothing significant changes. (Under these circumstances, I rather think I myself would tend to hesitate a bit before inviting fundamental underlying change - which of course is what sustainable development is all about in this context.) Oops. 3. The twelve companies that commissioned this work are not in fact sworn or explicit enemies of sustainable development and social justice, that would be all too simple and turn this into the latest run of "Dallas". It is just that they are basically still in a state of denial. Their report makes this clear of course - but at the same time they have to be asking themselves: "How could we have done better. We have addressed the issues, we have spent a lot of money and time in doing it, we have talked to a lot of people about it, we have produced a huge and beautiful report, and we have made our seven goal recommendations. What more could they ask for?" (Yes, but as we all know it is often for us middle class folks a lot easier to spend money than it is to go painfully back to square one and reassess every tough strand in a situation that is of great importance to us and that may require significant and possibly painful adjustments on our part (for example our relationship or lack thereof with our children, where it is all too often a lot easier to spend money for psychiatrics and ballet lessons than get off our butts and spend lots of time with them ourselves.) 4. And our job, as I see it here, is to help them as kindly and positively as we can to lead them out of this state of denial and back to work in addressing the real and full panoply of issues and options that together constitute sustainable mobility. And in getting them off on a new path in their own thinking, not only in this respect but in fact more strategically for their businesses as a whole. 5. With this 100% collegial if unrequested International Peer Review that is now getting underway, I am confident that all of those of us who are groped here have the information, the means, the wisdom and the human skills needed to help them in this. Moreover, in addition to the light that we can now help them with on the underlying issues of what mobility and the basic mobility trade-offs and options are all about, we can also and in parallel have a look at least two things which are in fact very much part of this broader problematique: a. $50 oil as an "ugly" current reality (and not some maybe out in some indefinite future), and b. Massive world overcapacity a-building in the auto sector. 6. The importance of this last in our context is very great -- since the impact is that we can be quite certain that there is going to be a lot of big time losing going on in the sector in the future, including in the very near future. And it's my guess that any company or group that gets control of the real issues and gets ready to confront them without waiting to be pushed, is going to have a jump of the rest. And that jump can make the difference between survival and oops. 7. To conclude: This is not a hair pulling contest and if we are to accomplish anything of real value it will have to be with knowledge, firmness and compassion. We want to bring the WBCSD, the twelve sponsors, and behind them a lot of other people and groups to the table of what we might call for lack of anything better the New Mobility Agenda. In the most positive way possible. That at least is my current take on what is gong on here. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040721/7cc07c00/attachment-0001.html From itdpasia at adelphia.net Thu Jul 22 02:52:11 2004 From: itdpasia at adelphia.net (John Ernst) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:52:11 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Re: WBCSD report - general commentary In-Reply-To: <013101c46f3e$a3a372f0$6501a8c0@home> References: <013101c46f3e$a3a372f0$6501a8c0@home> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040721110916.01bf4328@pop.abs.adelphia.net> I agree with Eric Britton's overview of the situation [sustran - 21 July 04]. While it's tempting to attack and bash, "knowledge, firmness and compassion" are more effective (not that we see much of it these days). Further, if business interests are to support sustainability they should have some good business reasons to do so. Two thoughts: 1) Even not considering the broader social and environmental consequences, which can be blurred by promises of zero-pollution, renewable energy powered vehicles; the car-centered approach falls short in 1 key area that any business-person can see in their bottom-line: congestion. Despite the SACTRA report now being 10-years old, the average person still sees road-building as the solution to congestion. It would seem the WBCSD also needs some convincing. 2) Car ownership is an emotional issue, as well as (for now) a profit powerhouse. We would do well to disconnect car ownership from use. (Thirty years ago business opposed energy conservation measures, saying energy use and economic production were linked. No longer. ) Car ownership per 1000 persons is used as an index of car-centricity of a city. Better to aim measures at the actual trips taken, and specifically those during congested periods. Let the individual then decide about owning a car. Both of these points support an emphasis on demand management. While there are many methods (see Todd Litmann's on-line encyclopedia at www.vtpi.org/tdm), one of the most effective is user charging, which London's successful congestion charging scheme has brought to the forefront. A good business analysis of road user pricing -- inspired by London's success -- was provided last year by Deloitte Consulting; see http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/press_release/0,2309,sid%253D%2526cid%253D28904,00.html. Best, John - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Ernst - Director, Asia Region ITDP - The Institute for Transport and Development Policy Subscribe to ITDP's Sustainable Transport e-update at www.itdp.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe Thu Jul 22 04:14:44 2004 From: ccordero at amauta.rcp.net.pe (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Carlos_Cordero_Vel=E1squez?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:14:44 -0500 Subject: [sustran] agosto a escala humana Message-ID: <002601c46f57$44d898e0$0ab501c8@pentiumiii> CICLORED El Bolet?n del Transporte a Escala Humana Agosto - Setiembre, 04 Despertares ?Qu? te despierta cada ma?ana?: ?La reuni?n de las ocho? ?El caf? cortado? ?Un sue?o invisible? ?El despertador?. Hoy, el sol de Cartagena, la promesa, la constataci?n de un nuevo a?o y un viento caribe que arrastra los murmullos del d?a, un par de llamadas telef?nicas. Los mensajes de los amigos, que aunque no est?n, siempre est?n. Durante el d?a, voces amables, me despierta mi idioma en acentos que apenas reconozco, el centro de la ciudad donde el peat?n es todo y todos, una tierra alzada de baluartes que mira un mar de piratas en tierra, un horizonte que no termina. A veces es suficiente. Subo la escalera del siglo XVI y, en el sal?n reunidos, la discusi?n sobre el transporte del XXI. Me despiertan las ganas de algunos, las complejas dificultades de todos, las voces que se juntan, los entusiasmos que se construyen. En la noche, la despedida y el jolgorio del encuentro fugaz, la alegr?a de conocer a los que tal vez no vuelvas a ver. Qu? largo d?a este de andar despertando. &&& Ida y vuelta El taxi describe un arco mientras bordea la muralla y persigue el mar. La carretera no tiene nombre y el semic?rculo dice lejos cuando debiera decir cerca. Pero para errores y desv?os uno y no m?s. As? que regreso, zigzagueando a pie las callecitas y sus nombres: Serrezuela gira en La Carbonera y empata La de Siete Infantes que tropieza Los Puntales y choca con Tablada que trasborda en Sargento Mayor entre Tejadillo y Estanco del Aguardiente bajando La del Cuartel a medio camino entre Estrella y La Merced antes que despunte Don Sancho y La Mantilla pegada a Santo Domingo cortada por Callej?n de los Estribos; donde la plaza re?ne y dispersa todos los nombres en un haz de mediod?a. &&& Los sue?os de un pez El pez so?? con una laguna de aguas azulverdosas. La laguna, desde su altura, vigilaba la vida de la ciudad que se erig?a bajo unos cerros de crestas coloradas. S? el pez se mov?a, la laguna se rebalsaba, volcaba los cerros y la ciudad desaparec?a. Al despertar, el pez tuvo miedo de moverse, entonces sigui? durmiendo. (colaboraci?n de Walter Ling?n) &&& Volver a Lima, enero 2004 ?Para el Jr. Amazonas hay dos tipos de pasajeros: los que van a comprar libros y los que van a comprar pastel.? Aclaro que soy de los primeros. Ocho soles por la ?carrera? de Jes?s Mar?a al viejo centro de la ciudad. De sem?foro en sem?foro, examina en voz alta la situaci?n actual. Un nuevo esc?ndalo consume la atenci?n general. Frente al Ministerio de Trabajo, una manifestaci?n le recuerda su propio drama personal: tambi?n ?l es un despedido; diez a?os de lucha -dice-, en las calles, en el ministerio. Y entre gesti?n y gesti?n, entre marcha y marcha: esta ?esclavitud del tim?n? que le oprime. ?Usted no las ve, pero mis brazos est?n unidos a esto -me dice, golpeando tres veces el volante de su Toyota blanca- por unas gruesas cadenas.? A Fujimori atribuye esta amargura encanecida. Ni leer ni pensar, vida familiar apenas. Doce horas diarias, siete d?as a la semana, pegado como lapa a ese tim?n ajeno. 51 a?os -mi misma edad- un chico en el colegio, otro en un instituto t?cnico, y el mayor -?mi apoyo para la vejez?- ?gracias a Dios! en Italia. ?Y el futuro? ?Ya pues no cochinee, maestro, esto es el Per?.? Extraigo de mi mochila, al bajar al pie del Puente Balta, un ejemplar de mi ?ltimo trabajo: ?A Pedro -escribo-, sin cadenas, golpeado pero no derrotado.? Se queda con mi libro; me quedo con su desconsuelo, con su mirada de sorpresa. Lima, como siempre, me toma por asalto; saturando mis sentidos, avivando mi memoria (Jos? Luis R?nique, versi?n completa http://www.andes.missouri.edu/andes/Cronicas/JLR_VolverALima.html ) &&& Barrio La semana que lanzamos la primera actividad del proyecto Barrio y todos se apura un poco. En realidad tiene un nombre m?s largo, pero le decimos Barrio: ser? porque somos vecinos, ser? porque estamos aprendiendo a decir m?s simple y m?s corto. Ser? porque sentimos que ya est? siendo. Todos ponen su poco, su algo: cons?guete una foto, a ver si te escribes un texto ?y la diagramaci?n, la imprenta para el afiche, c?mo va la reuni?n en la plazoleta - tri?ngulo?. ?Y los Reyes, los m?sicos? ?distribuyeron los volantes? ?Pasaron el e mail? Y todo va saliendo, como las cosas que tienen mucho sentido. Pero las preguntas permanecen: ?C?mo mejorar el barrio? Todos queremos un mejor lugar para vivir. Pero la vida no est? s?lo dentro de la casa. Est? tambi?n afuera. En el barrio, los vecinos. Los amigos. En la calle. Necesitamos calles vivas. Calles seguras. Calles para todos. ?C?mo mejorar el barrio? Tenemos que lograr que la gente sienta el barrio como suyo. Todos sabemos que tu calle no es igual a las otras calles, es tuya. All? juegas, all? te encuentras con los amigos, all? pasas una gran parte del d?a. All? compras. All? vives. ?C?mo mejorar el barrio? Un barrio vivo es un sitio que sirve para todos. Los que viven y los pasan por all?. Tenemos que pasar despacio, mirando todo. Los autos tienen que pasar muy despacio para no atropellar la vida del barrio. Los ni?os necesitan llegar al colegio seguros. Las personas con discapacidad, sentirse c?modas, protegidas. Los ancianos, la sombra de los ?rboles y mucha tranquilidad. ?C?mo mejorar el barrio? Mejores veredas, tr?fico tranquilo, vegetaci?n. Seguridad . Vida en las calles para que la vida de las personas sea mejor. Rutas amables para los que caminan, los que van en bici, rutas agradables. ?C?mo mejorar el barrio? Fiestas en la calle, menos ruido y m?s sonidos. Menos humo y m?s alegr?a. Rampas para los que caminan con dificultad, calles angostas para los autom?viles y anchas para la gente. Curiosidades, albricias y otros: barriobarranco@yahoo.com &&& Buscando plaza De tres pasos ?giles, el hombre cort? la calle oscura por la mitad y se puso detr?s de la mujer, acompasado al ritmo de la noche. El silencio y la soledad de la vereda les dijo que eran los ?nicos m?viles, que la ciudad dorm?a. Por un momento ella pens? en acelerar la marcha, sin embargo contuvo el miedo y pens? que de acercarse demasiado tendr?a entonces el valor de enfrentarlo cara a cara. De reojo pudo advertir la mirada penetrante, el acoso de sus pasos al corriente. Corri? la cartera hacia su pecho e introdujo la mano hasta tocar el arma, fr?a y plateada. El hombre lentamente acortaba la distancia que los separaba. A s?lo dos metros, en diagonal a ella, dispar?: ?Se?orita, sabe d?nde puedo encontrar una plaza? La pregunta le atraves? la espalda y, sin voltear, s?lo se le ocurri?: ?Cu?l plaza?. "Cualquiera, s?lo necesito una", descarg? el tipo, nuevamente. Ya en ruta paralela, ella le pudo ver el rostro y no parec?a tan fiero como minutos antes en medio de la oscuridad, sin embargo no despeg? la mano del arma, enfundada en el bolso. ?Para qu? necesita una plaza? Retruc? la mujer, menos, pero algo nerviosa todav?a. El hombre sin dejar de caminar y como quien suelta un silbido: "para ponerla a usted de monumento" y alej?ndose, con el mismo paso tranquilo, se perdi? nuevamente en la oscuridad. &&& Noticiero El Ayuntamiento de Par?s limita el uso de todoterrenos para reducir la contaminaci?n El Ayuntamiento de Par?s ha aprobado medidas para impedir la circulaci?n de los veh?culos 4x4 durante las fases de poluci?n elevada, alegando que este tipo de autom?viles contaminan m?s que los dem?s. Seg?n un informe de la Agencia del Medio Ambiente, esos veh?culos emiten m?s CO2 a la atm?sfera porque el peso de su carrocer?a y la motricidad de las cuatro ruedas exigen un consumo de carburante m?s alto que el de un modelo cl?sico, sobre todo en recorridos urbanos. Par?s est? gobernado por el socialista Bertrand Delano?, pero la limitaci?n de los todo terreno procede de sus aliados del partido de Los Verdes, que han insistido para que el Ayuntamiento se dote del poder de prohibir los 4x4 en caso de poluci?n y pretende llegar a una prohibici?n pr?cticamente general. "Los 4x4 no tienen nada que hacer en las ciudades", afirma el teniente alcalde de Los Verdes, Denis Baupin. En paralelo, el Ayuntamiento parisiense ha lanzado una vasta operaci?n de construcci?n de carriles para bicicletas. La oposici?n de derechas, vot? en contra de tal limitaci?n, consider?ndola "estigmatizadora de una clase de veh?culos". Los fabricantes no han reaccionado todav?a a la decisi?n. (J. P. - Par?s, EL PAIS ) A continuaci?n reproducimos un interesante comentario sobre la noticia anterior, tomado de una lista de discusi?n: Comentarios "Lo que preocupa respecto a la medida de la alcald?a parisiense y a los argumentos utilizados para justificarla, es que parece reflejar una confusi?n entre contaminaci?n local (PM10, NOX, SOx, ozono, CO, etc... que afecta directamente nuestra salud, y cuyas concentraciones gatillan las alertas en Paris cuando sobrepasan umbrales predefinidos) y contaminaci?n global (CO2, CH4 etc... que son responsables del cambio clim?tico y del efecto invernadero pero que no tienen un impacto directo sobre nuestros pulmones o nuestra salud en general). Los 4x4 emiten mucho CO2 (estas emisiones est?n directamente relacionadas con el consumo de combustible), pero si son nuevos, emiten pocos contaminantes locales (hay que entender que en t?rminos de contaminaci?n local, los avances de los fabricantes de autos en los ?ltimos 20 a?os son enormes). Muy probablemente un 4x4 nuevo contamina (localmente) menos que un carro chiquito que tiene ya 10 a?os de vida. Adem?s, una tonelada de CO2 es tan perjudicial emitida en Paris como en el medio del Oc?ano Pacifico, y durante un per?odo de alerta ambiental como durante un periodo en el cual la calidad del aire localmente es buena. Cuando hablamos de las emisiones generadas por la actividad humana, lo que cuenta para el cambio clim?tico es la cantidad total de CO2 emitida en todo el planeta desde los principios de la era industrial. Por eso, prohibir la circulaci?n de los veh?culos 4x4 en Paris, cuando hay alertas ambientales (ligadas, nuevamente, a contaminantes locales) no parece muy l?gico. Respecto de los 4x4, y si el objetivo es mitigar a todo precio el cambio clim?tico, tendr?an que ser prohibidos todo el tiempo, en todo el planeta, excepto tal vez en algunas pocas ?reas donde se justifican. Preocupa ver que a veces se est?n utilizando argumentos cient?ficamente err?neos para justificar medidas que s? podr?an tener sentido (aunque ?sta se ve bastante extremista, y que existen otras opciones m?s realistas y eficientes), en la medida de que se expliquen claramente y que se justifiquen adecuadamente. Esto podr?a debilitar las fuerzas ecologistas si los que se oponen a ellas fuesen suficientemente conocedores del tema para sacar provecho de esta "inexactitud" para da?arlos pol?ticamente. Adem?s, prohibir los 4X4 por razones ambientales no es lo correcto. Se podr?an prohibir por razones de seguridad vial, eso s?: no se ve nada cuando uno que va en bici est? detr?s de uno de estos monstruos y cuando circulan, ocupan casi toda la anchura del carril, lo que de nuevo resulta muy peligroso para un ciclista. Adem?s, se ha demostrado que por el mero hecho de tener un carro s?lido y resistente, los que los manejan se sienten m?s seguros y resultan m?s susceptibles de manejar peligrosamente. Un fen?meno parecido ya se ha notado con los frenos ABS. Pero en t?rminos ambientales, tiene mucho m?s sentido definir factores de emisi?n m?ximos (gramos de un contaminante dado por Km. o por asiento-Km.), tanto para el CO2 como para otros contaminantes de impacto local, y prohibir la circulaci?n de aquellos veh?culos que sobrepasan dichos umbrales, sin perjuicio respecto del tipo de veh?culo. Hay que tener en cuenta que ahora se est?n produciendo veh?culos 4x4 h?bridos con tecnolog?a de punta que les hacen bastante limpios con un rendimiento parecido al de un carro com?n". &&& Leyes y velocidades El d?a de ayer la ley de la gravedad fue derogada por la ley del m?nimo esfuerzo. Con la entrada en vigencia de la nueva ley, todas las cosas caer?n m?s despacio. &&& Sex and the city "La encuesta muestra que el sexo es la cosa que nos produce m?s felicidad, con los m?s educados con una mayor probabilidad de encontrar en una revolcada de placer, el grado m?s alto de satisfacci?n que los que tienen menores calificaciones. Pero mientras que el sexo nos hace sonre?r, la encuesta encuentra que el viaje diario al trabajo es lo que nos hace m?s infelices. El sexo est? ubicado, retrospectivamente, como la actividad que produce la mayor cantidad de felicidad, se?ala el informe. Transportarse de y al trabajo produce los niveles m?s bajos de bienestar psicol?gico. Estas dos actividades van, respectivamente, arriba y abajo en una lista de 19 actividades" (The Times, Junio 12, 2004, versi?n nuestra) &&& Este no es el Ken de la Barbie "Ken Livingstone, Alcalde de Londres, ha hecho una enorme contribuci?n a la calidad de vida de nuestras ciudades en el ?ltimo a?o, mostrando coraje y perspicacia al planear y ejecutar el primer gran proyecto de cargos por congesti?n. Esto muestra el camino en la aplicaci?n del principio "el que contamina paga". Es por esta raz?n que me enorgullezco de nominarlo para el WTN premio ambiental del a?o 2004. Desde Febrero del 2003 la ciudad cobra un cargo a los autom?viles privados que ingresan al ?rea central durante los d?as de semana, como una manera de reducir la congesti?n del tr?fico, mejorar la calidad de vida y reunir fondos para mejoras futuras del transporte. Este proyecto tecnol?gico ha reducido significativamente la congesti?n del tr?fico en el ?rea objetivo, ha conducido a una mejora del transporte masivo y el servicio de taxi y ha empezado a hacer la vida un poco m?s segura para ciclistas y peatones, y genera sustanciales recursos para mejoras futuras. Despu?s de mucha oposici?n inicial , la aceptaci?n del p?blico ha crecido y existe ahora apoyo para expandir el programa a otras partes de Londres y otras ciudades del Reino Unido. Este es el primer programa de tarificaci?n vial en una ciudad grande de Europa. El mayor esfuerzo llevado a cabo con coraje - y se necesit? una gran cantidad de coraje dado que desde el comienzo fue cercado por intereses econ?micos y pol?ticos, cabilderos (lobbies) y otras fuerzas que le aseguraban que el proyecto ser?a un desastre para la ciudad - y su ?xito sugiere que la tarificaci?n vial se ha convertido en algo m?s factible en todas partes. Nosotros anticipamos que virtualmente cada ciudad grande de Europa est? ya buscando en la posibilidad de un proyecto propio que siga esta ruta, adaptando y construyendo - y uno espera que mejorando - en base a la experiencia y lecciones de Londres. Para m?s detalles sobre este proyecto, vea el sitio web official: http://www.cclondon.com/ Para revisar la validez de esta nominaci?n, He solicitado comentarios a un panel internacional de reconocidos expertos en transporte, ambiente y pol?ticas p?blicas; m?s de cincuenta de los cuales han respondido, con sus visones y comentarios. Nueve de diez han apoyado con entusiasmo la nominaci?n, indicando que este ejemplo tambi?n estimular? una nueva percepci?n e innovaci?n en las ciudades del tercer mundo. Para un recuento de estos comentarios, vaya a http://newmobility.org ( WTN Nomination) . Un n?mero peque?o de respuestas, incluyendo la de expertos ingleses de primer nivel, han se?alado que si el premio es concedido, ?ste deber?a estar acompa?ado con un entusiasta consejo para el Alcalde Livingstone sobre incidir m?s en el manejo y administraci?n del sistema, en contraposici?n a la l?gica de infraestructura de "construir una salida al problema" que ha conducido a muchos de los problemas de movilidad y calidad de vida que abundan en nuestras ciudades, y entre ellas, Londres. Dejo aqu? el tema y esta nominaci?n, de acuerdo con todos ellos, y espero que en el caso que el premio sea concedido, tambi?n expresemos tanto nuestro aprecio por esta excelente contribuci?n, como nuestra preocupaci?n por el futuro". (Eric Britton, traducci?n nuestra) Carlos Cordero Vel?squez CICLORED - Centro de Asesor?a y Capacitaci?n para el Transporte y Ambiente Pasaje Lavalle 110 - Lima 04 Per? telf: (51 1) 4671322 From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sun Jul 25 20:44:18 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 13:44:18 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "Sustainability will not wait!" - Some organizational changes and new developments here - Message-ID: <005301c4723c$ba6f7f50$6501a8c0@home> Sunday, July 25, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Friends: As we told you at the beginning of the year 2004 is an active and important period for the New Mobility Agenda and its extensions, and to avoid any eventual confusion let me simply give you the current highlights: 1. Collective Actions/Peer Support : We are aggressively expanding the areas of cooperative work, peer support and international exchange ? the Value Capture Initiative, the recent much contested WTN Nomination for the London Congestion Charging project, and the just getting underway international peer review of the recent and possibly mis-titled WBCSD report Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability -- with other joint projects in the wings. 2. The New Mobility 20/20/20 Program: We are starting to initiate contacts to see if we can together in this great informal group create and support a world wide wave of ambitious local New Mobility City Dialogues which can help lay the base for much more ambitious sustainable mobility projects and programs in their cities and communities. When we say ambitious we have several things in mind: a. Specific projects and initiatives which are aimed at achieving significant near term improvements in the city?s mobility arrangements. As a target we want to get behind any project that is targeting significant on-street, in-lung improvements in 20 months or less. (If you are looking for a motto for this, what about ?Sustainability will not wait!?) b. Packages of policies and projects which will together target to achieve significant improvements in global system sustainability performance?which together will reduce peak hour traffic by at least 20% over the target period. More, the target is specifically to reduce the number of private cars on the city streets, while in parallel providing street space and support for a wide range of alternative movement arrangements, both familiar and innovative. c. Targeting in the overall transportation budget, significant amounts to achieve these objectives ? specifically adjusting the global spending program so that at least 20% of the total budget is aimed at supporting the emerging sustainability package. We thus are moving into a new stage here. And while not by any means backing away from our continuing support in terms of information and discussion spaces in the various program areas which constitute the New Mobility Agenda and its extensions, we now want to go to work to become much more focused and proactive. This shift in focus has been some time coming and has already manifested itself in several of our specific program areas. Now however, and in part I have to confess stimulated by the, to my mind, enormous anomaly of the leisurely 2030 horizon for sustainability chosen by the WBCSD team for their analysis, we are ready to move ahead with a much more aggressive action oriented approach, which is posited on the conviction not only that sustainability will not wait, but also that the move to sustainability is going to have to come from aggressive, structured, well supported initiatives and innovations at the personal and local levels. We have to get together now to define clearly the sustainability agenda in very specific, practical day to day terms, and then through force of character and our ability to convince, work with local government to move ahead in their cities and communities, without waiting for the world to come to our aid. We have seen all too clearly, that that simply will not happen. For the record, and to summarize: * The New Mobility Agenda is as always at http://newmobility.org * To address communications to the New Mobility @Forum, the mail address is still WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com * And for the New Mobility Caf?, it?s NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Next steps: 1. I invite you to pitch in to the WBCSD peer review, and specifically within the weeks ahead help us in coming up with a specific list of actions and measures that we can then recommend both for the sponsors of the Mobility 2030 report (since they have asked for it), and to others who their report has targeted to inform and influence. 2. Give some thought to how to organize New Mobility City Dialogues: cycles of well supported local workshops and planning sessions bringing together the full panoply of players in that place over a full week or so, perhaps supported by some of us here who may be useful to them as they start their push for new thinking and new practices to break the Sustainable Mobility impasse in their city. (We have some on-going discussions for a first such cycle with a number of organizations in the city of Toronto Canada, which I hope we shall be able to report here as an example of how this might work in one place. In truth, in a number of cities quite a bit is already going on along these lines, but it is our hope that with the support we can together give to such programs and perhaps the bit more structure as suggested here, these on-going local initiatives and groups will be better supported and moor effective in achieving the near term results which are, in fact. The very guts of what sustainability is all about. (Sorry to have carried on, and thanks for humoring me on this. I hope though that you agree that this just may be a promising approach and one worth pursuing together). Eric Britton The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant administrators and politicians; pioneering new concepts for business, entrepreneurs, activists, community groups, and local government; and through our joint efforts, energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the path to a more sustainable and more just society. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040725/bfb721c5/attachment.html From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Mon Jul 26 15:58:21 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:58:21 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Car/Free Day Planning/City Dialogues Message-ID: <003101c472dd$f1642eb0$6501a8c0@home> Monday, July 26, 2004, Paris, France, Europe Dear Friends of Sustainability , We have prepared extensive materials and guidelines for planning and implementing a high impact Car/Free Day, as a deliberate exploratory first step in a process aimed at advancing in specific practical ways, and in the very near term, the New Mobility Agenda in any given host city.? For now we prefer to work with them off line. (I should mention that in part our work on a major upgrading and recentering of this long standing program of the New Mobility Agenda has been substantially accelerated by the distress that we felt in the wake of the, to our minds, far too time-relaxed approach which seems to underlie the Mobility 2030 report. All these seemingly bits and pieces are indeed part of a greater whole.) Might your group or city be interested in working with us on this? If so, this is to invite you to get in touch with us via postmaster@ecoplan.org. ?Your communication will receive our immediate attention. Eric Britton *********************************************************************** The Commons: Increasing the uncomfort zone for hesitant administrators and politicians; pioneering new concepts for business, entrepreneurs, activists, community groups, and local government; and through our joint efforts, energy and personal choices, placing them and ourselves firmly on the path to a more sustainable and more just society. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jul 27 20:38:23 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 18:38:23 +0700 Subject: [sustran] FW: Seoul, Korea Message-ID: <20040727123749.527CE2EB88@mx0.jca.ne.jp> [...from Eric, but without attached pic] Dear Sustraners, This message just came in from our kind colleague Nobuaki Ohmori, in response in fact to a request for current information from our leader Paul Barter. I know close the loop with kindest thanks to Nobuaki. Eric Britton -----Original Message----- From: Nobuaki OHMORI [mailto:nobuaki@ut.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp] Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 11:14 AM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org Subject: RE: Seoul, Korea Dear Eric Britton, I got the following e-mail from UTSG mailing list. If you would like to get more information on "Chonggyecheon Restoration Project," it would be better to visit the following website: http://www.metro.seoul.kr/kor2000/chungaehome/en/seoul/main.htm In last March, I visited "The office of Cheonggyecheon Restoration" and "Seoul Development Institute (SDI)." You can contact with "Im, Ye Soon" who is one of the officers in the office of Cheonggyecheon Restoration and "Dr. Kwang-Hoon Lee" who is the director of department of urban transportation in SDI. Their e-mail addresses are: Im, Ye Soon: iys114@hanmail.net Kwan-Hoon Lee: kwlee@sdi.re.kr I think they can answer your questions. Attached is one of the photos I took when I visited Seoul in last March. With regards, Nobuaki OHMORI ************************************************* Nobuaki OHMORI, Ph. D. Lecturer Department of Urban Engineering The University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8656, Japan TEL: +81-3-5841-6232 FAX: +81-3-5841-8527 E-mail: nobuaki@ut.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp http://ut.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/members/nobuaki/nobuaki-e.htm ************************************************* -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Barter, Paul [Sustran] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 4:32 AM Re: "Seven Sustainable Mayors": Profiles of Courage I keep hearing about remarkable changes in Seoul, Korea. Since the late 1990s there has been a remarkable increase in official attention to pedestrians and cyclists, much more bus priority (to complement subway expansions), parking restraint has been applied vigorously, and congestion charging was introduced on two major routes. And perhaps most amazing - an inner city elevated expressway was torn down and the buried stream beneath it has been brought back to the surface as a linear park. Now we hear about a new round of attempts to make public transport more integrated and have higher on-road priority. So three questions: - Where can we get more information on these changes? (Can anyone elaborate on the story? Maybe my impressions are not accurate? Can anyone point us towards a good written summary of these events and how they have come about?) - What triggered the changes in policy? - Which particular individuals ('Mayors' or otherwise) or organisations deserve recognition for these changes? (perhaps via Eric's "Profiles of Courage") All the best, Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040727/f73cd9ed/attachment.html From ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr Tue Jul 27 22:16:33 2004 From: ecoplan.adsl at wanadoo.fr (ecoplan.adsl@wanadoo.fr) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:16:33 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD - IHT.com Article: Carmakers feel pinch of pollution Message-ID: <000701c473db$f1e53920$6501a8c0@home> As we prepare to dig into the next and most important stage of our knowledge building program using the WBCSD report as the frame for our discussions, I think it is a good idea to keep in mind the pressures that the automotive industry is under as it tries to figure out what to do next with this (and other) ever tightening loop around their necks. That's our challenge really, isn't it? To understand their position, and still to help them deal with these critical issues. If we just lob bricks at them, it won't accomplish anything for sure. Ironically enough, they need help in putting all this into perspective - strategic perspective in fact - and here is maybe where we can be of help. Without of course giving away the sustainability store. Eric Subject: IHT.com Article: Carmakers feel pinch of pollution A new report says that GM and Ford stand to lose more, financially, than any other automakers in complying with fuel efficiency regulations. http://www.iht.com/articles/531299.html Carmakers feel pinch of pollution Danny Hakim NYT Tuesday, July 27, 2004 DETROIT One does not often hear financial analysts talk about climate change, but this month John Casesa, an analyst at Merrill Lynch, organized a teleconference to address a troubling question for Detroit's automakers: As regulators around the world move to curb emissions of heat-trapping gases from cars and improve fuel efficiency, what will happen if Wall Street adds up the costs? The most likely answer will not make General Motors and Ford Motor very happy. Casesa's call included a presentation by the World Resources Institute, an environmental policy group in Washington that recently issued a report on the subject with Sustainable Asset Management, an investment group based in Zurich. The report says that GM and Ford stand to lose more, financially, than any other automakers in complying with regulations that the groups expect the United States, Europe and Japan to adopt over the next decade. Ford would have to spend $403 more on each vehicle to meet the expected new standards, the report estimates, and GM would have to spend $377 more. By contrast, the added cost to Honda Motor would be just $24. Car for car, BMW would have to spend more than Ford or GM, $649 on each vehicle, the report found, but because its prices are higher, it would have less difficulty absorbing the cost. Perhaps the most troubling finding for GM and Ford, the last two major U.S.-based automakers, is that some foreign competitors, particularly Toyota Motor, may actually be helped by tougher regulations because they have already invested much more in fuel-efficiency technologies, like hybrid gas-electric engine systems, that could generate new profit. Regulations related to fuel economy and gases believed to cause global warming are "going to be one of the key drivers that determines competitiveness in the industry over the next decade and beyond," said Duncan Austin, who until recently was a senior economist at the World Resources Institute. The European Union and Japan are phasing in curbs on automotive emissions of heat-trapping gases, which rise and fall almost in lock step with fuel use. The Bush administration has moved away from an international agreement, known as the Kyoto Protocol, to cap such emissions, but California has drafted its own plan, and several northeastern states may follow. "As a U.S. auto analyst, I'm very concerned about the risk side of the equation," Casesa of Merrill Lynch said. "For the domestic auto companies, we've had an accommodating energy policy, but there are new issues like climate change, and there are new geopolitical issues, military issues, that relate to our energy policy." The result could be tougher U.S. fuel-economy standards, Casesa said. That would be painful for Ford and GM because they rely heavily on sales of light-duty vehicles that are the least efficient in fuel use: large sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks. Niki Rosinski, a financial analyst who collaborated on the report and worked at Sustainable Asset Management until recently, pointed to what he called the "carbon intensity" of Ford's profit, meaning the company's reliance on vehicles that consume the most fuel and emit the most carbon dioxide and other gases that some scientists say cause climate change. "Sixty percent of Ford's sales globally come from the North American market, and in the North American market, 60 percent of their sales come from light trucks, which are around 80 percent of profits of their North American operations," Rosinski said. The institute's report forecasts that because of new regulations Ford's profit will be 10 percent lower than would otherwise be expected from now to 2015 and that GM's profit will be 7 percent lower. The New York Times IHTCopyright C 2004 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040727/4f3b492f/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 298 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040727/4f3b492f/attachment.gif From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jul 28 00:59:07 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 17:59:07 +0200 Subject: [sustran] WBCSD - General commentary Message-ID: <003f01c473f2$a70ca480$6501a8c0@home> Here by way of food for thought is an extract from a long piece by Ian St. John commenting on the first report in this series written some two year ago. I bring it to you attention once again not to slam the WBCSD team, but rather to provide you all with further background on the kind of tight corner they find themselves in. What perhaps we can hope to achieve this time around is to take a positive step in fashioning and a new and much deeper working relationship between these companies, their industrial network (to give the WBCSD a name), and civil society. Again, it is hard for any of us to change our ways. And not least when we feel under attack. Proof of our success will be that we and they find some ways to move ahead together to advance the New Mobility Agenda in the way which the present urgent circumstances provide. From: Ian St. John (istjohn@spamcop.net ) Subject: Re: You pay for it Newsgroups: sci.environment Date: 2002-10-11 22:50:31 PST Sustainable mobility? The WBCSD's 'Sustainable Mobility' project, focusing on the transport sector, released its first report in March 2001.28 The working group is run by major automobile and energy corporations, including BP, DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Michelin, Norsk Hydro, Renault, Shell and Toyota. The project claims to develop a long-term vision of future mobility, but fails to tackle the inherent unsustainability of continued growth in global transport volumes. A characteristic feature of WBCSD projects is their attitude to civil society groups with a moderate critique. This kind of 'constructive criticism' is often included in project reports or on websites. The 'Sustainable Mobility' website, for instance, features an article describing some NGO critique to the project's report, while highlighting that the critics "acknowledged the report was not unduly biased towards the interests of the auto and oil industries."29 This approach contributes to an open, transparent and consensus-seeking image. Meanwhile, those with a more fundamental critique are not offered any such space. The 'Sustainable Mobility' website for instance is silent about Prague-based campaign Group Carbusters, which has strongly criticized the project's corporate vision. Carbusters slammed the project for merely promoting technological fixes and the privatisation of public transport systems, while refusing to consider the option of reduced mobility. After attending one of the project's stakeholder dialogues, Carbusters concluded that "It all boils down to another advertising campaign for their wonderful 'green' cars."30 The 'Sustainable Mobility' website provides information about the stakeholder dialogue held in Prague, but is silent about the protest action held outside the event.31 On seeing the activists, the project director's first reaction was to ask: "Do any journalists know about this?"32 28.. The report was produced by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Charles River Associates 29.. WBCSD mobility report attracts fire from NGOs, 12 April 2002. 30.. They Say: People Desire Mobility, by Ivana Jakubkova, Carbusters. 31.. Participants entering the stakeholder dialogue were given copies of the Ultimate Greenwash Award which the WBCSD has received from Corpwatch. 32.. They Say: People Desire Mobility, by Ivana Jakubkova, Carbusters. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040727/7b6ff4e1/attachment-0001.html From litman at vtpi.org Wed Jul 28 19:10:11 2004 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 03:10:11 -0700 Subject: [sustran] VTPI News - Summer 2004 Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20040728030954.0389aea8@mail.highspeedplus.com> ----------- VTPI NEWS ----------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ------------------------------------ Summer 2004 Vol. 7, No. 2 ---------------------------------- The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative solutions to transportation problems. The VTPI website (http://www.vtpi.org) has many resources addressing a wide range of transport planning and policy issues. VTPI also provides consulting services. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VTPI ONLINE TDM ENCYCLOPEDIA - UPDATES ====================================== The VTPI "Online TDM Encyclopedia" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm) is one of the most comprehensive resources available to help identify and evaluate innovative management solutions to transport problems. We continually update and expand the Encyclopedia. New chapters: "Roadway Connectivity" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm116.htm). 'Connectivity' refers to the density of connections in a road or path network. A well connected road or path network has many short links, numerous intersections, and minimal dead-ends (cul-de-sacs). As connectivity increases, travel distances decrease and route options increase, allowing more direct travel between destinations, creating a more accessible and resilient system. "Strong Commercial Centers" (http://vtpi.org/tdm/tdm117.htm) Vibrant downtowns, business districts, urban villages and other walkable, mixed-use activity centers can provide a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits. They increase accessibility, increase travel options and reduce per capita vehicle travel. They tend to increase productivity and regional economic development. They support many other TDM strategies. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW DOCUMENTS ================ "Understanding Smart Growth Savings: What We Know About Public Infrastructure and Service Cost Savings, And How They are Misrepresented By Critics" (http://www.vtpi.org/sg_save.pdf) Various studies show that Smart Growth can save hundreds of dollars annually per capita compared with providing comparable public services to sprawled destinations. Most current development charges, utility fees and taxes fail to accurately reflect these location-related cost differences, representing a subsidy of sprawl. This paper summarizes estimates of Smart Growth savings, and critiques a study by Cox and Utt which claims that such savings are insignificant. That study misrepresents Smart Growth and contains several critical errors. "Evaluating Research Quality" (http://www.vtpi.org/resqual.pdf) This short, draft paper provides guidelines for evaluating research quality and discerning propaganda from true research. Please send your comments about it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UPDATED DOCUMENTS =================== "Evaluating Transportation Land Use Impacts" (http://www.vtpi.org/landuse.pdf) This paper examines how transportation decisions affect land use, and the economic, social and environmental impacts that result. It discusses how automobile use encourages sprawl, and how alternative transportation modes can support Smart Growth. It describes various costs and benefits of different land use patterns, including the opportunity cost of land used for roads and parking facilities, accessibility and transportation costs, costs of providing public services, neighborhood livability and community cohesion, greenspace and habitat, preservation of cultural resources, energy consumption and pollution emissions, housing affordability, pedestrian conditions, aesthetic impacts, and equity impacts. Current transportation planning practices tend to overlook many of these land use impacts, particularly those that are indirect, long-term and non-market, which biases planning decisions toward increased automobile use and sprawl, and undervalues TDM and Smart Growth. This paper describes specific methods for incorporating these land use impacts in transportation and land use planning. "Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs: Is It Cheaper To Subsidize Cars Instead Of Transit Service?" (http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf). This guidebook describes how to create a comprehensive framework for evaluating the full impacts (benefits and costs) of a particular transit service or improvement. It discusses best practices for transit evaluation and identifies common errors that can distort results. A new section examines recent claims by transit critics that it would be cheaper to subsidize cars instead of transit service to provide basic mobility. Such claims tend to overlook important factors, such as that many transit users cannot or should not drive, and that increased urban driving would exacerbate other transportation problems. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE =================== WBCSM, Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability, The Sustainable Mobility Project, World Business Council for Sustainable Mobility (http://www.wbcsd.org), 2004. This major international report describes various ways to create more sustainable transportation system. It cites VTPI as a leading source of information on demand management issues and strategies. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BEEN THERE - DONE THAT ====================== During the last few months we have participated in several exciting events: "Healthy Community Planning: Integrating Public Health Objectives in Transportation and Land Use Planning," presented at the 29th Annual National Wellness Conference, sponsored by the National Wellness Institute at the University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point (http://www.nationalwellness.org), 12 July 2004. The PowerPoint presentation is available at http://www.vtpi.org/wellness.pdf. For more information on this subject see our report "If Health Matters" (http://www.vtpi.org/health.pdf). "Win-Win Transportation Solutions," presented at Shifting Gears: Sustainable Mobility for Western Communities, Sponsored by Climate Change Central (http://www.climatechangecentral.com) of Environment Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, 16 June 2004. For more information on this subject see our report "Win-Win Transportation Solutions" (http://www.vtpi.org/winwin.pdf). "Pay-As-You-Drive Pricing: Innovative Strategy Proposed to Increase Insurance Affordability and Reduce Uninsured Driving," presented at the Casualty Actuarial Society Spring Meeting (http://www.casact.org), 17 May 2004. For more information on this subject see http://www.vtpi.org/payd_aff.pdf. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UPCOMING EVENTS =============== "Pro-Walk / Pro-Bike" Victoria 2004, September 7 10, 2004, Victoria, British Columbia (http://www.bikewalk.org). The major bi-annual international walking and cycling conference will be held September 7-10, here in Victoria, BC. Pro Walk - Pro Bike is a forum for sharing practical solutions, best practices and successful strategies for supporting healthy and sustainable lifestyles and transportation choices. It will both inspire participants and provide them with specific, hands-on tools for making more walkable and bicycle-friendly communities. Discount registration rates are in effect until July 31st. Delegate fees go up $50 (US) in August. Conference program highlights are at: http://www.bikewalk.org/PWPB2004/pwpb_snapshot.pdf. Todd Litman will present "What's It Worth: Evaluating The Full Economic Benefits Of Active Transportation (Walking and Cycling)". For more information on this subject see http://www.vtpi.org/walkability.pdf. "Rail~Volution: Building Livable Communities With Transit," September 18-22, Los Angeles. This annual conference explores ways to integrate public transit, walkability, smart growth and urban redevelopment to create more efficient transportation systems and livable communities. Todd Litman will participate in a session titled "Responding To Critics" and will present the results from his latest research on the economic, social and environmental benefits of rail transit. For more information on this subject see http://www.vtpi.org/railben.pdf. "Walking the Talk" Commercial Transportation's Contribution to a Sustainable Environment" (www.westac.com) October 20 & 21, 2004, Fairmont Waterfront Hotel & Ballantyne Pier, Vancouver, BC. This conference will discuss the transportation industry's green technologies. Expect a dynamic exchange of ideas and an opportunity to see, learn about and touch displays a "green goat", a "smart car", the hydrogen highway. Experience the new generation of friendly buses. "Getting around on Foot in NZ Cities & Towns" (http://www.livingstreets.org.nz/Conf2004.htm), 25th November 2004, Wellington, New Zealand. This one-day conference is targeted at transport professionals, health and activity professionals, urban designers, landscape planners, public officials and advocates for walking. It follows on last year's "Towards Sustainable Land Transport Conference," (http://www.nziht.co.nz/special_events/tslt/index.html), held November 2004, Wellington 2005 TRB Annual Meeting The 2005 Transportation Research Board 84th Annual Meeting takes place January 9-13, 2005. The deadline for paper submissions is 1 August 2004 (http://gulliver.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=3809).TRB welcomes any transportation-related paper submittals for consideration for presentation, and/or publication as part of the Transportation Research Record. VTPI Director Todd Litman will chair the TRB Sustainable Transportation Evaluation and Indicators Subcommittee. This subcommittee explores practical ways of evaluating progress toward sustainable transportation. Please contact him if you have questions or suggestions concerning this subcommittee. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ USEFUL RESOURCES ================ The City of Seattle's "One-Less-Car Study" involved 86 households that lived with 'one-less-car' for either six or nine weeks while keeping detailed trip diaries recording their travel patterns. The families demonstrated that every type of household (with and without children, high and lower incomes, etc.) in a variety of Seattle's neighborhoods can meet their needs with 'one-less-car' while saving money and reducing stress. Many families continued to reduce their vehicle ownership and use after the study ended. The "One-Less-Car Demonstration Study Replicability Package" (http://www.seattle.gov/waytogo/replicabilitypackage.htm) provides information on the project and guidance on implementing it in other cities. Will Toor and Spenser Havlick, "Transportation and Sustainable Campus Communities," Island Press (http://www.islandpress.org), May 2004. First chapter is available at http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html?SKU=1-55963-656-4. This detailed, 264-page book describes examples of North American collage and university campus transportation management programs, including their goals and objectives, features, case studies, and recommendations for implementing such programs. Includes parking management and pricing, transit service improvements, UPass programs, walking and cycling encouragement, ridesharing, carsharing, automobile use restrictions, and marketing programs. This book is highly recommended for anybody working with school or campus management programs. The Canadian Centre for Sustainable Transportation (http://www.cstctd.org) provides information, research and strategic policy advice to help create transportation systems that are clean, efficient, and equitable. The Centre performs research on a variety of related issues. The recent "Sustainable Transportation Monitor" (Number 10) includes discussion on transportation energy supply, and freight truck transport efficiency. Access Exchange International (http://www.globalride-sf.org) is a non-profit organization that promotes cost-effective access to public transportation for disabled persons in developing countries. AEI publications, "Mobility For All: A Guide To Making Transportation Accessible For Persons With Disabilities And Elders In Countries Around The World," and "Making Access Happen: Promoting and Planning Transport for All," are available from the Swedish Institute on Independent Living (http://www.independentliving.org). The website also provides links to various resources to help improve mobility for people with disabilities. Anybody involved in transit planning will appreciate the recently-released report, "The Demand for Public Transit: A Practical Guide," Transportation Research Laboratory, Report TRL 593 (http://www.trl.co.uk), 2004; available at http://www.demandforpublictransport.co.uk. It is a comprehensive analysis of the various factors that affect transit ridership, including fares, quality of service, and costs of automobile travel. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please let us know if you have comments or questions about any information in this newsletter, or if you would like to be removed from our mailing list. And please pass this newsletter on to others who may find it useful. Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 Email: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 30 19:16:50 2004 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:16:50 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Day in the Life of New Mobility - Food for thought from Toronto Message-ID: <00de01c4761e$55ecdf60$6501a8c0@home> Food for thought from Toronto: Our friends from the Sierra Club of Canada and the City of Toronto, with whom we are discussing Car/Free Day cooperation and a certain number of sustainable mobility transition ideas and actions in September, have just sent on a small brainstorming presentation entitled "Day in the Life of New Mobility" which you will now be able to access directly from the New Mobility Agenda site if you click to the Brainstorm link on the top menu. (Alternatively you can go direct to http://www.movingtheeconomy.ca/content/ditl.html) As their introduction makes clear, this is just one playful visualization; however the thing that is most striking here is the extent to which they are playing with quite a range of new and for the most part quite unfamiliar new or alternative mobility concepts which are neither solo driver cars or wait in the rain scheduled buses. This vivacity and variety is of course what is going to be the basic underlying pattern of new mobility in all cities of the world: new, softer and better ways of getting there without having to wait endlessly for technology to save us all (which of course it will not). And here's a thought for our friends who are involved in the WBCSD report and follow-up process. In a world of 100% for-sure over-capacity in the world auto sector, what is it that you can do to make money and provide products in this new mobility world, the one that we are now going to create? The advantages of being an early adapter will be enormous. BTW, if you want to know more about the planned Car/Free Day events this year in Toronto - after all one of the most innovative cities in North America and one that is not waiting for sustainable mobility to descend from the heavens - we invite you to get in touch off group via postmaster@ecoplan.org. The lead in the Toronto project is being taken by the Sierra Club (Ontario Chapter) whose site you can see at http://ontario.sierraclub.ca/. The Car Free Day campaign has its own website! http://www.carfreeday.ca/. You also may want to have a look at the Moving the Economy program of the City at http://www.movingtheeconomy.ca, which give quite a good feel for the number of actors and programs that are already on line there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040730/9653f956/attachment.html From arndt at wbcsd.org Fri Jul 30 20:50:10 2004 From: arndt at wbcsd.org (arndt@wbcsd.org) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:50:10 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Mobility News (30 July 2004) Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20040730/b3737e05/attachment.html