From editor at worldstreets.org Mon Jun 1 13:45:43 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 21:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Op-Ed: Chaotic India has an Urban Edge Message-ID: <1243831543735.08911ff9-89e4-4c70-b4a1-9b370027f853@google.com> - Dinesh Mohan, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi ?I regard the growth of cities as an evil thing, unfortunate for mankind and the world, unfortunate for England and certainly unfortunate for India...It is only when the cities realize the duty of making an adequate return to the villages for the strength and sustenance which they derive from them, instead of selfishly exploiting them, that a healthy and moral relationship between the two will spring up.? - M. K. Gandhi ?The unprecedented urban growth taking place in developing countries reflects the hopes and aspirations of millions of new urbanites. Cities have enormous potential for improving people?s lives, but inadequate urban management, often based on inaccurate perceptions and information, can turn opportunity into disaster.? - State of World Population 2007, UNFPA. Here we have two views about cities, almost reconcilable. The first by a humane visionary, and the second a consensus view of some professionals in the early 21st century including me. It is difficult to say who will be right in the ?long run?, especially in light of the assertions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their predictions about global warming. But, cities are here to stay, and I guess Gandhi?s second concern (above) will have to be taken seriously if IPCC is correct in their assessment. For many millennia human beings had to limit their greed because excess consumption demanded more manual labour. This limited their travel, the size of house they could build, clothes they could own and food they could eat. This put a limit on the use of natural resources. The industrial revolution changed all that. Our machines provide us with ready to cook food, houses, clothes and effortless travel. This has changed the concept of needs and greed. Our world is now a place where the rich and powerful can use up huge amounts of energy to transform natural resources into objects of daily use, travel and ultimately weapons of mass destruction. The world view has changed into a belief that there are endless resources and science and technology has solutions to every emerging problem without constraint. Most of the responses to IPCC warnings have this belief as their base. But, Gandhi?s concerns refuse to go away, even if at times I find it very difficult to be a faithful follower. Greed overpowering need is even more dominant in the domain of urban transport. Transportation planning has generally relied on the most simplistic applications of ?technology solves all? paradigm. The heady experience of speed from late nineteenth century onward has dominated all thinking. Human beings had not experienced comfortable speeds greater than 5 km per hour for all of their existence as a species except in their dreams. The launch of the train, motor car and the airplane in late 19th and early 20th century changed all that. With no genetic hunches to go by, we became speed addicts and like any other addict placed all concerns secondary to the new craving. Scientific theories and models taught all over the world for a century assumed that the main objective of a trip was to ensure smooth and unlimited movement of cars and if there were any ?unintended? effects like deaths, diseases and destruction of living patterns (called externalities by economists) they could be resolved by greater application of technology. International experience Unending problems of traffic congestion, CO2 production, accidents and pollution in every single city of the world has forced us to re-evaluate both our theories and practices. Many urban planning groups and professionals all over the world are into deep introspection. Experts like Professor Hermann Knoflacher from Vienna warn us that ?Car traffic is cooling social relationships by heating up the atmosphere! Traditional transportation engineering is a discipline to maximize congestion and as a side effect damages the urban fabric and finally the city. Global warming as a consequence is inevitable.? Voices like his are not alone or new. Jane Jacobs, the legendary urban planner explains our current problems ?Of course, if you have advisors that come from the West as advisors you're likely to get such a city. What American traffic engineer going to the Middle East doesn't want to make limited access highways and doesn't think in terms of wide streets and automobile capacities? They victimize American cities this way. Why won't they victimize foreign cities this way?? These are not voices of doomsday advocates. Their concern arises from the fact that most western cities have not been able to solve the problems that we are grappling with in India. According to the latest report from the Texas Transportation Institute congestion has increased in every single urban area in the USA in the past 25 years in spite of all investments in transit and road construction. Peak time delay in urban areas increased almost threefold between 1982 and 2007. The report warns us that ?One lesson from more than 20 years of mobility studies is that congestion relief is not just a matter of highway and transit agencies building big projects?. USA is not alone in this. Almost all cities in the world face severe congestion on arterial roads. During peak times car speeds average 10-15 km/h in cities like London, Paris, Tokyo, Jakarta, Tehran or Mexico City. The fact is that rich cities have not been able to reduce car use to very low levels in spite of extensive public transport infrastructure in place (See Table 1). All the cities in included in this table (except Singapore) had matured before the onset of the twentieth century, before cars became dominant. Their structures were determined by the need for people to walk or take the tram or the train. Even they have not been able to keep car use to very low levels. These data show that the car is used for more than 40% of the trips in most cities even when public transport is available. Evidence from cities like London, Paris and New York indicates that public transport use is greater than 60% only in the small inner core where parking is very limited and roads are perpetually full. In the rest of the city car use is generally more than 60% as roads are less crowded and there is easy availability of parking. Detailed studies from these cities point out that car owners generally shift to public transport only when no parking is available at the destination and average car speeds are less than 15 km/h. This empirical evidence suggests that car use (not ownership) is low only when walking and bicycling trips also form a significant proportion of all trips in cities. It appears that car use is encouraged when high speed entry and exit is ensured to city centres by building multi-lane wide avenues and elevated roads through the city. The classic example of the decay of American cities is given as proof of this phenomenon. Public transport use also becomes difficult when large colonies or gated communities are put in place. These neighbourhoods ensure long walking distances to public transit and discourage use. It has also been observed that when cities have very noisy roads and elevated metros, richer citizens move to quieter suburbs requiring long car commutes. This international experience should give us some important pointers. All urban transportation policy reports prepared by consultants in India assume that car use can be reduced just by providing more pubic transport facilities and assert that if their prescriptions are followed 70-80% of the trips would then be taken by public transit. The fact is that no city in the world has accomplished this feat! Further, car use as a proportion of all trips is so low in India that only very innovative thinking and practices may reduce growth in personal transport trips. In the richest cities of India, Mumbai and Delhi, recent estimates suggest that car trips constitute less than 10% of all trips. In all other cities this proportion would be lower. Additionally, the share of public transport is in these two cities is certainly higher than most of the cities in Europe or North America. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine how car and motorcycle use can be contained as we get richer if the international experience is anything to go by. Obviously, business as usual and copy-cat emulation of rich cities is not going to help. . . . The way forward in the face of global warming What does sustainable transport mean for us? At a fundamental level it requires less energy consumption. The choices available are: low emission vehicles, alternative fuels, fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips. Obviously, all options will have to be pursued for maximum gain. But, we will have to establish priorities on our political agenda as the shift is not going to be easy or painless both socially and technologically. Let us examine each option briefly here. At present our policy makers are putting the maximum stress on low emission vehicles and alternative fuels. This is horribly short-sighted. For the next twenty years there is no hope of huge reductions in CO2 primarily through low emission vehicles because the small gains will be more than offset by the rising number of vehicles and longer trip lengths. We know that as fuel consumption reduces people travel more and end up using more fuel. Production of biofuels has already become controversial internationally because of rising food prices. In a food and water short India, this is going to be even more difficult. Most international experts do not see biofuels as a solution in India. Even vehicles driven on electricity are not CO2 efficient because thermally produced electricity produces more CO2 (including transmission losses, etc.) than diesel/petrol powered vehicles. And, this does not include the negative effects of the huge amounts of fly ash associated with electric power. Even in public transport an efficiently run bus system produces about half to two-thirds the CO2 per passenger than a metro rail system. This is not to suggest that we should not have low emission vehicles, we must, and sooner than later. But, it will not be the main stay for a sustainable transport system. Fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips has to be the priority, and it has a lot to do with how we develop our cities and streets. Now we know that no matter how many roads we build and how wide they are they always get filled up with vehicles. The number of vehicles people own is always more than road space available as evidenced by road conditions in small towns of India to car and road based cities like Los Angeles in USA. Therefore, vehicle emissions in a city are directly proportional to the area of road space in a city. The higher the percentage of road space and more the number of elevated transportation corridors in a city more the pollution and CO2 emissions. This also applies to one way and signal free roads. These roads force people to travel longer distances and keep their vehicles on roads for longer times. For example, my neighbour used to get out of his house, turn right on the main road and go 2 km to his office. Now all the turns have been blocked, he has to turn left, go 2 km to the next major junction and then make a U-turn to travel 4 km more to his office. Instead of 2 km, now his daily office trip is 6 km! Public transport will only be used by choice if it is safe to walk and cross the road to take the bus. Provision of very safe roads then becomes a pre-requisite for promoting public transport and hence cleaner air. In a hot country the access trip to the bus must be less than 5-10 minutes away, or less than 500 m and all buses air conditioned. An air conditioned bus only adds half a rupee per trip over its life time. This means that no city block can be more than 800 m to 1 km square. At present many of our colonies and gated communities are larger than that. This discourages public transport use. The short walk must be safe from crime also. This can be ensured only if there are shops and street vendors on the road. So mixed land use, and intensely so, becomes imperative. How do we ensure fewer and shorter trips? It is the poor who are forced to have few and short trips, and this should be enabled by policy. Poor neighbourhoods should be allowed to exist cheek by jowl with rich colonies and all should be less than a km sq in area. Small shops, restaurants, hospitals and businesses would then have to be integral part of residential areas. If the above conditions are met then you can have dedicated bus and bicycle lanes on all major roads of a city. A typical arterial road being two car lanes, one dedicated bus and bicycle lane each, a 2 m pedestrian path and a 1 m tree line in each direction. Such a road can move at least 35,000 persons in each direction at peak time. If such roads exist every 0.8 -1 km all over the city you have adequate capacity for moving people. Such a road does not have to more than 45 m wide. This is the way forward for a sustainable transport option. Our cities are ready for it. Many of these options are present ?illegally? already. We have to recognise them as solutions and not problems as we currently do. Unless we re-think our plans for flyovers, wider roads, gated communities, ?slum? removal, and elevated transport corridors, our cities will turn out to be ?warmer? than we can tolerate. ==== For the complete paper as published by the Journal Civil Society - (Reference follows) To contact the author: Dinesh Mohan, PhD - dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in Professor and Coordinator Transport Research and Injury Prevention Programme WHO Collaborating Centre Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Room 808, 7th Floor Main Building Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016 www.iitd.ac.in/tripp -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 06:41:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090531/3c55e8b5/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Mon Jun 1 13:56:37 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 21:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris Message-ID: <1243832197169.619b5e84-e511-4940-982f-75b8579020bb@google.com> [http://newmobilityagenda.blogspot.com/2009/02/reports-of-velibs-demise-greatly.html] V?lib, Paris's pioneering, city-transforming public bike project has had its fair share (actually unfair share I would say) of vandalism and theft, and while it does not threaten the integrity and viability of the service, it is part of the landscape of public bikes and needs to be understood and taken into account. There is, in fact, a great deal that can be done to reduce the magnitude of these challenges , and indeed steps are being taken here. That said, let's have a look at some of the examples of damage, which have been collected for us by vigilant Eyes on the Street Sentinel in Paris, Larry Langner. And here you have a poster placed on one of the JCDecaux street signs in Paris, warning that: "Breaking a bike is easy. It can't defend itself". And then: "16,000 bikes vandalised, 8000 disappeared. Velib is yours. Protect it. For more examples, click to http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-264472 * Editor's note: Click here to read report on "Reports of V?lib?s Demise Greatly Exaggerated" -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 06:51:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090531/2aaa8883/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Jun 1 17:52:48 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:52:48 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris In-Reply-To: <1243832197169.619b5e84-e511-4940-982f-75b8579020bb@google.com> References: <1243832197169.619b5e84-e511-4940-982f-75b8579020bb@google.com> Message-ID: <4A2396E0.8040804@greenidea.eu> Hi, I would like to ask: * Does in fact the Municipality of Paris own the system ("...Velib is yours...")? * Who do people think really owns it? Paris? JCDecaux? "The people"? * How is destruction of the bikes tied in with attitudes about advertising in general, and JCDecaux in particular? * Is there any data on what people who damage bikes etc. think? Their demographic profile? Their reasons or lack thereof? Is it basically the same thing as destruction of collective public transport vehicles (non-functional damage such as tags on windows)? Does anyone suspect that the taxi or private car lobbies are behind it? * What other "steps" are being taken? Thanks, T The Editor wrote: > [http://newmobilityagenda.blogspot.com/2009/02/reports-of-velibs-demise-greatly.html] > > > > V?lib, Paris's pioneering, city-transforming public bike project has > had its fair share (actually unfair share I would say) of vandalism > and theft, and while it does not threaten the integrity and viability > of the service, it is part of the landscape of public bikes and needs > to be understood and taken into account. There is, in fact, a great > deal that can be done to reduce the magnitude of these challenges , > and indeed steps are being taken here. That said, let's have a look at > some of the examples of damage, which have been collected for us by > vigilant Eyes on the Street Sentinel in Paris, Larry Langner. > > > And here you have a poster placed on one of the JCDecaux street signs > in Paris, warning that: "Breaking a bike is easy. It can't defend > itself". > > And then: "16,000 bikes vandalised, 8000 disappeared. Velib is yours. > Protect it. > > For more examples, click to http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-264472 > > * Editor's note: Click here > to > read report on "Reports of V?lib?s Demise Greatly Exaggerated > " > > > > -- > Posted By The Editor to World Streets > > at 6/01/2009 06:51:00 AM > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/23013a49/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Tue Jun 2 00:22:08 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 08:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] World Street Weekly Digest - 22-29 May 2009 Message-ID: <1243869728779.d9f566d4-e253-41bb-8cb8-8c6ccc5e5759@google.com> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} 12.00 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} Articles & Comments appearing in week of 22-29 May 2009 All entries directly clickable to full article. For previous weeks and months, click to Archives, library and reading room Plan B: The New Mobility Agenda (Start here)Op-Ed: The choice challenge (Try nudging)Brainfood: Canned video interviews via SkypeHonk! Swine flu increases traffic fatalities in Mexico CityBack from Seoul: Denis Baupin on Cities against Climate ChangeHonk! Veronica Moss, lobbyistVirtuous cycles: It?s all about choiceHonk! Help April (help us)Who reads World Streets? And where? Op-Ed: The choice challenge (Try nudging) By The Editor ?Nudging? travel behaviour change through the design of information systems? - Erel Avineri, University of the West of England Today?s travellers have a wealth of information at their disposal to help plan and execute their journeys. The availability of travel information to the public has changed dramatically in recent years with the increasing use of the internet and mobile communications. Brainfood: Canned video interviews via Skype If you have a minute you may want to have a quick look at this. You may find some use in it. A few weeks ago some friends from The Movement Design Bureau in London (Eyes on the Street), called over to suggest that we might spend a few minutes together to demo a Skype video link they are working with in a program they call Re*Move (forgive them, they're English). To give our video some content Honk! Swine flu increases traffic fatalities in Mexico City This is a very short note, but I thought folks on the World Streets blog might appreciate this traffic factoid from here in Mexico. Apparently the swine flu in Mexico City caused few real deaths but many traffic deaths. The large drop in the volume of cars increased velocities and also increased traffic fatalities. There were 12 traffic fatalities in the 6 days before the government issued their Back from Seoul: Denis Baupin on Cities against Climate Change We try very hard in World Streets to stick to our topic, which is already broad enough. But from time to time we reach out to give attention to the basic underpinnings of public policy which shape the basic environment of our sector and our ability to do something about it. In this spirit, we are pleased to present here a recent "reflection" made by Denis Baupin, Deputy Mayor of Paris Honk! Veronica Moss, lobbyist >From our ever busy friends over at StreetFilms, two and a half minutes with Miss Veronica Moss, convinced SUV-ist, unbending defender of her right to the road, and apparently lobbyist in the corridors of power in Washington DC. Try it with your morning tea break. (Only in America, right? Oh? ) * Click here to listen to Miss Moss make her Virtuous cycles: It?s all about choice - Gordon Price, PriceTags, Vancouver, Canada It has taken a century of building almost exclusively for the car to get us to our current dilemma. It will take some time to achieve long-term solutions. Ultimately, they can only be found in the way we build our cities. We will have to establish virtuous cycles to offset the vicious ones, where success leads to more success. There is no single Honk! Help April (help us) Dear Photographers, Artists and Eyes on the Street colleagues worldwide, Our friend April Streeter, an environmental journalist, mother of two young cyclists, and Eyes on the Street Sentinel from Gothenburg Sweden is in the process of preparing a book which is focusing on urban women cyclists in all the very different corners of our often hard-to-cycle-in world.- Who reads World Streets? And where? In the last week close to two thousand thoughtful people from 140 cities and 36 countries of this suddenly quite small planet dropped in to pick up their free copy of the latest edition of World Streets. Looks like you are one of them. You and others joined us from cities in . . . . Australia. Belgium. Brazil. Canada. Colombia. Croatia. Czech Republic. Denmark. France. Germany. Green Light on World Streets: Next Steps World Streets: Insights and discussion points from leading thinkers and practitioners around the world. World Streets, the world's first independent sustainable transportation daily, is about to complete its first trimester of activity, so we thought this would be a good time to address one of the important building blocks of this effort, notably the potential for collaboration and exchange among Comments: Most of this I fully agree with. If people are to ... from World Streets Comments by Ian Perry (Cardiff, UK) Most of this I fully agree with If people are to take taxis when it is raining, these taxis and their drivers will be unemployed when it is not raining. Can these taxis and their drivers find alternative employment depending on the weather? If you are to meet peak demand for taxis and car share, then you have to have the capacity, which is, then unemployed when demand is low, but still I'm working in India as a transport and sustainability ... from World Streets Comments by Simon Bishop I'm working in India as a transport and sustainability consultant. I shifted independently with my family from a job as a planner in London Whilst Gandhi can seem a long way from where middle class India is headed right now and he is often not remembered for some of the most far-sighted views that he held, there is one ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL ADDITION to your list of 12 strategic goals From: Gail Jennings [mailto:gail@mobilitymagazine.... from World Streets Comments by Gail Jennings From: Gail Jennings [mailto:gail@mobilitymagazine.co.za] Hi Eric Just wanted to let you know that New Mobility and World Streets are SUCH excellent resources - there is nowhere better (that I've found, anyway!) to find out what's up and what's not, to get an overview of right-now mobility issues. Even on a Sunday afternoon, the sites are worth visiting! David Levinger said... Actually, when I read ... from World Streets Comments by David Levinger David Levinger said.. Actually, when I read this article, I felt (A) that the commenters appeared not to have understood that the German town is not actually *car-free*, but that residents who own cars simply have to park at the edges of the town (B) perplexed at their choice to feature a commenter who stated that there are only six U.S. cities in -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 05:20:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/e3cf2657/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Tue Jun 2 01:03:53 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] =?utf-8?Q?=5BWorld_Streets=5D_World_Streets_=E2=80=93_M?= =?utf-8?Q?ay_2009_Contents?= Message-ID: <1243872233605.641afaa4-ecbe-4f8c-9d1c-5a4ddd3e549f@google.com> [http://newmobilityagenda.blogspot.com/2009/03/this-week-on-street.html] During the month of May a total of 34 articles, Op-Ed pieces, and commentaries were featured in World Streets, coming from authors or on projects in Australia, Brazil, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Sweden, UK, and USA. And in addition you will find a handful of videos and tools, as well as an invitation to read World Streets (Ruas do Mondo) in Portuguese. To view them you have several options: * A PDF file which you can call up and print up by clicking here. * Or if you scroll down the left menu, you will see under World Streets Archives that all of May?s articles can be called up with a single click there. * You may also find it handy to use the Search function to locate a specific title, subject, author, etc. * For a recapitulation of all past published items, the best place to get start is by clicking here, our Archives, Library and Reading Room. Your comments and suggestions on these archiving procedures are more than welcome. -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 05:53:00 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/e9aabe16/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Tue Jun 2 14:03:00 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 22:03:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] =?utf-8?Q?=5BWorld_Streets=5D_Op-Ed=3A_Can_Cape_Town?= =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=99s_new_mayor_drive_improved_public_transp=2E=2E=2E?= Message-ID: <1243918980709.6dd93fcc-2509-4313-8336-509537355c8b@google.com> [http://www.mobilitymagazine.co.za] - By Gail Jennings, Cape Town, South Africa Democratic Alliance (DA) councillor Dan Plato elected Executive Mayor of Cape Town, South Africa, and has pledged to improve the state of public transport. The 48-year-old Plato replaces Helen Zille, who has taken up the position of Premier of the Western Cape after the April elections. ?Our citizens want jobs, first and foremost,? Plato reminded his electorate in his acceptance speech. ?But it is not for the Cape Town local government to employ people and create jobs. We need a stable economy, and we need money to stream into Cape Town. We need to enable businesses to thrive.? Currently, businesses are constrained by poor electricity supply, acute poverty, crime, municipal red tape ? and poor public transport,? he said. It follows, therefore, that improved public transport is one of the keys to job creation and a thriving economy ? considering that only 40% of South Africans own private vehicles. Now to a reader outside of South Africa, Plato?s pledge to improve public transport might seem an obvious pledge to make ? especially ahead of the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup, now just under 365 days away. The developed world everywhere is focussing on improving public transport, as well as on getting more people onto bicycles or car- and ride-shares, and grappling with air quality, gridlock and cleaner fuels. In South Africa, however, we have yet to create public-sector-led public transport (or sidewalks and bike lanes, for that matter?). Our transport needs are met (in the most loose application of the term ?met?) either by private vehicles or by a militant, unregulated and unsafe minibus taxi industry (which moves about two-thirds of public transport passengers). Yet South Africa?s promise to implement the first phases of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) before the World Cup have been mired in politics, between the opposition-led Cape Town and provincial/national government; and between all tiers of government and the minibus taxi industry (they believe they stand to lose their livelihood). Cape Town thus far ? to differentiate its scheme with those of other South African cities ? insists on referring to an IRT (Integrated Rapid Transit) system rather than a BRT. And instead of lobbying national treasury to have funding moved forward from 2010/11 to 2009/10 (to have a Phase 1A built for 2010), officials, we are told, have been making budget cuts instead, suggesting that a public transport system is not, in fact, a FIFA requirement? (FIFA has responded by saying that the organisation itself will transport fans and VIPs, although the mini-bus industry, of course, had hoped for that slice of the pie?). ?The point with BRT is that it is not supposed to be glorified city bus service,? says a frustrated national government transport official, watching the Cape Town situation unfold. ?BRT is supposed to be a fundamental urban transformation, which creates liveable and walkable liberated zones. You will never get this with a city bus service that is shiny new vehicles and nothing else.? ?It will be a tragedy for Cape Town to have a R4bn stadium and a R500m city bus service that calls itself a BRT....? Plato and his team of transport officials have pledged that ?the City will work closely with the national and provincial departments of transport to ensure the successful implementation of the IRT system,? but Cape Town could end up with a compromised end product, or a loss of decision-making and implementation authority entirely. The BRT system has now become a presidential and cabinet level issue. It is the first real transformative test since 1994 in the public transport sector. If South Africans do not fight for it now, we will still be fighting for it in 10 years? time, as the challenges are not going to be solved with multi-million new freeways and minibus taxi upgrades? By Gail Jennings, Mobility Magazine, Cape Town, South Africa -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/02/2009 07:03:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/588a6f27/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Tue Jun 2 14:23:46 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 22:23:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] World Street Weekly Digest - 22-29 May 2009 Message-ID: <1243920225254.8e192e1f-d5f5-40fc-8a4b-3c7111bdf747@google.com> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} 12.00 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} Articles & Comments appearing in week of 22-29 May 2009 All entries directly clickable to full article. For previous weeks and months, click to Archives, library and reading room Plan B: The New Mobility Agenda (Start here)Op-Ed: The choice challenge (Try nudging)Brainfood: Canned video interviews via SkypeHonk! Swine flu increases traffic fatalities in Mexico CityBack from Seoul: Denis Baupin on Cities against Climate ChangeHonk! Veronica Moss, lobbyistVirtuous cycles: It?s all about choiceHonk! Help April (help us)Who reads World Streets? And where? Op-Ed: The choice challenge (Try nudging) By The Editor ?Nudging? travel behaviour change through the design of information systems? - Erel Avineri, University of the West of England Today?s travellers have a wealth of information at their disposal to help plan and execute their journeys. The availability of travel information to the public has changed dramatically in recent years with the increasing use of the internet and mobile communications. Brainfood: Canned video interviews via Skype If you have a minute you may want to have a quick look at this. You may find some use in it. A few weeks ago some friends from The Movement Design Bureau in London (Eyes on the Street), called over to suggest that we might spend a few minutes together to demo a Skype video link they are working with in a program they call Re*Move (forgive them, they're English). To give our video some content Honk! Swine flu increases traffic fatalities in Mexico City This is a very short note, but I thought folks on the World Streets blog might appreciate this traffic factoid from here in Mexico. Apparently the swine flu in Mexico City caused few real deaths but many traffic deaths. The large drop in the volume of cars increased velocities and also increased traffic fatalities. There were 12 traffic fatalities in the 6 days before the government issued their Back from Seoul: Denis Baupin on Cities against Climate Change We try very hard in World Streets to stick to our topic, which is already broad enough. But from time to time we reach out to give attention to the basic underpinnings of public policy which shape the basic environment of our sector and our ability to do something about it. In this spirit, we are pleased to present here a recent "reflection" made by Denis Baupin, Deputy Mayor of Paris Honk! Veronica Moss, lobbyist >From our ever busy friends over at StreetFilms, two and a half minutes with Miss Veronica Moss, convinced SUV-ist, unbending defender of her right to the road, and apparently lobbyist in the corridors of power in Washington DC. Try it with your morning tea break. (Only in America, right? Oh? ) * Click here to listen to Miss Moss make her Virtuous cycles: It?s all about choice - Gordon Price, PriceTags, Vancouver, Canada It has taken a century of building almost exclusively for the car to get us to our current dilemma. It will take some time to achieve long-term solutions. Ultimately, they can only be found in the way we build our cities. We will have to establish virtuous cycles to offset the vicious ones, where success leads to more success. There is no single Honk! Help April (help us) Dear Photographers, Artists and Eyes on the Street colleagues worldwide, Our friend April Streeter, an environmental journalist, mother of two young cyclists, and Eyes on the Street Sentinel from Gothenburg Sweden is in the process of preparing a book which is focusing on urban women cyclists in all the very different corners of our often hard-to-cycle-in world.- Who reads World Streets? And where? In the last week close to two thousand thoughtful people from 140 cities and 36 countries of this suddenly quite small planet dropped in to pick up their free copy of the latest edition of World Streets. Looks like you are one of them. You and others joined us from cities in . . . . Australia. Belgium. Brazil. Canada. Colombia. Croatia. Czech Republic. Denmark. France. Germany. Green Light on World Streets: Next Steps World Streets: Insights and discussion points from leading thinkers and practitioners around the world. World Streets, the world's first independent sustainable transportation daily, is about to complete its first trimester of activity, so we thought this would be a good time to address one of the important building blocks of this effort, notably the potential for collaboration and exchange among Comments: Most of this I fully agree with. If people are to ... from World Streets Comments by Ian Perry (Cardiff, UK) Most of this I fully agree with If people are to take taxis when it is raining, these taxis and their drivers will be unemployed when it is not raining. Can these taxis and their drivers find alternative employment depending on the weather? If you are to meet peak demand for taxis and car share, then you have to have the capacity, which is, then unemployed when demand is low, but still I'm working in India as a transport and sustainability ... from World Streets Comments by Simon Bishop I'm working in India as a transport and sustainability consultant. I shifted independently with my family from a job as a planner in London Whilst Gandhi can seem a long way from where middle class India is headed right now and he is often not remembered for some of the most far-sighted views that he held, there is one ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL ADDITION to your list of 12 strategic goals From: Gail Jennings [mailto:gail@mobilitymagazine.... from World Streets Comments by Gail Jennings From: Gail Jennings [mailto:gail@mobilitymagazine.co.za] Hi Eric Just wanted to let you know that New Mobility and World Streets are SUCH excellent resources - there is nowhere better (that I've found, anyway!) to find out what's up and what's not, to get an overview of right-now mobility issues. Even on a Sunday afternoon, the sites are worth visiting! David Levinger said... Actually, when I read ... from World Streets Comments by David Levinger David Levinger said.. Actually, when I read this article, I felt (A) that the commenters appeared not to have understood that the German town is not actually *car-free*, but that residents who own cars simply have to park at the edges of the town (B) perplexed at their choice to feature a commenter who stated that there are only six U.S. cities in -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 5/29/2009 05:20:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/538a18e0/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Tue Jun 2 14:26:21 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 22:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Op-Ed: Chaotic India has an Urban Edge Message-ID: <1243920381486.eb1a9ec5-b81f-41c2-a8cd-7373f7ed9043@google.com> - Dinesh Mohan, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi ?I regard the growth of cities as an evil thing, unfortunate for mankind and the world, unfortunate for England and certainly unfortunate for India...It is only when the cities realize the duty of making an adequate return to the villages for the strength and sustenance which they derive from them, instead of selfishly exploiting them, that a healthy and moral relationship between the two will spring up.? - M. K. Gandhi ?The unprecedented urban growth taking place in developing countries reflects the hopes and aspirations of millions of new urbanites. Cities have enormous potential for improving people?s lives, but inadequate urban management, often based on inaccurate perceptions and information, can turn opportunity into disaster.? - State of World Population 2007, UNFPA. Here we have two views about cities, almost reconcilable. The first by a humane visionary, and the second a consensus view of some professionals in the early 21st century including me. It is difficult to say who will be right in the ?long run?, especially in light of the assertions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their predictions about global warming. But, cities are here to stay, and I guess Gandhi?s second concern (above) will have to be taken seriously if IPCC is correct in their assessment. For many millennia human beings had to limit their greed because excess consumption demanded more manual labour. This limited their travel, the size of house they could build, clothes they could own and food they could eat. This put a limit on the use of natural resources. The industrial revolution changed all that. Our machines provide us with ready to cook food, houses, clothes and effortless travel. This has changed the concept of needs and greed. Our world is now a place where the rich and powerful can use up huge amounts of energy to transform natural resources into objects of daily use, travel and ultimately weapons of mass destruction. The world view has changed into a belief that there are endless resources and science and technology has solutions to every emerging problem without constraint. Most of the responses to IPCC warnings have this belief as their base. But, Gandhi?s concerns refuse to go away, even if at times I find it very difficult to be a faithful follower. Greed overpowering need is even more dominant in the domain of urban transport. Transportation planning has generally relied on the most simplistic applications of ?technology solves all? paradigm. The heady experience of speed from late nineteenth century onward has dominated all thinking. Human beings had not experienced comfortable speeds greater than 5 km per hour for all of their existence as a species except in their dreams. The launch of the train, motor car and the airplane in late 19th and early 20th century changed all that. With no genetic hunches to go by, we became speed addicts and like any other addict placed all concerns secondary to the new craving. Scientific theories and models taught all over the world for a century assumed that the main objective of a trip was to ensure smooth and unlimited movement of cars and if there were any ?unintended? effects like deaths, diseases and destruction of living patterns (called externalities by economists) they could be resolved by greater application of technology. International experience Unending problems of traffic congestion, CO2 production, accidents and pollution in every single city of the world has forced us to re-evaluate both our theories and practices. Many urban planning groups and professionals all over the world are into deep introspection. Experts like Professor Hermann Knoflacher from Vienna warn us that ?Car traffic is cooling social relationships by heating up the atmosphere! Traditional transportation engineering is a discipline to maximize congestion and as a side effect damages the urban fabric and finally the city. Global warming as a consequence is inevitable.? Voices like his are not alone or new. Jane Jacobs, the legendary urban planner explains our current problems ?Of course, if you have advisors that come from the West as advisors you're likely to get such a city. What American traffic engineer going to the Middle East doesn't want to make limited access highways and doesn't think in terms of wide streets and automobile capacities? They victimize American cities this way. Why won't they victimize foreign cities this way?? These are not voices of doomsday advocates. Their concern arises from the fact that most western cities have not been able to solve the problems that we are grappling with in India. According to the latest report from the Texas Transportation Institute congestion has increased in every single urban area in the USA in the past 25 years in spite of all investments in transit and road construction. Peak time delay in urban areas increased almost threefold between 1982 and 2007. The report warns us that ?One lesson from more than 20 years of mobility studies is that congestion relief is not just a matter of highway and transit agencies building big projects?. USA is not alone in this. Almost all cities in the world face severe congestion on arterial roads. During peak times car speeds average 10-15 km/h in cities like London, Paris, Tokyo, Jakarta, Tehran or Mexico City. The fact is that rich cities have not been able to reduce car use to very low levels in spite of extensive public transport infrastructure in place (See Table 1). All the cities in included in this table (except Singapore) had matured before the onset of the twentieth century, before cars became dominant. Their structures were determined by the need for people to walk or take the tram or the train. Even they have not been able to keep car use to very low levels. These data show that the car is used for more than 40% of the trips in most cities even when public transport is available. Evidence from cities like London, Paris and New York indicates that public transport use is greater than 60% only in the small inner core where parking is very limited and roads are perpetually full. In the rest of the city car use is generally more than 60% as roads are less crowded and there is easy availability of parking. Detailed studies from these cities point out that car owners generally shift to public transport only when no parking is available at the destination and average car speeds are less than 15 km/h. This empirical evidence suggests that car use (not ownership) is low only when walking and bicycling trips also form a significant proportion of all trips in cities. It appears that car use is encouraged when high speed entry and exit is ensured to city centres by building multi-lane wide avenues and elevated roads through the city. The classic example of the decay of American cities is given as proof of this phenomenon. Public transport use also becomes difficult when large colonies or gated communities are put in place. These neighbourhoods ensure long walking distances to public transit and discourage use. It has also been observed that when cities have very noisy roads and elevated metros, richer citizens move to quieter suburbs requiring long car commutes. This international experience should give us some important pointers. All urban transportation policy reports prepared by consultants in India assume that car use can be reduced just by providing more pubic transport facilities and assert that if their prescriptions are followed 70-80% of the trips would then be taken by public transit. The fact is that no city in the world has accomplished this feat! Further, car use as a proportion of all trips is so low in India that only very innovative thinking and practices may reduce growth in personal transport trips. In the richest cities of India, Mumbai and Delhi, recent estimates suggest that car trips constitute less than 10% of all trips. In all other cities this proportion would be lower. Additionally, the share of public transport is in these two cities is certainly higher than most of the cities in Europe or North America. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine how car and motorcycle use can be contained as we get richer if the international experience is anything to go by. Obviously, business as usual and copy-cat emulation of rich cities is not going to help. . . . The way forward in the face of global warming What does sustainable transport mean for us? At a fundamental level it requires less energy consumption. The choices available are: low emission vehicles, alternative fuels, fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips. Obviously, all options will have to be pursued for maximum gain. But, we will have to establish priorities on our political agenda as the shift is not going to be easy or painless both socially and technologically. Let us examine each option briefly here. At present our policy makers are putting the maximum stress on low emission vehicles and alternative fuels. This is horribly short-sighted. For the next twenty years there is no hope of huge reductions in CO2 primarily through low emission vehicles because the small gains will be more than offset by the rising number of vehicles and longer trip lengths. We know that as fuel consumption reduces people travel more and end up using more fuel. Production of biofuels has already become controversial internationally because of rising food prices. In a food and water short India, this is going to be even more difficult. Most international experts do not see biofuels as a solution in India. Even vehicles driven on electricity are not CO2 efficient because thermally produced electricity produces more CO2 (including transmission losses, etc.) than diesel/petrol powered vehicles. And, this does not include the negative effects of the huge amounts of fly ash associated with electric power. Even in public transport an efficiently run bus system produces about half to two-thirds the CO2 per passenger than a metro rail system. This is not to suggest that we should not have low emission vehicles, we must, and sooner than later. But, it will not be the main stay for a sustainable transport system. Fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips has to be the priority, and it has a lot to do with how we develop our cities and streets. Now we know that no matter how many roads we build and how wide they are they always get filled up with vehicles. The number of vehicles people own is always more than road space available as evidenced by road conditions in small towns of India to car and road based cities like Los Angeles in USA. Therefore, vehicle emissions in a city are directly proportional to the area of road space in a city. The higher the percentage of road space and more the number of elevated transportation corridors in a city more the pollution and CO2 emissions. This also applies to one way and signal free roads. These roads force people to travel longer distances and keep their vehicles on roads for longer times. For example, my neighbour used to get out of his house, turn right on the main road and go 2 km to his office. Now all the turns have been blocked, he has to turn left, go 2 km to the next major junction and then make a U-turn to travel 4 km more to his office. Instead of 2 km, now his daily office trip is 6 km! Public transport will only be used by choice if it is safe to walk and cross the road to take the bus. Provision of very safe roads then becomes a pre-requisite for promoting public transport and hence cleaner air. In a hot country the access trip to the bus must be less than 5-10 minutes away,or less than 500 m. This means that no city block can be more than 800-1,000 m long. At present many of our neighbourhoods and gated communities are larger than that. This discourages public transport use. The short walk must be safe from crime also. This can be ensured only if there are shops and street vendors on the road. So mixed land use, and intensely so, becomes imperative.BUs use in hot climates can become a mode of choice if all buses are air conditioned. An air conditioned bus only adds half a rupee per trip over its life time. How do we ensure fewer and shorter trips? Rich and highly qualified people find it more difficult to find work close to home than those less qualified or poorer. Therefore, poor people should not be forced take long trips by moving them to the periphery. Short trips for most residents of the city can be enabled by policy. Poor neighbourhoods should be allowed to exist cheek by jowl with rich ones and all should be less than a sqkm in area. Small shops, restaurants, hospitals and businesses have to be an integral part of residential areas to make all this possible. If the above conditions are met then you can have dedicated bus and bicycle lanes on all major roads of a city. A typical arterial road being two car lanes, one dedicated bus and bicycle lane each, a 2 m pedestrian path and a 1 m tree line in each direction. Such a road can move at least 35,000 persons in each direction at peak time. If such roads exist every 0.8 -1 km all over the city you have adequate capacity for moving people. Such a road does not have to more than 45 m wide. This is the way forward for a sustainable transport option. Our cities are ready for it. Many of these options are present ?illegally? already. We have to recognise them as solutions and not problems as we currently do. Unless we re-think our plans for flyovers, wider roads, gated communities, ?slum? removal, and elevated transport corridors, our cities will turn out to be ?warmer? than we can tolerate. ==== For the complete paper as published by the Journal Civil Society - (Reference follows) To contact the author: Dinesh Mohan, PhD - dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in Professor and Coordinator Transport Research and Injury Prevention Programme WHO Collaborating Centre Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Room 808, 7th Floor Main Building Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016 www.iitd.ac.in/tripp -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 06:41:00 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090601/d80918d1/attachment.html From ianenvironmental at googlemail.com Tue Jun 2 21:17:43 2009 From: ianenvironmental at googlemail.com (Ian Perry) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 14:17:43 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris Message-ID: Hi Todd, What goes through the minds of the individuals who vandalise bicycles is very little... Vandalism of bicycles is not limited to bike-sharing, but to private bicycles too. Some see great entertainment value in vandalising bicyles here in the Netherlands, particularly late at night on their way home from a bar. I doubt very much that the car lobby or taxi drivers are behind the vandalism in Paris. The Dutch police do very little to prevent bicycle crime and will only register a theft, I'm told, if you can present the original two keys for your cut bicycle lock. It's not only the poor who steal and vandalise, but the privileged too, sometimes seeking retribution for a bicycle of theirs that was stolen, and so a cycle begins/continues. What is the answer? Perhaps we need to look east to the land of the rising sun. Ian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090602/db4d8276/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Wed Jun 3 00:51:23 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Op-Ed: Chaotic India has an Urban Edge Message-ID: <1243957883185.d1447d50-244b-4c96-aad7-333199de449e@google.com> - Dinesh Mohan, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi ?The unprecedented urban growth taking place in developing countries reflects the hopes and aspirations of millions of new urbanites. Cities have enormous potential for improving people?s lives, but inadequate urban management, often based on inaccurate perceptions and information, can turn opportunity into disaster.? - State of World Population 2007, UNFPA. ?I regard the growth of cities as an evil thing, unfortunate for mankind and the world, unfortunate for England and certainly unfortunate for India...It is only when the cities realize the duty of making an adequate return to the villages for the strength and sustenance which they derive from them, instead of selfishly exploiting them, that a healthy and moral relationship between the two will spring up.? - M. K. Gandhi Here we have two views about cities, almost reconcilable. The first by a humane visionary, and the second a consensus view of some professionals in the early 21st century including me. It is difficult to say who will be right in the ?long run?, especially in light of the assertions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their predictions about global warming. But, cities are here to stay, and I guess Gandhi?s second concern (above) will have to be taken seriously if IPCC is correct in their assessment. For many millennia human beings had to limit their greed because excess consumption demanded more manual labour. This limited their travel, the size of house they could build, clothes they could own and food they could eat. This put a limit on the use of natural resources. The industrial revolution changed all that. Our machines provide us with ready to cook food, houses, clothes and effortless travel. This has changed the concept of needs and greed. Our world is now a place where the rich and powerful can use up huge amounts of energy to transform natural resources into objects of daily use, travel and ultimately weapons of mass destruction. The world view has changed into a belief that there are endless resources and science and technology has solutions to every emerging problem without constraint. Most of the responses to IPCC warnings have this belief as their base. But, Gandhi?s concerns refuse to go away, even if at times I find it very difficult to be a faithful follower. Greed overpowering need is even more dominant in the domain of urban transport. Transportation planning has generally relied on the most simplistic applications of ?technology solves all? paradigm. The heady experience of speed from late nineteenth century onward has dominated all thinking. Human beings had not experienced comfortable speeds greater than 5 km per hour for all of their existence as a species except in their dreams. The launch of the train, motor car and the airplane in late 19th and early 20th century changed all that. With no genetic hunches to go by, we became speed addicts and like any other addict placed all concerns secondary to the new craving. Scientific theories and models taught all over the world for a century assumed that the main objective of a trip was to ensure smooth and unlimited movement of cars and if there were any ?unintended? effects like deaths, diseases and destruction of living patterns (called externalities by economists) they could be resolved by greater application of technology. International experience Unending problems of traffic congestion, CO2 production, accidents and pollution in every single city of the world has forced us to re-evaluate both our theories and practices. Many urban planning groups and professionals all over the world are into deep introspection. Experts like Professor Hermann Knoflacher from Vienna warn us that ?Car traffic is cooling social relationships by heating up the atmosphere! Traditional transportation engineering is a discipline to maximize congestion and as a side effect damages the urban fabric and finally the city. Global warming as a consequence is inevitable.? Voices like his are not alone or new. Jane Jacobs, the legendary urban planner explains our current problems ?Of course, if you have advisors that come from the West as advisors you're likely to get such a city. What American traffic engineer going to the Middle East doesn't want to make limited access highways and doesn't think in terms of wide streets and automobile capacities? They victimize American cities this way. Why won't they victimize foreign cities this way?? These are not voices of doomsday advocates. Their concern arises from the fact that most western cities have not been able to solve the problems that we are grappling with in India. According to the latest report from the Texas Transportation Institute congestion has increased in every single urban area in the USA in the past 25 years in spite of all investments in transit and road construction. Peak time delay in urban areas increased almost threefold between 1982 and 2007. The report warns us that ?One lesson from more than 20 years of mobility studies is that congestion relief is not just a matter of highway and transit agencies building big projects?. USA is not alone in this. Almost all cities in the world face severe congestion on arterial roads. During peak times car speeds average 10-15 km/h in cities like London, Paris, Tokyo, Jakarta, Tehran or Mexico City. The fact is that rich cities have not been able to reduce car use to very low levels in spite of extensive public transport infrastructure in place (See Table 1). All the cities in included in this table (except Singapore) had matured before the onset of the twentieth century, before cars became dominant. Their structures were determined by the need for people to walk or take the tram or the train. Even they have not been able to keep car use to very low levels. These data show that the car is used for more than 40% of the trips in most cities even when public transport is available. Evidence from cities like London, Paris and New York indicates that public transport use is greater than 60% only in the small inner core where parking is very limited and roads are perpetually full. In the rest of the city car use is generally more than 60% as roads are less crowded and there is easy availability of parking. Detailed studies from these cities point out that car owners generally shift to public transport only when no parking is available at the destination and average car speeds are less than 15 km/h. This empirical evidence suggests that car use (not ownership) is low only when walking and bicycling trips also form a significant proportion of all trips in cities. It appears that car use is encouraged when high speed entry and exit is ensured to city centres by building multi-lane wide avenues and elevated roads through the city. The classic example of the decay of American cities is given as proof of this phenomenon. Public transport use also becomes difficult when large colonies or gated communities are put in place. These neighbourhoods ensure long walking distances to public transit and discourage use. It has also been observed that when cities have very noisy roads and elevated metros, richer citizens move to quieter suburbs requiring long car commutes. This international experience should give us some important pointers. All urban transportation policy reports prepared by consultants in India assume that car use can be reduced just by providing more pubic transport facilities and assert that if their prescriptions are followed 70-80% of the trips would then be taken by public transit. The fact is that no city in the world has accomplished this feat! Further, car use as a proportion of all trips is so low in India that only very innovative thinking and practices may reduce growth in personal transport trips. In the richest cities of India, Mumbai and Delhi, recent estimates suggest that car trips constitute less than 10% of all trips. In all other cities this proportion would be lower. Additionally, the share of public transport is in these two cities is certainly higher than most of the cities in Europe or North America. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine how car and motorcycle use can be contained as we get richer if the international experience is anything to go by. Obviously, business as usual and copy-cat emulation of rich cities is not going to help. . . . The way forward in the face of global warming What does sustainable transport mean for us? At a fundamental level it requires less energy consumption. The choices available are: low emission vehicles, alternative fuels, fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips. Obviously, all options will have to be pursued for maximum gain. But, we will have to establish priorities on our political agenda as the shift is not going to be easy or painless both socially and technologically. Let us examine each option briefly here. At present our policy makers are putting the maximum stress on low emission vehicles and alternative fuels. This is horribly short-sighted. For the next twenty years there is no hope of huge reductions in CO2 primarily through low emission vehicles because the small gains will be more than offset by the rising number of vehicles and longer trip lengths. We know that as fuel consumption reduces people travel more and end up using more fuel. Production of biofuels has already become controversial internationally because of rising food prices. In a food and water short India, this is going to be even more difficult. Most international experts do not see biofuels as a solution in India. Even vehicles driven on electricity are not CO2 efficient because thermally produced electricity produces more CO2 (including transmission losses, etc.) than diesel/petrol powered vehicles. And, this does not include the negative effects of the huge amounts of fly ash associated with electric power. Even in public transport an efficiently run bus system produces about half to two-thirds the CO2 per passenger than a metro rail system. This is not to suggest that we should not have low emission vehicles, we must, and sooner than later. But, it will not be the main stay for a sustainable transport system. Fewer trips, shorter trips, more use of public transport instead of private vehicles, and maximising the number of walking and bicycle trips has to be the priority, and it has a lot to do with how we develop our cities and streets. Now we know that no matter how many roads we build and how wide they are they always get filled up with vehicles. The number of vehicles people own is always more than road space available as evidenced by road conditions in small towns of India to car and road based cities like Los Angeles in USA. Therefore, vehicle emissions in a city are directly proportional to the area of road space in a city. The higher the percentage of road space and more the number of elevated transportation corridors in a city more the pollution and CO2 emissions. This also applies to one way and signal free roads. These roads force people to travel longer distances and keep their vehicles on roads for longer times. For example, my neighbour used to get out of his house, turn right on the main road and go 2 km to his office. Now all the turns have been blocked, he has to turn left, go 2 km to the next major junction and then make a U-turn to travel 4 km more to his office. Instead of 2 km, now his daily office trip is 6 km! Public transport will only be used by choice if it is safe to walk and cross the road to take the bus. Provision of very safe roads then becomes a pre-requisite for promoting public transport and hence cleaner air. In a hot country the access trip to the bus must be less than 5-10 minutes away,or less than 500 m. This means that no city block can be more than 800-1,000 m long. At present many of our neighbourhoods and gated communities are larger than that. This discourages public transport use. The short walk must be safe from crime also. This can be ensured only if there are shops and street vendors on the road. So mixed land use, and intensely so, becomes imperative.BUs use in hot climates can become a mode of choice if all buses are air conditioned. An air conditioned bus only adds half a rupee per trip over its life time. How do we ensure fewer and shorter trips? Rich and highly qualified people find it more difficult to find work close to home than those less qualified or poorer. Therefore, poor people should not be forced take long trips by moving them to the periphery. Short trips for most residents of the city can be enabled by policy. Poor neighbourhoods should be allowed to exist cheek by jowl with rich ones and all should be less than a sqkm in area. Small shops, restaurants, hospitals and businesses have to be an integral part of residential areas to make all this possible. If the above conditions are met then you can have dedicated bus and bicycle lanes on all major roads of a city. A typical arterial road being two car lanes, one dedicated bus and bicycle lane each, a 2 m pedestrian path and a 1 m tree line in each direction. Such a road can move at least 35,000 persons in each direction at peak time. If such roads exist every 0.8 -1 km all over the city you have adequate capacity for moving people. Such a road does not have to more than 45 m wide. This is the way forward for a sustainable transport option. Our cities are ready for it. Many of these options are present ?illegally? already. We have to recognise them as solutions and not problems as we currently do. Unless we re-think our plans for flyovers, wider roads, gated communities, ?slum? removal, and elevated transport corridors, our cities will turn out to be ?warmer? than we can tolerate. ==== For the complete paper as published by the Journal Civil Society - (Reference follows) To contact the author: Dinesh Mohan, PhD - dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in Professor and Coordinator Transport Research and Injury Prevention Programme WHO Collaborating Centre Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Room 808, 7th Floor Main Building Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016 www.iitd.ac.in/tripp -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/01/2009 06:41:00 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090602/924959c5/attachment.html From ashok.sreenivas at gmail.com Wed Jun 3 01:56:02 2009 From: ashok.sreenivas at gmail.com (Ashok Sreenivas) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:26:02 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Michael Moore wishes GM a long good night ... Message-ID: <4A2559A2.1000400@gmail.com> http://www.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/2009/06/somebody-was-bound-to-put-the-boot-into-gm-and-it-might-as-well-be-him/ Goodbye, GM ?by Michael Moore I write this on the morning of the end of the once-mighty General Motors. By high noon, the President of the United States will have made it official: General Motors, as we know it, has been totaled. As I sit here in GM?s birthplace, Flint, Michigan, I am surrounded by friends and family who are filled with anxiety about what will happen to them and to the town. Forty percent of the homes and businesses in the city have been abandoned. Imagine what it would be like if you lived in a city where almost every other house is empty. What would be your state of mind? It is with sad irony that the company which invented ?planned obsolescence? ? the decision to build cars that would fall apart after a few years so that the customer would then have to buy a new one ? has now made itself obsolete. It refused to build automobiles that the public wanted, cars that got great gas mileage, were as safe as they could be, and were exceedingly comfortable to drive. Oh ? and that wouldn?t start falling apart after two years. GM stubbornly fought environmental and safety regulations. Its executives arrogantly ignored the ?inferior? Japanese and German cars, cars which would become the gold standard for automobile buyers. And it was hell-bent on punishing its unionized workforce, lopping off thousands of workers for no good reason other than to ?improve? the short-term bottom line of the corporation. Beginning in the 1980s, when GM was posting record profits, it moved countless jobs to Mexico and elsewhere, thus destroying the lives of tens of thousands of hard-working Americans. The glaring stupidity of this policy was that, when they eliminated the income of so many middle class families, who did they think was going to be able to afford to buy their cars? History will record this blunder in the same way it now writes about the French building the Maginot Line or how the Romans cluelessly poisoned their own water system with lethal lead in its pipes. So here we are at the deathbed of General Motors. The company?s body not yet cold, and I find myself filled with ? dare I say it ? joy. It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with. Nor do I, obviously, claim any joy in knowing that 21,000 more GM workers will be told that they, too, are without a job. But you and I and the rest of America now own a car company! I know, I know ? who on earth wants to run a car company? Who among us wants $50 billion of our tax dollars thrown down the rat hole of still trying to save GM? Let?s be clear about this: The only way to save GM is to kill GM. Saving our precious industrial infrastructure, though, is another matter and must be a top priority. If we allow the shutting down and tearing down of our auto plants, we will sorely wish we still had them when we realize that those factories could have built the alternative energy systems we now desperately need. And when we realize that the best way to transport ourselves is on light rail and bullet trains and cleaner buses, how will we do this if we?ve allowed our industrial capacity and its skilled workforce to disappear? Thus, as GM is ?reorganized? by the federal government and the bankruptcy court, here is the plan I am asking President Obama to implement for the good of the workers, the GM communities, and the nation as a whole. Twenty years ago when I made ?Roger & Me,? I tried to warn people about what was ahead for General Motors. Had the power structure and the punditocracy listened, maybe much of this could have been avoided. Based on my track record, I request an honest and sincere consideration of the following suggestions: 1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated. We are now in a different kind of war ? a war that we have conducted against the ecosystem and has been conducted by our very own corporate leaders. This current war has two fronts. One is headquartered in Detroit. The products built in the factories of GM, Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps. The things we call ?cars? may have been fun to drive, but they are like a million daggers into the heart of Mother Nature. To continue to build them would only lead to the ruin of our species and much of the planet. The other front in this war is being waged by the oil companies against you and me. They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn?t give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true ? that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline. President Obama, now that he has taken control of GM, needs to convert the factories to new and needed uses immediately?. From editor at worldstreets.org Wed Jun 3 02:21:13 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] "Pedaling Revolution" - Book review from today's Internationa... Message-ID: <1243963273254.7abad8e0-adba-4563-a6f6-9d599578aa9e@google.com> [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/books/review/Byrne-t.html?scp=4&sq=david%20byrne&st=cse] Today's International Herald Tribune carries a book review of "Pedaling Revolution; How Cyclists are Changing American Cities, by Jeff Mapes. I firmly doubt that any of our regular readers are going to learn a great deal from the book as described here. But it is perhaps useful for us to get some understanding of what is going on in the States -- in people's minds as well on the city streets -- as the process that interests us here begins to kick in. For a first paragraph of the review and the link to the full text, read on: Full disclosure: I?ve ridden a bike around New York as my principal means of transport for 30 years, so I?m inclined to sympathize with the idea that a cycling revolution is upon us, and that it?s a good thing. Like Jeff Mapes, the author of ?Pedaling Revolution: How Cyclists Are Changing American Cities,? I?ve watched the streets fill over the years with more and varied bike riders. It?s no longer just me, some food delivery guys and a posse of reckless messengers. Far from it. * For remainder of article, click here. -- Posted By The Editor to World Streets at 6/02/2009 07:10:00 PM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090602/b2d38e19/attachment.html From morten7an at yahoo.com Wed Jun 3 03:40:15 2009 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] "Pedaling Revolution" - Book review from today's Internationa... Message-ID: <828185.14726.qm@web51006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Thanks, dear Editor ;-) For some this link might work better : http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/books/review/Byrne-t.html Thought I'd add this about the reviewer : David Byrne?s most recent album is ?Everything That Happens Will Happen Today.? His book ?Bicycle Diaries? will be published in the fall. Best Regards, Morten --- On Tue, 2/6/09, The Editor wrote: > From: The Editor > Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] "Pedaling Revolution" - Book review from today's Internationa... > To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Date: Tuesday, 2 June, 2009, 6:21 PM > [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/books/review/Byrne-t.html?scp=4&sq=david%20byrne&st=cse] > > > Today's International Herald Tribune carries a book > review of "Pedaling Revolution; How Cyclists are > Changing American Cities, by Jeff Mapes. I firmly doubt > that any of our regular readers are going to learn a great > deal from the book as described here. But it is perhaps > useful for us to get some understanding of what is going on > in the States -- in people's minds as well on the city > streets -- as the process that interests us here begins to > kick in. > > For a first paragraph of the review and > the link to the full text, read on: > > > Full disclosure: I?ve ridden a bike > around New York as my principal means of transport for 30 > years, so I?m inclined to sympathize with the idea that a > cycling revolution is upon us, and that it?s a good thing. > Like Jeff Mapes, the author of ?Pedaling Revolution: How > Cyclists Are Changing American Cities,? I?ve watched the > streets fill over the years with more and varied bike > riders. It?s no longer just me, some food delivery guys > and a posse of reckless messengers. Far from it. > > * For remainder of article, click here. > > > > > -- > > Posted By The Editor to World > Streets at 6/02/2009 07:10:00 PM > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss > messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership > rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and > 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss > (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). > Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a > focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jun 3 15:54:04 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:54:04 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific (the SUSTRAN Network). In-Reply-To: <20090601170800.s8vviyvo84w8gsck@webmail.xmission.com> References: <20090601170800.s8vviyvo84w8gsck@webmail.xmission.com> Message-ID: <01bd01c9e418$19ce7a80$4d6b6f80$@britton@ecoplan.org> Paris, Wednesday, June 03, 2009 Dear Sustran Friends, This forum has been so very useful since the day in October 1999 -- almost ten years ago already? -- that I signed in to join Paul Barter as the first enthusiastic participant in this great collaborative adventure. But after years of vitality, we appear to have lost steam, So with your permission I would like to swap a few ideas with you all - after all there are 133 of us - about ways in which we can now be more useful to each other. And above all to be able to make much needed contributions to the reform to sustainable transport in the Sustran region. Here are my best thoughts on this today: 1. Expand membership: We need to recruit new members, bring in new blood, energy and ideas. What if each of us reaches out at least to one respected colleague to bring them into this group dialogue? More than one, great! 2. Extend regional coverage: And certainly if we can stretch our wings in China, Korea and other parts of the region who until now have been notably absent in the exchanges. We need to hear from them about projects, initiatives and ideas in and from their countries - including very bad ideas and policies, awareness of which is surely part of our job. We just do not thus far have a sufficiently wide reach within our region. 3. Gender parity: And we do need to bring more women into this great forum. More than 90% of our group are X- chromosome deficient. Not only that, we know that transport policy and investment have in the past - i.e., the mess in which we find ourselves today - have been the exclusive domain of males. We need not only to bring in women leaders and participants in the new mobility movement to ensure transport that is not only equitable but also efficient and well matched to the needs of all. Strong female participation at the top is about the only way that I can think of to bring this about. 4. World Streets inputs: I have tried to juice things up here in Sustran on two occasions by plugging us into the World Streets stream, but to my mind this is too aggressive and too generalist to be appropriate to our concerns here. Thus I will cut off this automatic feed tomorrow and instead share with you all more selectively. 5. Of course we want to have you signing into World Streets on a regular basis - www.worldstreets.org. It is after all - or at least this is the way I see it and am trying to execute - a natural complement and extension to Sustran. So here we are in what is truly an age of and time for new mobility, and if anyone needed a wake-up call they now have it with the sudden shrinkage of the hard core of the old mobility age, the end really of GM and Chrysler as we knew them. We need to be here to take up the relay. This is our opportunity. Let's put Sustran and World Streets in the front row. Warm regards from Paris dear colleagues, Eric Britton World Streets (Plan B) cid:image001.jpg@01C8DAF3.F7EBC130 Technology transforms time and space . . . and our minds New Mobility Partnerships - http://www.newmobility.org & check out World Streets -- www.Worldstreets.org Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/25f3cc01/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 12184 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/25f3cc01/attachment.jpe From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Wed Jun 3 16:55:49 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:55:49 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and thePacific (the SUSTRAN Network). In-Reply-To: <01bd01c9e418$19ce7a80$4d6b6f80$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <20090601170800.s8vviyvo84w8gsck@webmail.xmission.com> <01bd01c9e418$19ce7a80$4d6b6f80$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: I agree that it would be great to expand membership of sustran-discuss. Even more importantly I hope we can encourage more members to actively PARTICIPATE. You, the members, are a wonderful resource and we usually hear from only a very few of us. News, views and questions about urban transport policy are all welcome. You are especially welcome if you are from anywhere in the so-called 'developing countries' or any of the recently industrialised countries (such as Korea) or if you have some personal experience of urban transport in the cities of these countries. We don't restrict discussion to just Asia anymore. The main thing is that discussions here focus on urban transport outside the 'Western countries'. You are also especially welcome if English is not your first language. Please don't be shy. We can all learn valuable policy lessons from the experiences of every city, large or small, rich or poor. It is easy! Just send a message to Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org By the way, the community here on sustran-discuss is bigger than Eric thought. Approximately 450 or so people get the sustran-discuss emails. We have 361 members via the main list (hosted by JCA) and 133 via the yahoogroup mirror (who cannot post) but roughly 50 of these email addresses are bouncing or duplicates. And sustran-discuss started on 10 May 1997, so we are now 12 years old. All the best, Paul [sustran-discuss founder and co-manager] Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Wednesday, 3 June 2009 2:54 PM To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and thePacific (the SUSTRAN Network). Paris, Wednesday, June 03, 2009 Dear Sustran Friends, ... snip ... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/fd91b156/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Wed Jun 3 17:08:13 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 16:08:13 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Tip for searching sustran-discuss archives Message-ID: Did you know it is easy to search our archives? You probably wouldn't guess so from the archives page at http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/ So here is a tip. Go to Google and copy and paste "site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/" into the search box. Then type your search terms to the left of "site:". For example to search for "bus regulation" in the sustran-discuss archives you would put into the search box Bus regulation site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/ To search for "Shanghai" you would put: Shanghai site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/ Try it! The sustran-discuss archives are a rich resource and it would be a shame if they were not used. Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/2bbc9ded/attachment.html From sutp at sutp.org Wed Jun 3 17:53:49 2009 From: sutp at sutp.org (SUTP Team) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:23:49 +0530 Subject: [sustran] SUTP Newsletter Apr-May-2009 Message-ID: <4A263A1D.807@sutp.org> **** SUSTAINABLE URBAN TRANSPORT PROJECT (SUTP) **** **** Newsletter 02/09 - Apr - May 2009 **** Important: A PDF version of this text based newsletter can be downloaded from http://www.sutp.org/documents/NL-Apr-May-09.pdf *** Topic of the Month *** The Vehicle Quota System in Singapore Singapore's Vehicle Quota System (VQS), which came into effect in May 1990, is part of a series of measures to optimize traffic flow by managing the growth of vehicle ownership to acceptable levels. Under the VQS, motor vehicles are classified into several categories, with a separate licence quota for each category. For categories A, B, and D, the licence is non-transferable. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) determines the quota for each category every year. In order to register a new vehicle, the would-be-buyer must bid for and obtain a licence, referred to officially as a Certificate of Entitlement (COE). The COEs can be obtained through an auction, the COE electronic Open Bidding System, which is held twice a month (fortnightly). The Quota Premium (QP) represents the price for a COE. The QP is the price of the highest unsuccessful bid plus $1 for that category e.g, if there are 250 in the quota for a particular category for that fortnight, the QP is the bid price of the 251st ranked bid plus $1, which everyone whose bids rank from 1 to 250 pays. Bidders who successfully obtain a COE have to register the vehicle within 3 (for categories C and E) and 6 months (for categories A, B and D) respectively. The COE is valid for 10 years. After this period, the vehicle needs to be deregistered or the COE has to be renewed by paying a Prevailing Quota Premium (PQP), which is the 3 months' moving average of the QP. More from: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1582&Itemid=48&lang=uk *** New Publications *** Training document on "Transportation Demand Management" Transportation Demand Management (TDM) aims to increase the efficiency of a transport system by discouraging "unnecessary" private vehicle use, by promoting more effective, healthy and environment-friendly modes of transport and by integrating urban development and transport. 118 pages, fully illustrated Please login to download: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=413 ---- "Demystifying Induced Travel Demand" SUT Technical Document #1 "If we build it, they will come": The question of induced travel demand attracts substantial interest from decision-makers, planners and the wider public alike. This technical document is intended as an introduction to the concept of induced travel demand and the principal arguments and debates surrounding the phenomenon. The module has been written by Roger Gorham, a leading researcher in the field. 22 pages, fully illustrated Please login to download: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=393 ---- Cycling-inclusive Policy Development: A Handbook GTZ SUTP and the Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-Ce) have joined efforts in the development this document. It has been written by 12 authors who are experts in different fields of cycling-inclusive development. This handbook provides detailed information on how to develop cycling-friendly policies and facilities. It can help you, as a planner, engineer, community leader of advocate to enrich your own ideas about the future traffic and transport system where you live and work. The publication is also part of Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) initiative. 256 pages, fully illustrated Please login to download: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=392 *** Module Updates *** Two and Three Wheelers - Module 4c Two and three wheelers are synonymous with the growth of Asia in the past decades, they are the most preferred personal mode of travel, due to their ease to find a beeline in traffic jams and also due to their lower cost of ownership compared to cars. Managing the growth of these vehicles is essential in keeping Asian cities competitive. This updated version of the module "Two and Three wheelers" focuses on the latest trends in two and three wheelers' growth and various best practices in management of this type of vehicles. Apart from the updates by Mr. N.V. Iyer, this updated version also has a section authored by Dr. Christopher Cherry on the impacts of electric bikes with case studies from China. Please login to download http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=17 *** Hot Off The Presses *** GTZ Sourcebook on urban transport for the South Asian Audience GTZ SUTP's flagship publication "Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Countries" has been adapted for the South Asian audience and is available for purchase in its print version. The South Asian version of the sourcebook is titled "Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in South Asian Cities". The two volumes of this edition contain 12 modules specifically selected and adapted for the South Asian context. Dr. Ramachandran, Secretary to the Government of India (Urban Development), Ministry of Urban Development, underlines in his foreword: "The Sourcebook can serve as a toolkit for policy-makers in the state and city governments and support them in adopting sustainable transport solutions for their respective cities". Prof. Shivanand Swamy, Associate Director, CEPT, points out in his preface to the publication: "that [it] will provide guidance to the city administrators and planners in a variety of topics from urban transport institutions to details of planning for non-motorized transport, including other important issues such as bus regulation and planning and bus rapid transit." Both dignitaries agree that the publication would increase the understanding of the readers on various urban transport issues and help policy-makers make sustainable choices for their cities. The sourcebook supports the view of the National Urban Transport Policy-2006 (NUTP)'s recommendation on moving people and not vehicles, among various other principles. Queries about purchasing the print copies can be sent to sutp[at]sutp.org. *** Recent Events *** GTZ SUTP at the UN HABITAT Workshop in Yogyakarta, Indonesia Mr. Santhosh Kodukula, GTZ SUTP Urban Transport Specialist, participated and presented at a consultation workshop organised by the UN HABITAT in association with ITDP Indonesia and INSTRAN, Indonesia. The workshop was titled "Access to clean urban transport energy solutions for the urban poor" and was held between 27 - 29th May 2009 in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Around 20 participants attended the consultation workshop from various organisations that are working on the urban poor and transportation issues. The Vice Mayor of Yogyakarta was also present at the workshop. On the last day of the workshop, 29th May, the participants went on a field trip to Solo (Surakarta) city. Mr. Kodukula has delivered a presentation to the Solo officials on the importance of access to urban poor emphasising the need for a strong political will to materialise such projects. Mr. Kodukula presented on the topic of "Urbanisation and trends in demand for sustainable transport ? An Overview". The agenda of the workshop can be downloaded from here. For more information on the workshop please send an email to sutp[at]sutp.org Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1601&Itemid=1&lang=uk ---- GTZ and CDIA support Cochin in improving urban transportation GTZ participated in a Cities Development Initiative for Asia (CDIA) mission to Cochin, India in assisting the Cochin Municipality in developing and improving their urban transportation. The mission consisted of experts from ADB, CDIA and GTZ SUTP/ GTZ ASEM (Mr. Santhosh Kodukula). The mission was conducted during 18th - 22nd May 2009. During the stay at Cochin the experts met with various stakeholders including the Mayor, Municipal Commissioner, Town Planning authorities, State Road transport officials and other NGO's to discuss regarding the existing scenario and find the scope for conducting a pre-feasibility study. More information on the mission and GTZ's role can be had by sending an email to sutp[at]sutp.org Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1590&Itemid=1&lang=uk ---- GTZ assist Shimla Municipality in their Transport development The Shimla Municipal Corporation is being provided support in their urban transport development by GTZ-SUTP through the GTZ-Advisory Services in Environmental Management (ASEM) project in India. Mr. Santhosh Kodukula, GTZ-SUTP's Urban Transport Specialist, was in Shimla during 04-07th May 2009 to conduct a preliminary study on the existing urban transport situation and to discuss the way forward for Shimla to deal with their urban transport issues. During his stay Mr. Kodukula met with various officials and departments related to urban transport in Cochin, including the Municipal Commissioner, Town and Country Planning Department, Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation and the Directorate of Transportation in Shimla. More information on the assistance to Shimla can be obtained by sending an email to sutp[at]sutp.org Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1567&Itemid=1&lang=uk ---- Sustainable Urban Transport Seminar with Enrique Pe?alosa in Solo The City of Surakarta (also called Solo) held a seminar with Enrique Pe?alosa on improving livability in the city through sustainable urban transport on May 5. Around 250 participants from the local universities, press agencies, NGOs and top government officials from the greater area of Solo attended the Seminar that was carried out in cooperation with CDIA and GTZ-SUTIP. Among the participants were also local community leaders and the head of the local city parliament. The representatives of CDIA (Dr. Emiel Wegelin), ADB (Ms. Yan Zhong) and GTZ (Dr. Dino Teddyputra) introduced each of their institutions' programs and resources that Solo can potentially take advantage of. The seminar featured a keynote by Enrique Pe?alosa that was followed by a lively discussion focusing on how to replicate Bogota successes in Solo. Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1538&Itemid=1 ---- Sustainable Urban Transport Seminar with Enrique Pe?alosa in Jogjakarta The Province of Jogjakarta, Indonesia, held a seminar titled "Enhancing the Urban Livability by means of Sustainable Urban Transport - a seminar with Enrique Pe?alosa" on April 30. More than 80 participants from the academic world, local press, NGOs and top local government officials from different cities in Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi attended the event that was carried out in cooperation with CDIA and GTZ-SUTIP. Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1521&Itemid=1 ---- Bike to Work and School day in Jogjakarta, Indonesia The City of Jogjakarta has proven to be one of the leading Cities in Indonesia in promoting the utilitarian use of bicycles among its residents. Now, the City carries out a weekly campaign to promote bicycle use for school and work trips. Every Friday morning at 7 o'clock, the City Mayor leads a 15 km Segosegawe bike tour in the city with an increasing number of participants. This weekly bicycle campaign, which is in short known as Segosegawe is an abbreviation of the local Javanese language for Sepeda nganggo sekolah and nyambut gawe which means "bike to school and to work". The former Mayor of Bogota, Mr. Enrique Penalosa, GTZ's Dino Teddyputra and ADB's Yan Zhong participated at the Segosegawe bike campaign last Friday. Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1520&Itemid=1 ---- Indonesia's president awarded the winners of the nationwide city competition in urban transport Mayors from 71 cities and districts in Indonesia gathered Tuesday, April 28 at the annual ceremony of the national urban transport award called Wahana Tata Nugraha (WTN). The WTN prizes are awarded to selected cities that have fulfilled a set of criteria related to "traffic discipline" and public transport, which are established by the Ministry of Transportation. 22 cities and districts received this year's highest awards, handed out directly by the President of the country, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, while the Transport Minister awarded 49 cities and districts with the second level prize. The WTN awards were started in the '90s to encourage disciplined behavior of street users, enhance public service and encourage innovations in the development of urban transport in Indonesian cities. The WTN competition is managed by the Directorate for Urban Transport Development at the Ministry of Transportation (MoT), which is the executing agency for the GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Improvement Project (SUTIP). It is planned that GTZ-SUTIP will assist the MoT to extend the WTN competition to include sustainable transport criteria. Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1519&Itemid=1&lang=uk ---- GTZ SUTP at the National EST Event in Dhaka, Bangladesh Santhosh K. Kodukula, GTZ SUTP Urban Transport Specialist, participated and presented at the three day Training Workshop-cum-Policy Dialogue on Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST), conducted between 26-28 April 2009 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The event was conducted by the United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD) in cooperation with the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Bangladesh, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Bangladesh, GTZ and also the Swedish Agency for Development (Sida). Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1518&Itemid=1 ---- GTZ at the national EST event in Jakarta, Indonesia Mr. Manfred Breithaupt, GTZ Senior Transport Advisor and Project Director of SUTP, and Dr. Dino Teddyputra, GTZ-SUTIP, participated and presented at the three day Training Workshop-cum-Policy Dialogue on Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST), conducted between 21-23 April 2009 in Jakarta, Indonesia.The event was jointly organized by UNCRD, Ministry of Environment, Indonesia and the Ministry of Transport and is supported by Sida, GTZ, ITDP, Ministry of the Environment-Japan (Co-organizer of the Signing Event on 23 Apr), US-EPA. Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1539&Itemid=1 ---- GTZ SUTP and BMA Cooperation The SUTP Team along with the SUTP Project Director Mr. Manfred Breithaupt, also GTZ Senior Transport Advisor, have met with the Deputy Governor of Bangkok Metropolitan Authority (BMA), Dr. Teerachon Manomaiphibul, on April 27, 2009. The main aim of the meeting was to review and evaluate the cooperation between SUTP and BMA and to discuss potentials for future cooperation. Among the various potential future ventures, bike-taxis, public transport integration and promoting non-motorised transport were identified as crucial needs for transforming Bangkok into a more liveable city and to reduce the car dependence. A half day training session was also conducted in the afternoon for BMA transport and traffic staff, 30 participants, on the concepts of Sustainable Urban Transport (SUT). Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1517&Itemid=1 *** GTZ at work *** GTZ contributes to the Johannesburg Rea Vaya Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project Johannesburg started planning a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in November 2006. The FIFA 2010 World Cup meant that a significant amount of national funding had become available for transport projects in the host cities, as long as these projects also left a public transport legacy for the cities' residents long after the month-long tournament was over. The BRT project, called "Rea Vaya" (which means "we are going") aims to develop approximately 122 km of exclusive busways as Phase 1 of a high quality BRT mass transit system by 2013. The BRT routes are designed to connect the major concentrations of visitors and spectators with the two major soccer stadia, at Ellis Park and Nasrec. The major BRT routes will link Soweto with central Johannesburg (CBD) via Nasrec, Soweto with Sandton via Parktown and Rosebank, and Sandton to the CBD and the stadia. The legacy of the first phase will be a high-quality public transport system that meaningfully integrates Soweto and Alexandra, areas of historical disadvantage, into the rest of the City, and also provides a credible public transport alternative, for the first time, to residents of areas of high motor vehicle useage. GTZ's services cover contributions to system layout, financial modeling, contracting, auditing of accessibility and advice on measuring and maximising the environmental benefits of the BRT. For more information on GTZ's involvement in the Johannesburg BRT project, please visit the following link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1546&Itemid=1&lang=uk ---- Transportation and Climate Change: Bridging the Gap Transport is recognised as a key contributing factor to GHG emissions. However, compared to other issues like deforestation or energy, transport plays a minor role under the current regime and in the negotiations of the Post-Kyoto process. There is recognition that transport is a significant part of the solution and many transport related organizations are discussing the links between transport and climate change. One of the main barriers to achieving an effective link between transport and climate change, is a clear understanding of the different negotiation streams and how to develop a clear targeted strategy to integrate transport into the current negotiations. GTZ, TRL, Veolia Transport and UITP are working to facilitate the process in 2009 to improve the link between the transport sector and the climate change negotiations. Website: http://www.sutp.org/bridging_the_gap *** Upcoming Events *** 01.06.2009 La Colle sur Loup, FR: eceee 2009 Summer Study Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=280&lang=uk 02.06.2009 Toulouse, FR: 17th Transport and Air Pollution symposium Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=321&lang=uk 07.06.2009 Vienna, AT: 58th World Congress and mobility exhibition Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=208&lang=uk 10.06.2009 Denver, US: Congress for New Urbanism Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=342&lang=uk 11.06.2009 Charlotte, US: Fifth International Hydrail Conference Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=341&lang=uk 14.06.2009 Edmonton, CA: ICLEI World Congress 2009 Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=269&lang=uk 14.06.2009 Stuttgart, DE: Cities for Mobility World Congress 2009 Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=340&lang=uk 15.06.2009 Beijing/Chengdu, CN: CPN China Week 2009 Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=315&lang=uk 28.06.2009 Breda, NL: Working Parking Symposium Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=343&lang=uk 28.06.2009 Marseille, FR: Urban Research Symposium 2009 Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=322&lang=uk 29.06.2009 Copenhagen, DK: Kuhmo-Nectar Conference and Summer School Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=344&lang=uk 30.06.2009 Puerto Vallarta, MX: Intl Conference on City Logistics Link: http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_eventlist&Itemid=56&func=details&did=345&lang=uk Important: A PDF version of this text based newsletter can be downloaded from http://www.sutp.org/documents/NL-Apr-May-09.pdf Note: All the documents mentioned here are available for download from the SUTP website. For registration please visit http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=registers&lang=uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/b500be5d/attachment.html From editor at worldstreets.org Wed Jun 3 18:13:30 2009 From: editor at worldstreets.org (The Editor) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 02:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] [World/Streets] Subscribe to World/Streets today Message-ID: <1244020410096.28e35945-7a86-47e5-aa96-1dfbd555e157@google.com> [https://www.paypal.com/uk/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=fXUGG5BVQs7MROx3UeUw1pIXedvgDa4BQGjmJiJfKWQcfbSaI0mmGq-K5Ne&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f998ca054efbdf2c29878a435fe324eec2511727fbf3e9efc] World/Streets today, the world's only sustainable transportation daily. World/Streets is today, after three months of proving its worth edition after edition, day after day to more than thirty thousand visitors coming in regularly from more than forty countries on all continents, is now reaching out to get active subscriber support so that we can continue. The tough reality is that we will be unable to continue publication unless we have your support. The annual subscription has been set at 29 Euros ($39.00 if you prefer) -- the same price as for a subscription to V?lib's great and otherwise free share bike service. This strikes us as a good model, since like V?lib once you have signed up the rest is free. First class sustainable mobility for all. Help yourself, and help the world. So please, if you can possibly afford it, get out your virtual check book and click here to send us your 2009 subscription today. To pay by credit card or PayPal, please click the Support icon immediately below. (If you need help or additional payment instructions for bank transfers or check, click here). Subscribers will have full access to all sections of the site, and will as well receive the monthly summary edition which will be available only to them. You also for your money get a guided tour to V?lib, Mobilien (BRT), "breathing streets", our "political tramway" and the other remarkable highlights of the ongoing process of sustainable transport innovation in Paris when your travels bring you here. Also, we are here to answer your questions and review eventual problems or projects with you by email or Skype. And what happens if you cannot afford to subscribe? We are well aware that a number of our readers, particularly those in the poorer developing countries and unfunded local environment and transport groups, cannot afford even such a small amount. To you we have three messages of solidarity. First, please do continue to come into World Streets and make use of the hard work of all those who are pitching in here. We need you to carry on with your work and contributions, and if we can help you in this way, so much the better. Second, we invite you to keep an eye on what is going on in your city and country, and when appropriate let us know of projects, problems, accomplishments, which will help us all to better understand the full complexity of our shared task. One excellent way to do this, is to sign in to the World Eyes on the Street network, for which full details are available if you click here. Finally, send us a simple email message telling us that you appreciate and are making use of our work. And perhaps a few suggestions and reactions for us to consider as we strike to do better. Also, if we have a large number of these messages of support, this will help in our search for longer term funding to support this work. After all, we have to be sustainable too. Thanks to those who have already pitched in: Over this first three months we have received paid in subscriptions and other support from about twenty of our international colleagues. This is very heartwarming and while only a small part of what we need to be able to continue publication, is extremely encouraging. So from the bottom of my hear, thank you for showing your support and solidarity. If you are interested to know about other forms of support needed beyond simple subscription, I invite you to click here. World/Streets. Tying the global and the local together five days a week all year long. Eric Britton Editor, World/Streets -- Posted By The Editor to World/Streets at 6/03/2009 11:11:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/0aa55d3b/attachment.html From voodikon at yahoo.com Wed Jun 3 20:46:29 2009 From: voodikon at yahoo.com (jane.) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 04:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris Message-ID: <436233.99257.qm@web39507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The Land of the Rising Sun? If you mean Japan, I don't know what systems they're using there, but in China, bicycle theft is rampant. Vandalism to bicycles, if it exists, would more likely than not be owner-inflicted, in the hopes of deterring thieves. Personally, I buy a bike every few months because I simply seem unable to hang onto them. But, inexpensive bikes can be bought for about US$15 to $50 new, and when they're sold "secondhand," i.e., stolen, their value doesn't diminish much. There are underground "secondhand bike market" districts that everybody knows of; police come along every so often to do a raid, but generally business is conducted as usual. There is no lock, or even set of locks, that can deter a determined thief, and at any rate, most of the locks sold here are cheap and easy to break, I suspect with the reasoning that nobody's going to spend a chunk of change on a lock that's going to be drilled or cut open anyway. People who invest some money into a higher quality bike here generally do not let it out of their sight, which involves sometimes carrying it up seven or eight flights of stairs. But at most major shopping centers, parks, or other public places where people might wish to park their bicycles, there will be a bicycle parking lot that is watched over by a guard. Generally you pay between 2 and 5 mao (the equivalent of a few U.S. cents). The vigilance (or loyalties--some are in cahoots with bike thieves) of these guards is not consistent across the board, and sometimes bikes are stolen even from these designated parking areas. But generally, especially if they're at a supermarket or something similar, they're safe. Carrefour, for instance, provides a guarantee that shoppers' bikes won't be stolen while their guard is on duty, or the supermarket will pay a percentage of the cost of the bike to the owner (how the owner is expected to prove that is another question entirely). But generally, bicycle theft, like pickpocketing, is an accepted part of life here. Many deliberately ride the oldest, ugliest bicycles they can find to avoid the issue. Jane --- On Tue, 6/2/09, Ian Perry wrote: From: Ian Perry Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Date: Tuesday, June 2, 2009, 8:17 PM Hi Todd, What goes through the minds of the individuals who vandalise bicycles is very little...? Vandalism of bicycles is not limited to bike-sharing, but to private bicycles too.? Some see great entertainment value in vandalising bicyles here in the Netherlands, particularly late at night on their way home from a bar.? I doubt very much that the car lobby or taxi drivers are behind the vandalism in Paris. The Dutch police do very little to prevent bicycle crime and will only register a theft, I'm told, if you can present the original two keys for your cut bicycle lock.? It's not only the poor who steal and vandalise, but the privileged too, sometimes seeking retribution for a bicycle of theirs that was stolen, and so a cycle begins/continues. What is the answer?? Perhaps we need to look east to the land of the rising sun. Ian -----Inline Attachment Follows----- -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/681147da/attachment.html From zvi.leve at gmail.com Wed Jun 3 21:19:52 2009 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:19:52 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: [World Streets] Honk! Battered Bicycles in Paris In-Reply-To: <4A2396E0.8040804@greenidea.eu> References: <1243832197169.619b5e84-e511-4940-982f-75b8579020bb@google.com> <4A2396E0.8040804@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: Hi Todd, Interesting points you make here. Not long ago one of the neighbourhoods here in Montreal set up a fleet of free communal bicycles, which by definition were marketed as shared 'community' property. Sadly (but not surprisingly) the project came to an abrupt halt this week when all of the bikes went missing. You can here an interview with one of the people involved here. There were some recent conflicts with the authorities after the group 'appropriated' an a unused private building and declared it their new community and bicycle centre. Would not be a stretch to suggest that the authorities removed the bikes.... It definitely requires creative efforts to create a sense of public ownership. Given the emphasis on 'private property' throughout our recent history, and the growth in urban populations with the associated social atomisation that virtual communities provide (take that as you wish) it is not clear whether this sense of 'communal propriety' can ever be created. I believe that there were similar bicycle sharing programs in Holland decades ago (and probably elsewhere), and they too suffered similar fates.... Eric - any information on attitudes to 'ownership' of the Velib bikes? Zvi 2009/6/1 Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > Hi, > > I would like to ask: > > * Does in fact the Municipality of Paris own the system ("...Velib is > yours...")? > * Who do people think really owns it? Paris? JCDecaux? "The people"? > * How is destruction of the bikes tied in with attitudes about advertising > in general, and JCDecaux in particular? > * Is there any data on what people who damage bikes etc. think? Their > demographic profile? Their reasons or lack thereof? Is it basically the same > thing as destruction of collective public transport vehicles (non-functional > damage such as tags on windows)? Does anyone suspect that the taxi or > private car lobbies are behind it? > * What other "steps" are being taken? > > Thanks, > T > > > > The Editor wrote: > > [ > http://newmobilityagenda.blogspot.com/2009/02/reports-of-velibs-demise-greatly.html] > > > > V?lib, Paris's pioneering, city-transforming public bike project has had > its fair share (actually unfair share I would say) of vandalism and theft, > and while it does not threaten the integrity and viability of the service, > it is part of the landscape of public bikes and needs to be understood and > taken into account. There is, in fact, a great deal that can be done to > reduce the magnitude of these challenges , and indeed steps are being taken > here. That said, let's have a look at some of the examples of damage, which > have been collected for us by vigilant Eyes on the Street Sentinel in Paris, > Larry Langner. > > > And here you have a poster placed on one of the JCDecaux street signs in > Paris, warning that: "Breaking a bike is easy. It can't defend itself". > > And then: "16,000 bikes vandalised, 8000 disappeared. Velib is yours. > Protect it. > > For more examples, click to http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-264472 > > * Editor's note: Click here > to > read report on "Reports of V?lib?s Demise Greatly Exaggerated > " > > > > -- > Posted By The Editor to World Streetsat 6/01/2009 06:51:00 AM > > ------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > edelman@greenidea.euwww.greenidea.euwww.flickr.com/photos/edelman > > CAR is over. If you want it. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the > real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you > can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090603/6c550b41/attachment.html From simon.bishop at dimts.in Fri Jun 5 14:05:45 2009 From: simon.bishop at dimts.in (Simon Bishop) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:35:45 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Please explain how to search the archive - there is no search box Message-ID: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB802CC6B@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Dear Paul, I have tried to follow the instructions that you gave. There is no "site" on the page and no search box either. Sorry, but its still quite confusing to me. Thanks, Simon Bishop -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090605/ab1eb93f/attachment.html From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Fri Jun 5 14:20:37 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:20:37 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Please explain how to search the archive - there is nosearch box In-Reply-To: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB802CC6B@dimts-exch.dimts.org> References: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB802CC6B@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Message-ID: Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. The trick is that you need to leave the site and go to GOOGLE! So my instructions take place in the search box at www.google.com, not on the archive site which does not have a search box, as you noticed. Go to GOOGLE and copy and paste "site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/" into the search box. Then type your search terms to the left of "site:". For example to search for "bus regulation" in the sustran-discuss archives you would put into the search box Bus regulation site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/ I hope this is clearer. Happy searching, Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Simon Bishop Sent: Friday, 5 June 2009 1:06 PM To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Please explain how to search the archive - there is nosearch box Dear Paul, I have tried to follow the instructions that you gave. There is no "site" on the page and no search box either. Sorry, but its still quite confusing to me. Thanks, Simon Bishop -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090605/08120c83/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 5 16:34:16 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:34:16 +0200 Subject: [sustran] World Streets gets behind World Environment Day 2009. See feature article at www.worldstreets.org Message-ID: <010301c9e5b0$0a0e3d80$1e2ab880$@britton@ecoplan.org> World Streets gets behind World Environment Day 2009. See feature article at www.worldstreets.org But is Streets a useful tool for the UN Environment Programme? Let's have your views on this. World Streets - Our small planet's only sustainable transportation daily. World Streets (Plan B) cid:image001.jpg@01C8DAF3.F7EBC130 Technology transforms time and space . . . and our minds New Mobility Partnerships - http://www.newmobility.org & check out World Streets -- www.Worldstreets.org Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton USA: 9440 Readcrest Drive Los Angeles, CA 90210 T: +1 310 601-8468 Skype : newmobility -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090605/c8b75fd5/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 12184 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090605/c8b75fd5/attachment.jpe From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Fri Jun 5 18:15:56 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 17:15:56 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? Message-ID: Dear sustran-discussers There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, sustran-discuss. I want your views on which regional focus would be best for sustran-discuss: A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the discussions more focused and consistently "on topic"? B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on developing countries 2. Revert to the original focus on "Asia" (rich and poor alike) 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE? * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even though the list description says we focus on the 'global South' (developing countries). So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more accurately than 1. So maybe switching to "Asia" would be clearer? High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even if they are not in developing countries. * In practice, we don't really get much material here on Africa, Latin America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such material. Your views? Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090605/5736dd25/attachment.html From sunny.enie at gmail.com Sat Jun 6 04:00:23 2009 From: sunny.enie at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:30:23 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Please explain how to search the archive - there is nosearch box In-Reply-To: References: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB802CC6B@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Message-ID: <4A296B47.4020804@gmail.com> Dear All, Just to make the search process easier on SUSTRAN I have created a customised search engine from Google. We can use this to search the SUSTRAN archives. Link: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss People can add this search engine to their blogs or websites, the instructions are there on the site hope it helps cheers sunny *Santhosh (Sunny) Kodukula *Urban Transport Specialist Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) Deutsche Gesellschaft f?r Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH (German Technical Cooperation) S-35, First Floor, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi 100 017, INDIA T + 91 11 406 100 30, 31 Extn.: 25 F + 91 11 406 100 32 E santhoshk.kodukula@gtz.de I http://www.gtz.de/transport Sustainable Urban Transport Website: http://www.sutp.org Skype: sunny_nwho P*Consider the environment, please think before you print* On Friday 05 June 2009 10:50 AM, Paul Barter wrote: > > Sorry if I wasn?t clear enough. The trick is that you need to leave > the site and go to GOOGLE! > > So my instructions take place in the search box at www.google.com > , not on the archive site which does not have a > search box, as you noticed. > > Go to GOOGLE and copy and paste > ?site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/? into the search > box. Then type your search terms to the left of ?site:?. > > For example to search for ?bus regulation? in the sustran-discuss > archives you would put into the search box > > Bus regulation > site:http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/ > > I hope this is clearer. > > Happy searching, > > Paul > > Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy > National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore > 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | > paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | > http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx > http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ > > *From:* sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org > [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org] > *On Behalf Of *Simon Bishop > *Sent:* Friday, 5 June 2009 1:06 PM > *To:* Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > *Subject:* [sustran] Please explain how to search the archive - there > is nosearch box > > Dear Paul, > > I have tried to follow the instructions that you gave. There is no > ?site? on the page and no search box either. Sorry, but its still > quite confusing to me. > > Thanks, > > Simon Bishop > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/f99dab9c/attachment.html From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Sat Jun 6 21:41:03 2009 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 07:41:03 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Paul and everyone, The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're thinking. - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful here, either as contrast or good or bad example. Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful for having developed these discussion spaces. Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of its creation and development. Best regards, Carlos. Paul Barter wrote: > > Dear sustran-discussers > > There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, > sustran-discuss. > > *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for > sustran-discuss:* > > A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the > discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? > > B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? > > 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on > developing countries > > 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) > > 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) > > *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* > > * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even > though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? > (developing countries). > > So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more > accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? > High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and > Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even > if they are not in developing countries. > > * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin > America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. > > * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the > West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind > everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such > material. > > Your views? > > Paul > > Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy > National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore > 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | > paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | > http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx > http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From richmond at alum.mit.edu Sun Jun 7 00:51:25 2009 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:51:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of punishment. In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > Paul and everyone, > > The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful > for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: > > - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness > from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various > training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on > these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. > However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. > I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough > to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all > participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about > regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other > people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's > obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first > time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups > is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long > as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're > thinking. > > - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have > broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and > Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in > nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us > have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that > they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we > promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as > far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful > here, either as contrast or good or bad example. > > Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. > Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a > Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand > English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion > groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and > cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many > non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful > for having developed these discussion spaces. > > Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of > its creation and development. > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > > Paul Barter wrote: >> >> Dear sustran-discussers >> >> There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, >> sustran-discuss. >> >> *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for >> sustran-discuss:* >> >> A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the >> discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? >> >> B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? >> >> 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on >> developing countries >> >> 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) >> >> 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) >> >> *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* >> >> * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even >> though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? >> (developing countries). >> >> So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more >> accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? >> High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and >> Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even >> if they are not in developing countries. >> >> * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin >> America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. >> >> * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the >> West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind >> everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such >> material. >> >> Your views? >> >> Paul >> >> Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy >> National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore >> 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | >> paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | >> http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx >> http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > ----- Jonathan Richmond +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From zvi at inro.ca Sun Jun 7 01:07:40 2009 From: zvi at inro.ca (Zvi Leve) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 12:07:40 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more people would be inclined to actively participate. Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. Anyway.... Zvi 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > officers --Jonathan! > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/89ea951a/attachment.html From info at autofrei-wohnen.de Sun Jun 7 01:20:03 2009 From: info at autofrei-wohnen.de (Markus Heller) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 18:20:03 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: a very simple reason is the lack of english skills ... I don`t have the time for too long and too complicated eMails, so simple english is a help (for me, at least) - and I agree completely with Carlos (global south focus) Markus (Berlin) ----- Original Message ----- From: Zvi Leve To: Jonathan E. D. Richmond Cc: Paul Barter ; Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 6:07 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more people would be inclined to actively participate. Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. Anyway.... Zvi 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of punishment. In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/e6a749af/attachment.html From richmond at alum.mit.edu Sun Jun 7 01:21:55 2009 From: richmond at alum.mit.edu (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 12:21:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: Even with face to face contact, junior employees will often not express opinions in front of their bosses. And punishments, ranging from humiliation to loss of promotion and status are very real. In Thailand, for example, the situation is best understood in terms of the concept of "greng jai," the requirement to make your boss look good -- part of which involves demonstrating that you are inferior to your boss and have little of value to contribute compared to him or her. Having good ideas or being creqtive can be seen as an insult to your boss. Jonathan! On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Zvi Leve wrote: > I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits > people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' > exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried > about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with > people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more > people would be inclined to actively participate. > > Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult > to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no > full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. > > Anyway.... > > Zvi > > > > 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but > fear of punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing > opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for > politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > ----- Jonathan Richmond +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ From etts at indigo.ie Sun Jun 7 05:36:22 2009 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 21:36:22 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: Zvi, Jonathon, I agree with the points you both make, although these are applicable more in the Asian culture and rather less in the American culture. In addition, I would suggest another aspect - employer and client confidentiality. Those in the best position to highlight new issues and to explain decision-taking, apparent paradoxes, or to illustrate points by specific examples can often only do so by sharing information that is not in the public domain. In many cases this would mean breaking confidences of our organisation, employer, client or network. Perhaps this is just another aspect of fear of punishment or fear of loss of face. However, I think for many it is just contrary to our training, where we temper opportunities to make ourselves look knowledgeable (at least in our own eyes!) against what we consider to be our responsibilities. It is ironic that on matters about which we know least we can be free, contentious and indulge in hyperbole; whereas on the matters we know most we are cautious, inhibited and often silent. That said, I agree with Paul and others that the Sustran community should be more participative, and that we would all get more out of it by contribution, dialogue and respectful debate than when we are just silent readers. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" To: "Zvi Leve" Cc: "Paul Barter" ; Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 5:21 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? > > > Even with face to face contact, junior employees will often not express > opinions in front of their bosses. > > And punishments, ranging from humiliation to loss of promotion and status > are very real. > > In Thailand, for example, the situation is best understood in terms of the > concept of "greng jai," the requirement to make your boss look good -- > part of which involves demonstrating that you are inferior to your boss > and have little of value to contribute compared to him or her. > Having good ideas or being creqtive can be seen as an insult to > your boss. Jonathan! > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Zvi Leve wrote: > >> I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits >> people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' >> exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried >> about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with >> people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more >> people would be inclined to actively participate. >> >> Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult >> to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no >> full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. >> >> Anyway.... >> >> Zvi >> >> >> >> 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond >> >> >> I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but >> fear of punishment. >> >> In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing >> opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for >> politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/c9b9b3db/attachment.html From sudhir at cai-asia.org Sun Jun 7 08:13:20 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 07:13:20 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi all, I think internet has provided that freedom of expression that face to face communication cannot ( fear of punishment, shyness, english etc...). How many of us have met face to face? agree with Carlos on geographical focus - global south is the better option.. regarding members, i think we need to advertise more as i think we don't have many policymakers and students... from my personal view, students are the key and i guess they don't know about sustran. Majority of universities are still focusing on 'traditional' concepts and '"solutions".. and it would be great if we can bring them in... cheers Sudhir 2009/6/7 Brendan Finn > Zvi, Jonathon, > > I agree with the points you both make, although these are applicable more > in the Asian culture and rather less in the American culture. > > In addition, I would suggest another aspect - employer and client > confidentiality. Those in the best position to highlight new issues and > to explain decision-taking, apparent paradoxes, or to illustrate points by > specific examples can often only do so by sharing information that is not in > the public domain. In many cases this would mean breaking confidences of our > organisation, employer, client or network. Perhaps this is just another > aspect of fear of punishment or fear of loss of face. However, I think for > many it is just contrary to our training, where we temper opportunities to > make ourselves look knowledgeable (at least in our own eyes!) against what > we consider to be our responsibilities. > > It is ironic that on matters about which we know least we can be free, > contentious and indulge in hyperbole; whereas on the matters we know most we > are cautious, inhibited and often silent. > > That said, I agree with Paul and others that the Sustran community should > be more participative, and that we would all get more out of it > by contribution, dialogue and respectful debate than when we are just silent > readers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090607/90186ce3/attachment.html From etts at indigo.ie Sun Jun 7 20:34:53 2009 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 12:34:53 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5B0DC1CE8FE94914B9AC48FC72FECD92@MicroPro271007> Dear Paul, Thanks for stimulating this discussion. - I agree that there should be clearer regional focus. I support the suggestion from Carlos about 'Global South'. I think there is great value in sharing challenges, practice, experience, and opinion across the continents. I note that some not-so-south locations share characteristics of society or transportation - I would not exclude contribution of experience from 'Global North' - i.e. from North America, Europe and Australia/NZ (which of course are the most South of all). However, they should be in an 'additive' way to discussion which keeps its focus on the target regions - We need to avoid analysis or judgement which uses the perspective and value set of 'Global North' to comment on 'Global South', except in cases where this is clearly useful and adds value - We should exclude the use of Sustran forum by 'Global North' participants as yet another place to fight out their own old arguments I join with others to warmly congratulate you on achieving 10 years of Sustran. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Barter To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 10:15 AM Subject: [sustran] Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? Dear sustran-discussers There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, sustran-discuss. I want your views on which regional focus would be best for sustran-discuss: A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the discussions more focused and consistently "on topic"? B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on developing countries 2. Revert to the original focus on "Asia" (rich and poor alike) 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE? * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even though the list description says we focus on the 'global South' (developing countries). So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more accurately than 1. So maybe switching to "Asia" would be clearer? High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even if they are not in developing countries. * In practice, we don't really get much material here on Africa, Latin America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such material. Your views? Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.53/2155 - Release Date: 06/04/09 17:55:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090607/bfdb24f9/attachment.html From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Mon Jun 8 00:53:51 2009 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2009 11:53:51 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the globalSouth? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090607115351.20391jcg1pe8kqds@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> \Hi everyone I would like to point out that in most governments, perhaps not Asian ones as much, once a project is completed, or a vendor is selected, documents become public domain. Thus, one can often steer people to the document and let this reveal one's position. In theory, it was always possible to request documents, but having documents and results of public hearings on the internet is a big step forward. Eric Bruun Quoting Brendan Finn : > Zvi, Jonathon, > > I agree with the points you both make, although these are applicable > more in the Asian culture and rather less in the American culture. > > In addition, I would suggest another aspect - employer and client > confidentiality. Those in the best position to highlight new issues > and to explain decision-taking, apparent paradoxes, or to illustrate > points by specific examples can often only do so by sharing > information that is not in the public domain. In many cases this > would mean breaking confidences of our organisation, employer, > client or network. Perhaps this is just another aspect of fear of > punishment or fear of loss of face. However, I think for many it is > just contrary to our training, where we temper opportunities to make > ourselves look knowledgeable (at least in our own eyes!) against > what we consider to be our responsibilities. > > It is ironic that on matters about which we know least we can be > free, contentious and indulge in hyperbole; whereas on the matters > we know most we are cautious, inhibited and often silent. > > That said, I agree with Paul and others that the Sustran community > should be more participative, and that we would all get more out of > it by contribution, dialogue and respectful debate than when we are > just silent readers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" > To: "Zvi Leve" > Cc: "Paul Barter" ; > Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 5:21 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or > the globalSouth? > > >> >> >> Even with face to face contact, junior employees will often not express >> opinions in front of their bosses. >> >> And punishments, ranging from humiliation to loss of promotion and status >> are very real. >> >> In Thailand, for example, the situation is best understood in terms of the >> concept of "greng jai," the requirement to make your boss look good -- >> part of which involves demonstrating that you are inferior to your boss >> and have little of value to contribute compared to him or her. >> Having good ideas or being creqtive can be seen as an insult to >> your boss. Jonathan! >> >> >> >> On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Zvi Leve wrote: >> >>> I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits >>> people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' >>> exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried >>> about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with >>> people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more >>> people would be inclined to actively participate. >>> >>> Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult >>> to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no >>> full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. >>> >>> Anyway.... >>> >>> Zvi >>> >>> >>> >>> 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond >>> >>> >>> I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but >>> fear of punishment. >>> >>> In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing >>> opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for >>> politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! >>> > From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Jun 8 03:31:00 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2009 20:31:00 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A2C0764.2030408@greenidea.eu> When people join this List, is there a way to ask them clearly if they would like to use an anonymous ID, and include a link to e.g. Googlemail? - T Jonathan E. D. Richmond wrote: > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > >> Paul and everyone, >> >> The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful >> for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: >> >> - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness >> from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various >> training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on >> these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. >> However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of >> sustran. [...] > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090607/d84787b4/attachment.html From cornie.huizenga at cai-asia.org Sun Jun 7 20:15:10 2009 From: cornie.huizenga at cai-asia.org (Cornie Huizenga) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:15:10 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 5 In-Reply-To: <20090607030053.22BF62BD6C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <20090607030053.22BF62BD6C@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <7e2a2770906070415p39175aa2xb9a0e1a4c84329ee@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Interesting discussion. A few observations/questions from my side while answering Paul's questions: - Apart from asking the question on geographical focus it is also important to answer the question what purpose this listserv has. If you want to use the list to influence and lobby policies in the south, you will need to have more focus on the south and more participation from the south. If it is more a general discussion list where people exchange views on transport it is quite convenient to have a broad range of discussions on noth and south; - I am at present involved in a new inititiative which aims to actively promote sustainable, low carbon transport in developing countries. In order to accomplish this we are targetting both the climate and the transport community. To be effective in reaching these communities you need to make certain that you have both quantity and quality of people on your list. A number of you might be familiar with the specific theme listservs that Transport and Environment is running in Europe on e.g. bunker oil, or on low carbon transport. These google lists have a clear role in discussing coordinate action and they are not open to all and are by invitation only. They are quite active in terms of discussion and debate; - It is also important to look at what other lists we have for Asia. We see that in addition to the Sustrain list that there is a Sustainable Urban Mobility Newsletter by CAI-Asia and its SUMA partners, there is the GTZ SUTP newsletter, but these two are both more news letters and less of discussion lists. - We are currently considering to set up a new Partnership on Sustainable Low Carbon Transport. The question that will come up is whether we are going to have a new dedicated discussion group/list for this Partnership which is aimed at developing countries in Asia and Latin America. Or should we try to make use of the existing Sustran List? Cornie Huizenga, Convener on Transport and Climate Change On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 11:00 AM, wrote: > Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than > "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." > > > ######################################################################## > Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest > > IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in > your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you > are responding to. Many thanks. > > About this mailing list see: > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > ######################################################################## > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global > South? (Carlosfelipe Pardo) > 2. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global > South? (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) > 3. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global > South? (Zvi Leve) > 4. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? (Markus Heller) > 5. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global > South? (Jonathan E. D. Richmond) > 6. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? (Brendan Finn) > 7. Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? (Sudhir) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 07:41:03 -0500 > From: Carlosfelipe Pardo > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > global South? > To: Paul Barter > Cc: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > Paul and everyone, > > The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful > for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: > > - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness > from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various > training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on > these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. > However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. > I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough > to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all > participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about > regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other > people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's > obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first > time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups > is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long > as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're > thinking. > > - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have > broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and > Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in > nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us > have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that > they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we > promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as > far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful > here, either as contrast or good or bad example. > > Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. > Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a > Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand > English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion > groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and > cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many > non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful > for having developed these discussion spaces. > > Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of > its creation and development. > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > > Paul Barter wrote: > > > > Dear sustran-discussers > > > > There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, > > sustran-discuss. > > > > *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for > > sustran-discuss:* > > > > A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the > > discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? > > > > B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? > > > > 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on > > developing countries > > > > 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) > > > > 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) > > > > *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* > > > > * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even > > though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? > > (developing countries). > > > > So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more > > accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? > > High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and > > Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even > > if they are not in developing countries. > > > > * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin > > America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. > > > > * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the > > West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind > > everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such > > material. > > > > Your views? > > > > Paul > > > > Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy > > National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore > > 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | > > paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | > > http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx > > http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:51:25 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > global South? > To: Carlosfelipe Pardo > Cc: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Paul Barter > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > > > Paul and everyone, > > > > The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful > > for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: > > > > - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness > > from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various > > training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on > > these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. > > However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. > > I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough > > to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all > > participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about > > regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other > > people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's > > obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first > > time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups > > is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long > > as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're > > thinking. > > > > - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have > > broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and > > Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in > > nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us > > have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that > > they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we > > promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as > > far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful > > here, either as contrast or good or bad example. > > > > Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. > > Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a > > Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand > > English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion > > groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and > > cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many > > non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful > > for having developed these discussion spaces. > > > > Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of > > its creation and development. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Carlos. > > > > > > Paul Barter wrote: > >> > >> Dear sustran-discussers > >> > >> There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, > >> sustran-discuss. > >> > >> *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for > >> sustran-discuss:* > >> > >> A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the > >> discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? > >> > >> B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you > prefer? > >> > >> 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on > >> developing countries > >> > >> 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) > >> > >> 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) > >> > >> *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* > >> > >> * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even > >> though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? > >> (developing countries). > >> > >> So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more > >> accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? > >> High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and > >> Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even > >> if they are not in developing countries. > >> > >> * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin > >> America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. > >> > >> * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the > >> West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind > >> everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such > >> material. > >> > >> Your views? > >> > >> Paul > >> > >> Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy > >> National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore > >> 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | > >> paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | > >> http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx > >> http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------- > >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------- > >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > >> > >> ================================================================ > >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) > > +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in > Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 12:07:40 -0400 > From: Zvi Leve > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > global South? > To: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" > Cc: Paul Barter , > Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits people > from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' exchanges - it is > more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried about how they will > be perceived by others.... When interacting with people directly it is > easier to understand the social cues, so more people would be inclined to > actively participate. > > Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult > to > hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no full > name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. > > Anyway.... > > Zvi > > > > 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > > > > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > > punishment. > > > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > > officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/89ea951a/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 18:20:03 +0200 > From: "Markus Heller" > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? > To: > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > a very simple reason is the lack of english skills ... I don`t have the > time for too long and too complicated eMails, so simple english is a help > (for me, at least) > - and I agree completely with Carlos (global south focus) > Markus (Berlin) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Zvi Leve > To: Jonathan E. D. Richmond > Cc: Paul Barter ; Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 6:07 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? > > > I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits > people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' exchanges - > it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried about how they > will be perceived by others.... When interacting with people directly it is > easier to understand the social cues, so more people would be inclined to > actively participate. > > Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult > to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no full > name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. > > Anyway.... > > Zvi > > > > > 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/e6a749af/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 12:21:55 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > global South? > To: Zvi Leve > Cc: Paul Barter , > Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Even with face to face contact, junior employees will often not express > opinions in front of their bosses. > > And punishments, ranging from humiliation to loss of promotion and status > are very real. > > In Thailand, for example, the situation is best understood in terms of the > concept of "greng jai," the requirement to make your boss look good -- > part of which involves demonstrating that you are inferior to your boss > and have little of value to contribute compared to him or her. > Having good ideas or being creqtive can be seen as an insult to > your boss. Jonathan! > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Zvi Leve wrote: > > > I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits > > people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' > > exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried > > about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with > > people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more > > people would be inclined to actively participate. > > > > Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult > > to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no > > full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. > > > > Anyway.... > > > > Zvi > > > > > > > > 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > > > > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but > > fear of punishment. > > > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing > > opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for > > politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) > > +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in > Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 21:36:22 +0100 > From: "Brendan Finn" > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? > To: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" , "Zvi Leve" > > Cc: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org, Paul Barter > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Zvi, Jonathon, > > I agree with the points you both make, although these are applicable more > in the Asian culture and rather less in the American culture. > > In addition, I would suggest another aspect - employer and client > confidentiality. Those in the best position to highlight new issues and to > explain decision-taking, apparent paradoxes, or to illustrate points by > specific examples can often only do so by sharing information that is not in > the public domain. In many cases this would mean breaking confidences of our > organisation, employer, client or network. Perhaps this is just another > aspect of fear of punishment or fear of loss of face. However, I think for > many it is just contrary to our training, where we temper opportunities to > make ourselves look knowledgeable (at least in our own eyes!) against what > we consider to be our responsibilities. > > It is ironic that on matters about which we know least we can be free, > contentious and indulge in hyperbole; whereas on the matters we know most we > are cautious, inhibited and often silent. > > That said, I agree with Paul and others that the Sustran community should > be more participative, and that we would all get more out of it by > contribution, dialogue and respectful debate than when we are just silent > readers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" > To: "Zvi Leve" > Cc: "Paul Barter" ; < > Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 5:21 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? > > > > > > > > Even with face to face contact, junior employees will often not express > > opinions in front of their bosses. > > > > And punishments, ranging from humiliation to loss of promotion and status > > are very real. > > > > In Thailand, for example, the situation is best understood in terms of > the > > concept of "greng jai," the requirement to make your boss look good -- > > part of which involves demonstrating that you are inferior to your boss > > and have little of value to contribute compared to him or her. > > Having good ideas or being creqtive can be seen as an insult to > > your boss. Jonathan! > > > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Zvi Leve wrote: > > > >> I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits > >> people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' > >> exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are > worried > >> about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with > >> people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more > >> people would be inclined to actively participate. > >> > >> Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not > difficult > >> to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no > >> full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. > >> > >> Anyway.... > >> > >> Zvi > >> > >> > >> > >> 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond > >> > >> > >> I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but > >> fear of punishment. > >> > >> In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing > >> opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for > >> politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! > >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090606/c9b9b3db/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 07:13:20 +0800 > From: Sudhir > Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the > globalSouth? > To: Brendan Finn > Cc: Paul Barter , > Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi all, > > I think internet has provided that freedom of expression that face to face > communication cannot ( fear of punishment, shyness, english etc...). How > many of us have met face to face? > > agree with Carlos on geographical focus - global south is the better > option.. > > regarding members, i think we need to advertise more as i think we don't > have many policymakers and students... > > from my personal view, students are the key and i guess they don't know > about sustran. Majority of universities are still focusing on > 'traditional' > concepts and '"solutions".. and it would be great if we can bring them > in... > > cheers > Sudhir > > 2009/6/7 Brendan Finn > > > Zvi, Jonathon, > > > > I agree with the points you both make, although these are applicable more > > in the Asian culture and rather less in the American culture. > > > > In addition, I would suggest another aspect - employer and client > > confidentiality. Those in the best position to highlight new issues and > > to explain decision-taking, apparent paradoxes, or to illustrate points > by > > specific examples can often only do so by sharing information that is not > in > > the public domain. In many cases this would mean breaking confidences of > our > > organisation, employer, client or network. Perhaps this is just another > > aspect of fear of punishment or fear of loss of face. However, I think > for > > many it is just contrary to our training, where we temper opportunities > to > > make ourselves look knowledgeable (at least in our own eyes!) against > what > > we consider to be our responsibilities. > > > > It is ironic that on matters about which we know least we can be free, > > contentious and indulge in hyperbole; whereas on the matters we know most > we > > are cautious, inhibited and often silent. > > > > That said, I agree with Paul and others that the Sustran community should > > be more participative, and that we would all get more out of it > > by contribution, dialogue and respectful debate than when we are just > silent > > readers. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Brendan. > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090607/90186ce3/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 5 > ********************************************** > -- Cornie Huizenga Vice-Chair, Board of Trustees CAI-Asia Center www://cleanairnet.org/caiasia cornie.huizenga@cai-asia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090607/e16e8114/attachment.html From patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 03:48:45 2009 From: patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 00:18:45 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8fba064c0906071148g1cc09ca7k9dc1afda47aa32c8@mail.gmail.com> I agree with Carlos. I hope more of the silent ones will contribute to the discussions when they have something to say. I have found the SUSTRAN list most useful in broadening my understanding, and I've considered Paul to be a great resource ever since I saw his book "Taking Steps", and had the pleasure of meeting him in Delhi in 2004?? Actually if he could update that book it will be really great. -- Sujit On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > Paul and everyone, > > The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful > for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: > > - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness > from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various > training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on > these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. > However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. > I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough > to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all > participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about > regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other > people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's > obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first > time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups > is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long > as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're > thinking. > > - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have > broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and > Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in > nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us > have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that > they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we > promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as > far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful > here, either as contrast or good or bad example. > > Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. > Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a > Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand > English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion > groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and > cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many > non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful > for having developed these discussion spaces. > > Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of > its creation and development. > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > > Paul Barter wrote: > > > > Dear sustran-discussers > > > > There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, > > sustran-discuss. > > > > *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for > > sustran-discuss:* > > > > A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the > > discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? > > > > B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? > > > > 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on > > developing countries > > > > 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) > > > > 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) > > > > *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* > > > > * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even > > though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? > > (developing countries). > > > > So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more > > accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? > > High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and > > Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even > > if they are not in developing countries. > > > > * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin > > America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. > > > > * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the > > West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind > > everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such > > material. > > > > Your views? > > > > Paul > > > > Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy > > National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore > > 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | > > paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | > > http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx > > http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment to destroy the city? Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel Munich 1970 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sujit Patwardhan patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com sujitjp@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Parisar: www.parisar.org PTTF: www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090608/1d122e09/attachment.html From patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 03:50:11 2009 From: patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 00:20:11 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? In-Reply-To: References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8fba064c0906071150t653fe63fn61198ae87262309c@mail.gmail.com> *there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior officers * Thankfully that is fast changing. -- Sujit On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Jonathan E. D. Richmond < richmond@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > > I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of > punishment. > > In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an > activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior > officers --Jonathan! > > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > > Paul and everyone, >> >> The discussions on geographical focus and participation are very useful >> for Sustran. I'll comment briefly on both: >> >> - Regarding participation, I think it's lacking due to a bit of shyness >> from members of the group. I've met with many people when we did various >> training courses in Asia that would have great ideas and examples on >> these topics that would be extremely useful for places such as sustran. >> However, many of these people say they are "silent readers" of sustran. >> I guess what some people feel is that they aren't knowledgeable enough >> to give some input here, but everyone should take part! I invite all >> participants to think about a topic that they've always wondered about >> regarding sustainable transport and post it on sustran to see what other >> people think. It doesn't matter if we've discussed it already or if it's >> obvious, because many people will be reading about it for the first >> time. Also, I think the essence of sustran and these discussion groups >> is that you can be as informal as you want (though respectful), as long >> as you're making a contribution! Go ahead, everyone, tell us what you're >> thinking. >> >> - Regarding geographical focus, I think it's very useful to have >> broadened it to "the Global South". Problems in Asia, Latin America and >> Africa are pretty similar (they differ mostly in degree, but not in >> nature). So I'd say we should keep it global, also because many of us >> have interesting news to give from any of these regions and feel that >> they are relevant for people in other regions. Otherwise, why would we >> promote stuff from Bogot? in Jakarta, and it works? I would even go as >> far as to say that information from "the North" would also be useful >> here, either as contrast or good or bad example. >> >> Actually, one true obstacle between geographical regions is language. >> Asia is relatively "fluent" in English, while Latin America is mostly a >> Spanish-speaking country and many people don't speak or understand >> English. This is why we've also promoted the use of some discussion >> groups in Spanish (predominantly, sustranlac , sutp-lac and >> cities-for-mobility , all in yahoogroups) and they seem to work. Many >> non-English speaking professionals from those regions are most thankful >> for having developed these discussion spaces. >> >> Finally, thanks to Paul for moderating the group and for being part of >> its creation and development. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Carlos. >> >> >> Paul Barter wrote: >> >>> >>> Dear sustran-discussers >>> >>> There is a suggestion to rethink the geographical focus of this forum, >>> sustran-discuss. >>> >>> *I want your views on which regional focus would be best for >>> sustran-discuss:* >>> >>> A. Should we be clearer about our regional focus in order to keep the >>> discussions more focused and consistently ?on topic?? >>> >>> B. If you said yes to A above, then which of the following do you prefer? >>> >>> 1. Keep things as they are: we say in our blurb that our focus is on >>> developing countries >>> >>> 2. Revert to the original focus on ?Asia? (rich and poor alike) >>> >>> 3. Other ways to define our regional focus? (I am open to suggestions) >>> >>> *WHY BOTHER THINKING ABOUT A CHANGE?* >>> >>> * We started with an Asia focus, which we mostly still have, even >>> though the list description says we focus on the ?global South? >>> (developing countries). >>> >>> So, in practice, 2 probably reflects the discussions here more >>> accurately than 1. So maybe switching to ?Asia? would be clearer? >>> High-income Asian cities (Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, HK and >>> Singapore) often come up and they certainly feel relevant enough even >>> if they are not in developing countries. >>> >>> * In practice, we don?t really get much material here on Africa, Latin >>> America, south-western Asia or Eastern Europe anyway. >>> >>> * Also in practice, we get a bit TOO much discussion on issues in the >>> West (Europe, North America, Australia/NZ) and we often need to remind >>> everyone that there are various other forums better suited to such >>> material. >>> >>> Your views? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy >>> National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore >>> 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | >>> paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | >>> http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx >>> http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >>> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >>> >>> ================================================================ >>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >>> (the 'Global South'). >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). >> >> > ----- > Jonathan Richmond > +230 707-1134 (Mauritius mobile: most reliable way to reach me) > > +1 (617) 395-4360 (US phone number rings at home -- call me in > Mauritius for the price of a call to the US). > > e-mail: richmond@alum.mit.edu > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/ > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment to destroy the city? Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel Munich 1970 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sujit Patwardhan patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com sujitjp@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Parisar: www.parisar.org PTTF: www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090608/442da7ed/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jun 8 16:27:34 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 09:27:34 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific. In-Reply-To: <8fba064c0906071150t653fe63fn61198ae87262309c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A2A63DF.20301@gmail.com> <8fba064c0906071150t653fe63fn61198ae87262309c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00b701c9e80a$99e46950$cdad3bf0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Thanks so much Paul for agreeing to go public with this exchange. Just the ticket as we can see from this lively reaction it is getting. The first step, as always, is for us to figure out who we are. And who we want to be. I think we are off to a promising start here. Here are my best thoughts on this. By the numbers: 1. Sustran is a great forum and source of ideas and inspiration, and has been a useful dialoguing tool in the struggle for sustainable transport in the region for many of us over the last decade. 2. But it appears of late to have fallen into a bit of a fallow period. Despite the fact that it is more important than ever that we have good lines of communications between those of us who care deeply about these concerns and have something to say. (Let me mention quickly that my comments here are not only as a very long time member of this group, but also since I have had quite a bit of experience managing related projects, programs and focused discussion groups as part of the New Mobility Agenda.) 3. The original focus of this forum was to Sustainable Transport Action Network for Asia and the Pacific. Within the last couple of years however at least me and quite possibly others have lobbied to stretch this geographic coverage to the "Global South". I now regard this as an error on my part, for some of the reasons we are seeing here. It dilutes the very important focus that I sincerely believe we need to retain. 4. Our great advantage as a group is that we have a common focus, a viable means of communications, something to say, and that our topic has never been more important than it is today. 5. Our weakness, if I may, is that (a) we have not of late been making good use of these advantages, and (b) we are not as yet bringing in enough players in many important parts of the region, with China of course right at the top of the list. 6. That said, the "Asia and the Pacific" focus is to my mind an extremely useful one to stay with. It is an area which is clearly delineated, in which we already have a good running start, in which English works pretty well as a common language, and which offers as very wide spread of transport and other conditions, and with it an opportunity for cross learning including "North/South" lessons. 7. There are great benefits for concentrating, and I hope that you all will consider this strategic suggestion and that we will be able to build on it if you find it a reasonable start. 8. As to our central theme - I propose that we keep it exactly as it has been since the beginning "sustainable transport action network". No more, no less. 9. Finally, we must realize that our strength in the past is precisely that there has been no big structure or lots of work and heavy resources needed to keep it going. Sustran pretty much does itself, and I would like it to be that way in the future. It's a clear example of what I like to call a "self organizing collaborative network". That's the way I think we should go. Which means that now I have to stand back and get out of the way. Self-organize oh Sustran. Warm regards, Eric Britton Read World Streets. It's good for you and for your planet. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090608/b90fbea0/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jun 9 16:15:39 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:15:39 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sustran poll - please give your views Message-ID: <013a01c9e8d2$1a8d16c0$4fa74440$@britton@ecoplan.org> Dear Sustran friends, What about this as a possibly useful next step in our group process of rethinking Sustran? If you go over to World Streets this morning - www.worldstreets.org - and scroll down a bit on the left menu, you will see that I have set up a little three choice poll for the group. It asks you what you think should be our geographic focus. Real simple and should take you no more than a minute or two. I will then report back to the group in a few days when the trend is clear. Eventually once the dust has settled on this, I hope that we will be able to get together to do a fine feature piece on Sustran to introduce it to the world, And perhaps in the process pick up a few more great members for the group. With all good wishes, Eric PS. PLAN B: And for anyone who is still here, I attach the text of what is for me a very important think piece setting out what I sincerely believe to be the only possible responsible transportation strategy to the challenges before us. I would be most grateful to have your critical comments on this. Because if I am wrong I better make some major adjustments around here. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090609/b5408e9b/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Plan B - v0.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 51004 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090609/b5408e9b/PlanB-v0.pdf From voodikon at yahoo.com Tue Jun 9 18:33:56 2009 From: voodikon at yahoo.com (jane.) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 02:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Fw: Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? Message-ID: <527294.90681.qm@web39503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Loss of face might be part of the explanation, but I don't think it fully uncovers the situation. English might be the language of educated classes in India and the Philippines, but that still overlooks a vast number of people in the "Global South"--namely, people in China (not to mention southeast Asia, etc.). If we look at the Chinese-language Internet, for example, we can see that it is extremely active, and the oft-quote "Chinese netizens" tend to be very vocal and opinionated on both foreign and domestic matters ... on Chinese-language discussion forums. (See the somewhat raunchy www.chinasmack.com for a peek into this activity, diligently translated into English by an anonymous Shanghai-based blogger). To me this would indicate issues with common language, lack of awareness of the list, and/or lack of interest. I suspect without resources available in simplified Chinese, it will be mighty difficult to get many voices heard from within mainland China. Yet another issue is accessibility. Specifically, a number of carfree websites, including the World Carfree Network's and World Streets (as it's hosted on blogspot), are currently blocked by China's firewall. Does somebody have access to the number and demographics of the existing members? How many are actually in Asia, and especially the regions? Do those numbers shed any light on the silence? Jane --- On Sun, 6/7/09, Zvi Leve wrote: From: Zvi Leve Subject: [sustran] Re: Regional focus for sustran-discuss: Asia or the global South? To: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" Cc: "Paul Barter" , Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Date: Sunday, June 7, 2009, 12:07 AM I do not think that it is exactly "fear of punishment" that inhibits people from certain cultures from participating in such 'public' exchanges - it is more a "fear of losing face". That is, they are worried about how they will be perceived by others.... When interacting with people directly it is easier to understand the social cues, so more people would be inclined to actively participate. Not sure what can be done about this. If one desires, it is not difficult to hide one's true identity from the forum (generic email address, no full name, etc.), but this does not seem to make much of a difference. Anyway.... Zvi 2009/6/6 Jonathan E. D. Richmond I do not think the issue is fear of lack of knowledge but fear of punishment. In many Asian countries there is a taboo about expressing opinions, an activity often felt to be reserved for politicians and the most senior officers --Jonathan! -----Inline Attachment Follows----- -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090609/f08c77d3/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Thu Jun 11 11:11:01 2009 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:11:01 -0700 Subject: [sustran] VTPI News - Spring 2009 Message-ID: <20090611021554.7D6632D94F@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> ----------- VTPI NEWS ----------- Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" ------------------------------------- Spring 2009 Vol. 12, 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. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEW DOCUMENTS ============== "Cycling for a Few or for Everyone: The Importance of Social Justice in Cycling Policy" (http://www.vtpi.org/pucher_buehler_cycling.pdf ) By John Pucher and Ralph Buehler, posted with permission. This article discusses the importance of designing cycling programs and facilities to accommodate the varying abilities and preferences of a broad spectrum of the population. This is one of several articles on sustainable transport in the May 2009 issue of "World Transport Policy & Practice" (http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp15.1.pdf ). "The Value Capture Approach To Stimulating Transit Oriented Development And Financing Transit Station Area Improvements" (http://www.vtpi.org/gihing_tod.pdf) By Thomas A. Gihring, posted with permission This paper examines the proposition that a land value property tax is an effective method to promote transit oriented development (TOD) and raise revenue to finance public improvements within urban rail transit station areas. A case study of a proposed TOD special assessment district in Seattle demonstrates how changing the general property tax to a land value tax (LVT) would provide incentives to utilize sites more intensively. The paper discusses various value capture mechanisms, and offers two possible land value capture methods to support public bond financing. "Arapahoe County Parking Utilization Study Concerning Residential Transit Oriented Development" (http://www.vtpi.org/topp_parking.pdf ) By Christopher A. Topp, posted with permission. This study surveyed Denver, Colorado transit-oriented developments concerning factors such as vehicle ownership, travel options, parking space utilization rates, and residents' community design preferences. Finds relatively low parking facility occupancy rates in multi-modal areas suggesting that current supply and minimum parking regulations are much higher than optimal. Identifies various factors that affect parking demand including location, income and transit service quality. Discusses current parking planning practices and the costs of excess parking supply. Recommends reforms. "A Review of 'On the Social Desirability of Urban Rail Systems' by C. Winston and V. Maheshrib" (http://www.vtpi.org/goddard.pdf ), by Haynes Goddard, posted with permission. This paper evaluates analysis by Clifford Winston and Vikram Maheshri which attempted to use benefit-cost analysis to make a definitive statement about the social desirability of urban rail transit in the United States. Their argument is deficient on several elementary analytic and statistical grounds: They underestimate total benefits, and therefore net benefits, and their failure to examine the suitability of their data and to pay attention to the usual caveats associated with benefit-cost analysis further undermines their assertions. "2009 Transit Performance Spreadsheet" (http://www.vtpi.org/Transit2009.xls ) This spreadsheet contains a wealth of transportation system performance data for U.S. cities, and a variety of analysis concerning the relationships between public transportation travel and outcomes such as vehicle travel, mode split, congestion delays, traffic fatalities, and consumer transportation expenditures. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE =================== Tara Laan, Todd Litman and Ronald Steenblik (2008), "Biofuels: At What Cost? Government Support For Ethanol And Biodiesel In Canada," (http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2009/biofuels_subsidies_canada.pdf ), published by the Global Subsidies Initiative (www.globalsubsidies.org). This study estimates Canadian federal and provincial government spending to support liquid biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel) and evaluates the cost effectiveness of those expenditures. Estimates that total transfers to biofuels approach C$ 1 billion for the 2006-08 period. Concludes that costs per unit of fossil energy or GHG avoided are much higher than alternatives. Letter to the Editor, ITE Journal (http://www.vtpi.org/ITE_letter_may2009.pdf ) By Todd Litman. This letter responds to the January 2009 article "The Nexus of Energy, Environment and the Economy: A Win, Win, Win Opportunity," by Alan Pisarski, which argued that transportation energy conservation and emission reduction efforts should focus on increasing fuel efficiency rather than reducing vehicle travel. Planetizen Blogs (http://www.planetizen.com ): "Comprehensive Evaluation of Transit Oriented Development Benefits" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/39133 ) "The Automobile Industry and National Economic Development" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/39070 ) "Travel Demands Are A-Changing: So Should Our Spending" (http://www.planetizen.com/node/38283 ) National Journal Blog "Should Fuel Taxes Pay For Alternative Transportation" (http://transportation.nationaljournal.com/2009/05/should-fuel-taxes-pay-for-alte.php ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pay-As-You-Drive Vehicle Insurance ================================== Several new developments are building support for Pay-As-You-Drive vehicle insurance (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm79.htm ). Send an email to info@vtpi.org if you would like to receive occasional updates on PAYD issues. MileMeter (www.milemeter.com) MileMeter is a private insurance company now sells PAYD insurance policies in Texas. Policies are purchased by the Internet. Motorists report their odometer reading at the beginning of the policy term and purchase a certain number of kilometers. Reported mileage is cross-referenced with odometer readings from vehicle emission, maintenance, and registration databases nationwide to insurance accuracy. Real Insurance PAYD (www.payasyoudrive.com.au) Real Insurance now sells PAYD vehicle insurance in Australia. Motorists report their odometer reading at the beginning of the policy term and purchase a certain number of kilometers. Any unused kilometers are either refunded if motorists cancel or don't renew (upon verification of vehicle odometers if requested by the company) or carried over to the next policy. If kilometers exceed prepayment the policy only provides basic coverage (liability, fire and theft). This program was awarded Australia's Cheapest Car Insurance award by 'Money Magazine.' The Magazine said, "In these tough times consumers need to reduce costs wherever they can and shopping around for car insurance is a must. Money Magazine is pleased to be able to recognise and reward the best products and services, particularly at a time where it's so critical for consumers to rein in their spending." PAYD in State Emission Reduction Plans (http://www.newamerica.net/files/State%20Climate%20Policy%20Tracker%205-4-09.xls ) Of 33 state climate action plans evaluated by the New America Foundation Climate Policy Program, twelve include PAYD as a transportation emission reduction strategy, as summarized in. These states include: AZ, CA, CO, MD, ME, MN, NH, NM, NC, RI, VA, and VT. The degree of emphasis and support for PAYD varies. For example, the Rhode Island plan, while endorsing the importance of the strategy, explicitly says that the state will likely wait for other states to figure out how to promote PAYD insurance before it does so. Justin Horner of the National Resources Defense Council described this analysis in the following blog: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jhorner/thirteen_states_say_ok_lets_ha.html Ceres Insurance Program Supports PAYD (http://www.ceres.org/insurance ) Ceres (a national coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public interest organizations working to address sustainability challenges) is supporting PAYD insurance pricing as part of its insurance sector risk reduction program. Ceres held a workshop, "Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance Innovation for Transportation Efficiency" at its April conference in San Francisco, and is supporting ongoing research to support PAYD pricing. UPCOMING EVENTS ================= 2009 Joint Summer Meeting, "Forging Ahead in Uncertain Times," July 19-22 in Seattle, Washington (http://guest.cvent.com/EVENTS/Info/Summary.aspx?e=ed57e411-12a8-456d-bfba-8f8b3b33b851 ). Todd Litman will be attending. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IN THE NEWS ================= "Transportation Study That Rated N.S. Highly Was Flawed - Expert," The Chronicle Herald (http://www.apta.ca/webcura/files/1174.pdf ) which describes our critique of the Fraser Institute's transportation studies. Also see the Clark Williams-Derry blog on the subject (http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2008/11/06/dont-like-reality-ignore-it ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ USEFUL RESOURCES ================= Andrea Broaddus, Todd Litman and Gopinath Menon (2009), "Training Document On "Transportation Demand Management," Sustainable Urban Transport Project (http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=413 ) This 118 page document describes effective ways to manage demand and create a resilient and efficient transport system. John Pucher and Ralph Buehler (2009), "Sustainable Transport that Works: Lessons from Germany," World Transport Policy and Practice, Vol. 15, No. 1, May 2009, pp. 13-46 (http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp15.1.pdf ). This article evaluates transportation patterns in Germany. Germans walk, bike, and take public transport for 41% of their daily trips, four times more than in the USA. This paper examines the policy and planning practices that have contributed to this diversity and efficiency. Three excellent new documents from the Project for Public Spaces (http://www.pps.org): "A Citizen's Guide to Better Streets" (http://www.pps.org/pdf/bookstore/How_to_Engage_Your_Transportation_Agency_AARP.pdf ). "Streets As Places: Using Streets To Rebuild Communities" (http://www.pps.org/pdf/bookstore/Using_Streets_to_Rebuild_Communities.pdf ) "The Quiet Revolution in Transportation Planning: How Great Corridors Make Great Communities," (http://www.pps.org/pdf/bookstore/Great_Corridors_Great_Communities.pdf. Donald Shoup (2008), "The Politics and Economics of Parking On Campus" (http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/PoliticsAndEconomicsOfCampusParking.pdf). More great information and witty observations concerning parking and politics. "How Much Can We Slow VMT Growth? The Potential Savings of Implementing Best Practice Everywhere" (http://www.ccap.org/docs/resources/460/How%20much%20can%20we%20slow%20VMT%20growth%20May%202008.pdf ) This summarizes a study of the potential travel and emission reductions of various mobility management strategies. It concludes that aggressive implementation of such strategies could reasonably achieve a 21% reduction from baseline VMT by 2030 and a 29% reduction by 2050. "Residential Garage Conversions" (www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/pl/hcd/ADU/adu.html) Santa Cruz, CA has a special program to encourage development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs, also known as mother-in-law or granny units), which often consist of converted or expanded garages, to increase housing affordability and urban infill. The city has ordinances, design guidelines and information materials for such conversions. "Integrated Approach to Planning" (http://www.transit.govt.nz/planning/iap.jsp) is a collaborative program between New Zealand transport sector agencies and Ministry for Environment to identify gaps and barriers to achieving better integration, both within and between transport and land-use planning, to help improve transport system sustainability. The project includes research to evaluate current planning practices and recommend improvements for more integrated planning. "Mixed-Income Housing TOD Action Guide," (http://reconnectingamerica.org/public/display_asset/090304mitodag0109 ) by the Center for Transit Oriented Development (CTOD) for Reconnecting America. This guide is designed to help community advocates, practitioners, intermediaries, and jurisdictions in their efforts to foster mixed-income transit oriented development. "Household Auto Greenhouse Gas Emissions: New Maps Show that Urban Living Helps Curb Global Warming" (http://htaindex.cnt.org ) New research by the Center for Neighborhood Technology compares greenhouse gas emissions of household vehicle travel in 55 U.S. metropolitan areas. These emissions tend to decline significantly (as much as 70%) with smart growth transportation and land use development patterns. Additional information at http://www.cnt.org/news/2009/05/27/new-maps-show-that-urban-living-helps-curb-global-warming and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/f-kaid-benfield/village-green-dramatic-ne_b_208035.html "Urban Transportation Emissions Calculator" (http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/prog/2/UTEC-CETU/menu.aspx?lang=eng ) is a user-friendly, Internet-based tool developed by Transport Canada that estimates greenhouse gas and criteria air contaminant emissions from urban transportation. It can be used in a wide variety of contexts involving different vehicle types (e.g., cars, commercial trucks, buses, light rail), fuel technologies (e.g., gasoline, diesel, hybrid, ethanol, biodiesel, etc.), and planning horizons (2006-2031). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090610/a1672fc6/attachment.html From sutp at sutp.org Thu Jun 11 12:20:38 2009 From: sutp at sutp.org (SUTP Team) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:50:38 +0530 Subject: [sustran] GTZ SUTP now in India Message-ID: <4A307806.7090202@sutp.org> The GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) recently opened an office in New Delhi. This office will oversee the urban transport assistance activities in the South Asian region. SUTP is currently working with GTZ ? Advisory Services for Environmental Management (ASEM) at providing technical assistance to some JNNURM cities that are under the purview of ASEM. Mr. Santhosh Kodukula, GTZ Urban Transport Specialist, will be stationed in this office and can be contacted for any inquiries regarding technical assistance, capacity building and project development. He can be contacted at santhoshk.kodukula@gtz.de and at the following address: Mr. Santhosh (Sunny) Kodukula Urban Transport Specialist GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project S-35, First Floor, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi 110 017, India T + 91 11 406 100 30, 31 or 431 411 11 Extn.: 25 F + 91 11 406 100 32 M + 91 96 54 43 56 81 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/036ee212/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu Jun 11 17:05:46 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:05:46 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Only three days left to give your views Message-ID: <018a01c9ea6b$6ec256c0$4c470440$@britton@ecoplan.org> The Sustran geo focus poll over at World Streets - www.worldstreets.org, a bit down on the left menu - is giving some surprising results. Surprising to me at least. Wow! One of the things about democracy is that it teaches. Don't forget to make your voice heard. A two minute deal for Sustran. Sustran deserves it. Eric Britton World Streets (Plan B) cid:image001.jpg@01C8DAF3.F7EBC130 Technology transforms time and space . . . and our minds New Mobility Partnerships - http://www.newmobility.org & check out World Streets -- www.Worldstreets.org Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton USA: 9440 Readcrest Drive Los Angeles, CA 90210 T: +1 310 601-8468 Skype : newmobility -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/47d7c009/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 12184 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/47d7c009/attachment.jpe From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Thu Jun 11 17:17:50 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:17:50 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Only three days left to give your views In-Reply-To: <018a01c9ea6b$6ec256c0$4c470440$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <018a01c9ea6b$6ec256c0$4c470440$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: It may seem daunting to go and find the opinion poll on World Streets. So here is a link that will take you straight there. Visit http://tinyurl.com/kuebe9 to go to vote for your preferred choice for the geographical focus of sustran-discuss. Paul Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Thursday, 11 June 2009 4:06 PM To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Only three days left to give your views The Sustran geo focus poll over at World Streets - www.worldstreets.org, a bit down on the left menu - is giving some surprising results. Surprising to me at least. Wow! One of the things about democracy is that it teaches. Don't forget to make your voice heard. A two minute deal for Sustran. Sustran deserves it. Eric Britton World Streets (Plan B) Technology transforms time and space . . . and our minds New Mobility Partnerships - http://www.newmobility.org & check out World Streets -- www.Worldstreets.org Europe: 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France T: +331 4326 1323 or +339 7044 4179 Skype: ericbritton USA: 9440 Readcrest Drive Los Angeles, CA 90210 T: +1 310 601-8468 Skype : newmobility -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/4a5a0b56/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 12184 bytes Desc: image001.jpg Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/4a5a0b56/attachment.jpe From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Thu Jun 11 19:03:09 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:03:09 +0200 Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] World Streets Weekly In-Reply-To: <1244710123282.c9335dbf-4c97-482b-a5e6-440fe70a3f5b@google.com> References: <1244710123282.c9335dbf-4c97-482b-a5e6-440fe70a3f5b@google.com> Message-ID: <021201c9ea7b$d55b0980$80111c80$@britton@ecoplan.org> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SiP7t8nOFgI/AAAAAAAAA0I/1ACKOlxZOzA/s2 00/glasses.jpgHere you can call up with a single click all editions to date of World Streets This Week, Volume 1, starting with the first edition published this year on 2 March. To create a paper version for easy reading away from your computer, all you have to do is to print the browser frame. This will yield a handy paper or PDF edition of the selected week's content. Volume 1: 2009 * No. 15. Week of 14 June 2009 * No. 14. Week of 7 June 2009 * No. 13. Week of 31 May 2009 * No. 12. Week of 24 May 2009 * No. 11. Week of 17 May 2009 * No. 10. Week of 10 May 2009 * No. 9. Week of 3 May 2009 * No. 8. Week of 26 April 2009 * No. 7. Week of 19 April 2009 * No. 6. Week of 12 April 2009 * No. 5. Week of 5 April 2009 * No. 4. Week of 29 March 2009 * No. 3. Week of 22 March 2009 * No. 2. Week of 15 March 2009 * No. 1. Week of 8 March 2009 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/a96fc8fa/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3085 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/a96fc8fa/attachment.jpe From morten7an at yahoo.com Thu Jun 11 19:46:29 2009 From: morten7an at yahoo.com (Morten Lange) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Only three days left to give your views Message-ID: <987674.47752.qm@web51007.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Thanks for the link, Paul. As to the democracy comment from Eric : Democracy is a big and important word, in my mind. Like sustainable development. Something to strive for. I think the poll would have more to do with democracy if the primary? arguments? would be easily available as links from the poll.? Also I think options like the following are missing : * The main thing is to get more activity and input, especially? from the "Global South". * More input from Asia is what I want. Excluding other inputs from the Global South is not what I want though * Global North centric activity should be toned down? * I do not know / not sure * Not interested And perhaps polls like this one should cater for a first, second and third priority choice. To illustrate with a U.S.A.? centric example (although I am not from the US) : Some persons would like to elect? Ralph Nader, and show their preference for him as president,? but in the (probable) event that he does not win, they would prefer to weigh in with the democrat candidate rather than the republican. I know I am stretching it. But democracy is worth streching for. Best Regards, Morten --- On Thu, 11/6/09, Paul Barter wrote: From: Paul Barter Subject: [sustran] Re: Only three days left to give your views To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Date: Thursday, 11 June, 2009, 9:17 AM It may seem daunting to go and find the opinion poll on World Streets. ? So here is a link that will take you straight there. ? Visit http://tinyurl.com/kuebe9 ?to go to vote for your preferred choice for the geographical focus of sustran-discuss. ? Paul ? Paul A. Barter | Assistant Professor | LKY School of Public Policy National University of Singapore | 469C Bukit Timah Road | Singapore 259772 | Tel: +65-6516 3324 | Fax: +65-6778 1020 | paulbarter@nus.edu.sg | http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/Faculty_Paul_Barter.aspx? http://reinventingtransport.blogspot.com/ ? From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sppbpa=nus.edu.sg@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: Thursday, 11 June 2009 4:06 PM To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Only three days left to give your views ? The Sustran geo focus poll over at World Streets ? www.worldstreets.org, a bit down on the left menu ? is giving some surprising results. Surprising to me at least. Wow! ? One of the things about democracy is that it teaches. ? Don?t forget to make your voice heard. A two minute deal for Sustran. Sustran deserves it. ? Eric Britton ? ? ??????? ???????????????World Streets (Plan B) ? ?????????????? Technology transforms time and space ??????????????????????????????????? ???????? . . . and our minds ? ? New Mobility Partnerships? ? http://www.newmobility.org ?????? & check out World Streets -- www.Worldstreets.org ??? ? Europe:?? 8/10 rue Joseph Bara,???? 75006 Paris,? France??? ????? ??T:? +331 4326 1323??or? +339 7044 4179?? Skype: ericbritton ??? ? USA:????? 9440 Readcrest Drive?? Los Angeles, CA? 90210???? ? ???? ???T:? +1 310 601-8468??? Skype : newmobility ? -----Inline Attachment Follows----- -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/c7e33fa9/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 12184 bytes Desc: image001.jpg Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090611/c7e33fa9/attachment.jpe From sudhir at cai-asia.org Sat Jun 13 08:39:28 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:39:28 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Beijing to build "public transport city" Message-ID: *Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??* see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read More @ http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090613/d7910d2d/attachment.html From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Sat Jun 13 21:15:28 2009 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:15:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Hi, An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be achieved. Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. Carlos. Sudhir wrote: > > /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ > > see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak > hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be > shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced > to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the > journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on > humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was > recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC > Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in > downtown areas > > According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new > transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by > implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. > > By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in > downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via > public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will > undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public > transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and > bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of > "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the > downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the > furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, > and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim > economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major > pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read > More @ > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From edelman at greenidea.eu Sun Jun 14 00:09:26 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 17:09:26 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" + Charter of Brussels In-Reply-To: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A33C126.3040105@greenidea.eu> re: YES, thanks, Carlos... that story could have said instead "Beijing aims for no more than 50% automobile modal share!" -- with little cycling or even walking mentioned its a half-empty cup. This cycling or PT modal share thing is too simplistic, its not keeping up with development, nor language... to refer to the theme of a sister List, I think it's an Old Mobility way of talking about transport.. Many cities in Europe have a very high modal share of public transport (Around 40% in Prague) or cycling (About 30 to 35% in Amsterdam and Copenhagen) but which cities have BOTH at those levels... and thus a very low private automobile modal share? And how about in some developing cities outside of Europe, where a lot of people can afford a car? And now the flip side... With a Europe-based mobility consultant I was discussing the "Charter of Brussels" launched at the recent Velo-City + which has one of its main features a commitment for cities which sign it to set a goal of a 15% modal share of cycling (or higher if that share is already achieved) by 2020. The Charter makes no mention of where these cyclists will come from and in fact at best only mentions public transport as one of several "other stakeholders". In a city with development policies, a commercial real estate industry and consumer behaviour which creates large - though still not peripheral - shopping centres at the expense of highly distributed small stores, an increase of cycling could simply come at the decrease of walking. No achievement at all unless you are trying to sell bikes or get people used to moving faster. Sure, this is an extreme case. The consultant suggested to me - something I would call Newer Mobility if not quite a totally un-Old Mobility way of thinking - that better would be to set a decreasing automobile modal share as the main goal. This would tend to create a joint project of walking, cycling, public transport AND dense urban planning actors - and together they could try to agree on goals for an increasing, composite, non-private automobile modal share which everyone would be happy with. Which cities or regions are already doing this? Regards, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory, Ex-Prussia and Occupied Mexico Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public > transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered > (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places > I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users > will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that > bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea > how this will be achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some > years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of > cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I > mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars > or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be >> shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced >> to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the >> journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on >> humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was >> recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC >> Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via >> public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will >> undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public >> transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and >> bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of >> "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the >> downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the >> furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, >> and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim >> economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major >> pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >> More @ >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). >> > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090613/764d6a27/attachment.html From sudhir at cai-asia.org Sun Jun 14 11:44:24 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 10:44:24 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Carlos and others, Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and priority is on public transport. Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think its a very good move...... The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with proportionate investment in 2020. In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) best regards Sudhir 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public > transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or > asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've > asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will > come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle > or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this > will be achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years > ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is > promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they > end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure > if it's the win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > >> >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> >> see >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to >> 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; >> public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green >> transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the >> Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public >> transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport >> during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent >> of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; >> building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average >> commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the >> travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no >> more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the >> Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of >> major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >> More @ >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- To search the >> archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- If you get >> sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). >> > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/dab7b88a/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Sun Jun 14 16:42:03 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 09:42:03 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A34A9CB.3090505@greenidea.eu> Hi Sudhir, Do you mean 20-25% as a goal by 2020? Prague has about 25% private car modal share and its pretty darn horrible. Of course I am not sure how this looks in other much larger cities but when so much driving is still possible, it is likely that a lot of people will still have private cars which end up sitting around most of the time, stored in public space. Stored on streets. A street is a public space between buildings, but when used for car storage it is simply a parking lot with a bit of natural activity, and with homes on the sides. (in addition to businesses and a few other facilities). I think we need to start asking ourselves why we want to live next to parking lots. - T Sudhir wrote: > Hi Carlos and others, > > Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and > priority is on public transport. > > Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good > investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think > its a very good move...... > > The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i > would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with > proportionate investment in 2020. > > In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private > automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) > > best regards > Sudhir > > > > > > 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > > > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future > public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is > seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a > problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally > say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or > the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport > users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be > achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use > some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the > "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad > in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding > bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the > win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > > > /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ > > > see > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway > trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus > stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will > account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. > "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological > and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed > and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing > Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys > in downtown areas > > According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will > construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's > needs for development, by implementing four major projects > including rail transit network project. > > By then, the public transport will become remarkably more > attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of > the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the > journeys will be via public transport during the commuting > period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total > passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily > passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over > 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means > that the average commuting time within the downtown area will > be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new > towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and > the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay > Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total > amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower > than that in 2008. Read More @ > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- To > search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- If > you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a > focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/0162ab92/attachment.html From patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com Sun Jun 14 18:54:47 2009 From: patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:24:47 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: <4A34A9CB.3090505@greenidea.eu> References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> <4A34A9CB.3090505@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <8fba064c0906140254g51f4d54fm54cd0e73c34ce76@mail.gmail.com> These are the right questions, but finding the right answers will not be easy as long as we are unable to convince the decision makers that unless we put a stop to the present car-oriented development, our problems will only get worse. -- Sujit On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > Hi Sudhir, > > Do you mean 20-25% as a goal by 2020? > > Prague has about 25% private car modal share and its pretty darn horrible. > Of course I am not sure how this looks in other much larger cities but when > so much driving is still possible, it is likely that a lot of people will > still have private cars which end up sitting around most of the time, stored > in public space. Stored on streets. A street is a public space between > buildings, but when used for car storage it is simply a parking lot with a > bit of natural activity, and with homes on the sides. (in addition to > businesses and a few other facilities). I think we need to start asking > ourselves why we want to live next to parking lots. > > - T > > Sudhir wrote: > > Hi Carlos and others, > > Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and > priority is on public transport. > > Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good investment > on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think its a very good > move...... > > The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i would be > happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with proportionate > investment in 2020. > > In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private automobiles > (20% in 2004) :-) > > best regards > Sudhir > > > > > > 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > >> Hi, >> >> An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public >> transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or >> asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've >> asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will >> come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle >> or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this >> will be achieved. >> >> Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some >> years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. >> So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will >> they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not >> sure if it's the win-win situation. >> >> Carlos. >> >> Sudhir wrote: >> >>> >>> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >>> >>> see >>> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >>> >>> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >>> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to >>> 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; >>> public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >>> areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green >>> transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the >>> Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public >>> transport city". >>> >>> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >>> >>> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >>> areas >>> >>> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >>> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >>> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >>> >>> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >>> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >>> areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport >>> during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent >>> of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >>> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; >>> building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average >>> commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the >>> travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no >>> more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the >>> Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of >>> major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >>> More @ >>> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >>> >>> -- >>> Sudhir Gota >>> Transport Specialist >>> CAI-Asia Center >>> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >>> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >>> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >>> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >>> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >>> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >>> Skype : sudhirgota >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- To search the >>> archives of sustran-discuss visit >>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- If you get >>> sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >>> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >>> >>> ================================================================ >>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >>> (the 'Global South'). >>> >> > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visithttp://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > edelman@greenidea.euwww.greenidea.euwww.facebook.com/toddedelmanwww.flickr.com/photos/edelman > > CAR is over. If you want it. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment to destroy the city? Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel Munich 1970 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sujit Patwardhan patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com sujitjp@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Parisar: www.parisar.org PTTF: www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/240df632/attachment.html From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Sun Jun 14 19:50:46 2009 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:50:46 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A34D606.3010806@gmail.com> Sudhir, You're right, sorry for the "black hat" You are right that it's much better to have more public transport prioritized than ring roads.in my position. What I meant is that the policy should include the reversal of anti-bicycle measures and even the creation of more pro-bicycle measures, and the continuation of car restriction measures (which started with the odd-even scheme during the Olympics but I'm not sure if any other similar measure has been implemented). I guess my point is that many measures can be seen as positive, but they are only effective when they are part of a broader agenda of sustainable urban transport (similar to what Sujit has said). Best regards, Carlos. Sudhir wrote: > Hi Carlos and others, > > Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and > priority is on public transport. > > Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good > investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think > its a very good move...... > > The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i > would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with > proportionate investment in 2020. > > In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private > automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) > > best regards > Sudhir > > > > > > 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > > > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future > public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is > seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a > problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally > say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or > the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport > users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be > achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use > some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the > "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad > in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding > bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the > win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > > > /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ > > > see > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway > trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus > stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will > account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. > "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological > and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed > and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing > Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys > in downtown areas > > According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will > construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's > needs for development, by implementing four major projects > including rail transit network project. > > By then, the public transport will become remarkably more > attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of > the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the > journeys will be via public transport during the commuting > period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total > passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily > passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over > 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means > that the average commuting time within the downtown area will > be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new > towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and > the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay > Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total > amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower > than that in 2008. Read More @ > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- To > search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- If > you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a > focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota From sguttikunda at gmail.com Sun Jun 14 20:58:43 2009 From: sguttikunda at gmail.com (Sarath Guttikunda) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 17:28:43 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: <4A34D606.3010806@gmail.com> References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> <4A34D606.3010806@gmail.com> Message-ID: <683ba1ca0906140458v1e1e82c2o1bca9f4725d88ffa@mail.gmail.com> A well written article in *Hindustan Times*, looking at the growing commuter problems in Beijing, despite six ring roads and comparisons to Delhi, which is building its third ring road and a metro line. *From Beijing, a lesson for Delhi Sunday, June 14th, 2009 * http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=255bf11f-8bcd-41f6-985e-9593ecfa5972 With regards, Sarath -- Sarath Guttikunda New Delhi, India Phone: +91 9891 315 946 Email: sguttikunda@gmail.com http://www.urbanemissions.info On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > Sudhir, > > You're right, sorry for the "black hat" You are right that it's much > better to have more public transport prioritized than ring roads.in my > position. What I meant is that the policy should include the reversal of > anti-bicycle measures and even the creation of more pro-bicycle > measures, and the continuation of car restriction measures (which > started with the odd-even scheme during the Olympics but I'm not sure if > any other similar measure has been implemented). > > I guess my point is that many measures can be seen as positive, but they > are only effective when they are part of a broader agenda of sustainable > urban transport (similar to what Sujit has said). > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > > Hi Carlos and others, > > > > Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and > > priority is on public transport. > > > > Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good > > investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think > > its a very good move...... > > > > The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i > > would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with > > proportionate investment in 2020. > > > > In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private > > automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) > > > > best regards > > Sudhir > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/43a57340/attachment.html From simon.bishop at dimts.in Mon Jun 15 15:57:00 2009 From: simon.bishop at dimts.in (Simon Bishop) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:27:00 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge modal share. I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing so. The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white elephant. The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+simon.bishop=dimts.in@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+simon.bishop=dimts.in@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:31 AM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org You can reach the person managing the list at sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." ######################################################################## Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are responding to. Many thanks. About this mailing list see: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss ######################################################################## Today's Topics: 1. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Carlosfelipe Pardo) 2. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" + Charter of Brussels (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) 3. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Sudhir) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:15:28 +0100 From: Carlosfelipe Pardo Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" To: Sudhir Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hi, An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be achieved. Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. Carlos. Sudhir wrote: > > /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ > > see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak > hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be > shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced > to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the > journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on > humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was > recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC > Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". > > Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. > > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in > downtown areas > > According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new > transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by > implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. > > By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. > Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in > downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via > public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will > undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public > transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and > bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of > "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the > downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the > furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, > and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim > economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major > pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read > More @ > http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 17:09:26 +0200 From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" + Charter of Brussels To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: <4A33C126.3040105@greenidea.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" re: YES, thanks, Carlos... that story could have said instead "Beijing aims for no more than 50% automobile modal share!" -- with little cycling or even walking mentioned its a half-empty cup. This cycling or PT modal share thing is too simplistic, its not keeping up with development, nor language... to refer to the theme of a sister List, I think it's an Old Mobility way of talking about transport.. Many cities in Europe have a very high modal share of public transport (Around 40% in Prague) or cycling (About 30 to 35% in Amsterdam and Copenhagen) but which cities have BOTH at those levels... and thus a very low private automobile modal share? And how about in some developing cities outside of Europe, where a lot of people can afford a car? And now the flip side... With a Europe-based mobility consultant I was discussing the "Charter of Brussels" launched at the recent Velo-City + which has one of its main features a commitment for cities which sign it to set a goal of a 15% modal share of cycling (or higher if that share is already achieved) by 2020. The Charter makes no mention of where these cyclists will come from and in fact at best only mentions public transport as one of several "other stakeholders". In a city with development policies, a commercial real estate industry and consumer behaviour which creates large - though still not peripheral - shopping centres at the expense of highly distributed small stores, an increase of cycling could simply come at the decrease of walking. No achievement at all unless you are trying to sell bikes or get people used to moving faster. Sure, this is an extreme case. The consultant suggested to me - something I would call Newer Mobility if not quite a totally un-Old Mobility way of thinking - that better would be to set a decreasing automobile modal share as the main goal. This would tend to create a joint project of walking, cycling, public transport AND dense urban planning actors - and together they could try to agree on goals for an increasing, composite, non-private automobile modal share which everyone would be happy with. Which cities or regions are already doing this? Regards, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory, Ex-Prussia and Occupied Mexico Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public > transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered > (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places > I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users > will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that > bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea > how this will be achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some > years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of > cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I > mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars > or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be >> shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced >> to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the >> journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on >> humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was >> recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC >> Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via >> public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will >> undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public >> transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and >> bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of >> "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the >> downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the >> furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, >> and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim >> economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major >> pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >> More @ >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). >> > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090613/764d6a27/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 10:44:24 +0800 From: Sudhir Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" To: Carlosfelipe Pardo Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Carlos and others, Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and priority is on public transport. Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think its a very good move...... The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with proportionate investment in 2020. In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) best regards Sudhir 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public > transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or > asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've > asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will > come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle > or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this > will be achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years > ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is > promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they > end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure > if it's the win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > >> >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> >> see >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to >> 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; >> public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green >> transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the >> Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public >> transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >> areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport >> during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent >> of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; >> building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average >> commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the >> travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no >> more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the >> Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of >> major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >> More @ >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- To search the >> archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- If you get >> sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). >> > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/dab7b88a/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 *********************************************** From sudhir at cai-asia.org Mon Jun 15 17:55:03 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:55:03 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> References: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Message-ID: Dear Simon and Others could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project deadline.... :-) 1. On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous ring-road development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by Sujit- http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) it also talks about cycling... *More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow* *Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 bicycle rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles available for rent exceeding 50,000 units. * I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should get more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions of metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am happy with either metro or BRTS as long as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose master thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe it is congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects for long, White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level interchanges as seen in Delhi. 2. Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to clean the air which everyone breaths). It should not be at the risk of providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. 3. I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month ( http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but again i am not sure.. 4. Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia with high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they get 25% of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT and PT get majority of investment and priority. thanks Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop > Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting in > Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean > motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' > solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on the > Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the > other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge > modal share. > > I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could make > public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small shift to > it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient and people > will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing so. The vast > majority of people use public transport in London and NY because they have > to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope that Beijing's > approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its > policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white elephant. > > The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and > faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more > convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing that > can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and > motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). > > In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where > you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and > feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of > the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is > 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times > greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of > door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! > This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, > particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and > there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an > argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand > Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090615/f4a268e7/attachment.html From simon.bishop at dimts.in Mon Jun 15 19:39:54 2009 From: simon.bishop at dimts.in (Simon Bishop) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:09:54 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: <4A360256.6080207@gmail.com> References: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> <4A360256.6080207@gmail.com> Message-ID: <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB80724BD@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Hi Carlos Sudhir and others, If you have a look at page 37, table 5 of the Mayor's Air Quality Strategy for London it gives you the emissions of different pollutants from cars, buses, taxis and coaches. This gives per passenger kilometer figures and for SO2 and PM10 they don't look good. On the emissions of CO2, I remember reading one of the Mayor's reports and being very shocked to find that actual energy consumption of buses was only a little better than half that of cars. As I understand it, to have a decent bus network one needs to run it out of peak periods when loading factors fall and fuel consumption per passenger rises. For this reason the bus network in London requires financial subsidies of 1 billion pounds a year to keep running. It is an excellent network and we pay for it with $ and energy. Now in cities like Delhi you don't yet have a public transport network that many with a choice of private, motorized transport would opt to use, so the figures that we quote on fuel efficiency NOW are not those that will exist with an improved network. Why? To get motorcyclists and car users to switch in future, or at least stay on the bus, even WITH very strong demand management measures and low fares, we'll need to increase frequency, add A/C in some cases, bring down the 'crush factor' and widen geographical scope, all of which will inevitably result in more energy consumed per passenger. It's hard to disagree with this line of thinking without adopting one standard of public transport comfort for 'the West' and one for the developing world. That's why I think land use controls, the bicycle and rickshaw have key (but not exclusive) roles to play in tackling climate change in the urban transport sector. Simon From: Carlosfelipe Pardo [mailto:carlosfpardo@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:42 PM To: Simon Bishop Subject: Re: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Simon, is your data assuming emissions and expenditure per vehicle or per passenger? I'd be thankful if you can clarify. Thanks! Carlos. Simon Bishop wrote: Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge modal share. I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing so. The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white elephant. The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+simon.bishop=dimts.in@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+simon.bishop=dimts.in@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:31 AM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org You can reach the person managing the list at sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." ######################################################################## Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are responding to. Many thanks. About this mailing list see: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss ######################################################################## Today's Topics: 1. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Carlosfelipe Pardo) 2. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" + Charter of Brussels (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) 3. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Sudhir) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:15:28 +0100 From: Carlosfelipe Pardo Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" To: Sudhir Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hi, An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be achieved. Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. Carlos. Sudhir wrote: /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read More @ http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 17:09:26 +0200 From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" + Charter of Brussels To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: <4A33C126.3040105@greenidea.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" re: YES, thanks, Carlos... that story could have said instead "Beijing aims for no more than 50% automobile modal share!" -- with little cycling or even walking mentioned its a half-empty cup. This cycling or PT modal share thing is too simplistic, its not keeping up with development, nor language... to refer to the theme of a sister List, I think it's an Old Mobility way of talking about transport.. Many cities in Europe have a very high modal share of public transport (Around 40% in Prague) or cycling (About 30 to 35% in Amsterdam and Copenhagen) but which cities have BOTH at those levels... and thus a very low private automobile modal share? And how about in some developing cities outside of Europe, where a lot of people can afford a car? And now the flip side... With a Europe-based mobility consultant I was discussing the "Charter of Brussels" launched at the recent Velo-City + which has one of its main features a commitment for cities which sign it to set a goal of a 15% modal share of cycling (or higher if that share is already achieved) by 2020. The Charter makes no mention of where these cyclists will come from and in fact at best only mentions public transport as one of several "other stakeholders". In a city with development policies, a commercial real estate industry and consumer behaviour which creates large - though still not peripheral - shopping centres at the expense of highly distributed small stores, an increase of cycling could simply come at the decrease of walking. No achievement at all unless you are trying to sell bikes or get people used to moving faster. Sure, this is an extreme case. The consultant suggested to me - something I would call Newer Mobility if not quite a totally un-Old Mobility way of thinking - that better would be to set a decreasing automobile modal share as the main goal. This would tend to create a joint project of walking, cycling, public transport AND dense urban planning actors - and together they could try to agree on goals for an increasing, composite, non-private automobile modal share which everyone would be happy with. Which cities or regions are already doing this? Regards, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory, Ex-Prussia and Occupied Mexico Carlosfelipe Pardo wrote: Hi, An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be achieved. Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. Carlos. Sudhir wrote: /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read More @ http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090613/764d6a27/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 10:44:24 +0800 From: Sudhir Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" To: Carlosfelipe Pardo Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Carlos and others, Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and priority is on public transport. Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think its a very good move...... The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with proportionate investment in 2020. In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) best regards Sudhir 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo Hi, An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be achieved. Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. Carlos. Sudhir wrote: /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read More @ http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/dab7b88a/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 *********************************************** -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090615/5baea268/attachment.html From lutman at globalnet.co.uk Mon Jun 15 22:08:37 2009 From: lutman at globalnet.co.uk (Peter Lutman) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:08:37 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: References: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp><247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Message-ID: Dear Sudhir, I have been following the discussion about Beijing's pro-public transport policies and I notice the comments about diesel-powered buses as almost as polluting per passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT route in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of suburban routes, it should be remembered that the central areas of the Chinese Capital are served by a very frequent and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new Trolleybuses were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics and since - and these vehilces produce neither noise nor air pollution at the point of operation. For the weird people who do not like overhead wires and feel that 'visual pollution' is as damaging to health and happiness as air pollution, the Trolleybuses operate on battery power across the main boulevard and through the central shopping streets, where there are no wires. Peter Lutman FCILT ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: Sudhir To: Simon Bishop Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Dear Simon and Others could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project deadline.... :-) 1. On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous ring-road development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by Sujit- http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) it also talks about cycling... More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 bicycle rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles available for rent exceeding 50,000 units. I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should get more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions of metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am happy with either metro or BRTS as long as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose master thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe it is congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects for long, White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level interchanges as seen in Delhi. 2. Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to clean the air which everyone breaths). It should not be at the risk of providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. 3. I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month (http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but again i am not sure.. 4. Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia with high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they get 25% of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT and PT get majority of investment and priority. thanks Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge modal share. I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing so. The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white elephant. The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090615/3caedadd/attachment.html From sudhir at cai-asia.org Mon Jun 15 22:36:35 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:36:35 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 In-Reply-To: References: <20090614030100.CF2C92BCDE@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <247EE4DD2AD33940B402771AC8C2CDFE2DB807243E@dimts-exch.dimts.org> Message-ID: Dear Peter, Thanks for the mail and please note the e-bike analysis from Chris Cherry from China - http://www.baq2008.org/system/files/sp5_Cherry+presentation.pdf... its interesting to note about e-bus with battery and wires. i have not seen any research on this. It would be interesting to note the impact of electric bus in China considering the lifecycle analysis... I am cc'ing chris if he can throw some light on the impact of e-buses. the logic of seeing the transport problem from only emissions perspective is not good.. but continuing the discussions on emissions... I would argue that buses and cars emissions are not the same on passenger km basis in Asia as the calculations depend on occupancies and we should never compare bad bus scenario with good car scenario. And we need to take the scenario of " what-if" seriously.. thanks Sudhir 2009/6/15 Peter Lutman > Dear Sudhir, > > I have been following the discussion about Beijing's pro-public transport > policies and I notice the comments about diesel-powered buses as almost as > polluting per passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT route > in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of suburban routes, it > should be remembered that the central areas of the Chinese Capital are > served by a very frequent and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new > Trolleybuses were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics and since - and > these vehilces produce neither noise nor air pollution at the point of > operation. For the weird people who do not like overhead wires and feel that > 'visual pollution' is as damaging to health and happiness as air pollution, > the Trolleybuses operate on battery power across the main boulevard and > through the central shopping streets, where there are no wires. > > Peter Lutman FCILT > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Sudhir > *To:* Simon Bishop > *Cc:* sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 > > Dear Simon and Others > > could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project > deadline.... :-) > > 1. On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. > Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT > integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are > inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major > change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, > but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous ring-road > development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by Sujit- > http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) it also > talks about cycling... > > *More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy > passenger flow* > *Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk > network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces > will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 bicycle > rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles available > for rent exceeding 50,000 units. * > > I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how > many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the > mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should get > more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions of > metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am happy with either metro or BRTS as long > as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose master > thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe it is > congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects for long, > White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level interchanges > as seen in Delhi. > > 2. Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) > that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people > but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I > pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam > because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was > subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to > clean the air which everyone breaths). It should not be at the risk of > providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But > considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized > or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. > > 3. I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses > applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail > Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month ( > http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his > paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can > feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from > any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on > passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but > again i am not sure.. > > 4. Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia with > high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal > automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they get 25% > of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT and PT get > majority of investment and priority. > > thanks > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop > >> Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting >> in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean >> motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' >> solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on the >> Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the >> other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge >> modal share. >> >> I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could >> make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small >> shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient >> and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing >> so. The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY >> because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope >> that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a >> lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white >> elephant. >> >> The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and >> faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more >> convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing that >> can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and >> motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). >> >> In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where >> you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and >> feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of >> the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is >> 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times >> greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of >> door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! >> This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, >> particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and >> there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an >> argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand >> Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. >> >> > ------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090615/f10b3094/attachment.html From shovan1209 at yahoo.com Mon Jun 15 23:01:23 2009 From: shovan1209 at yahoo.com (Saiful Alam) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] NMT Ban: Success or Failure? Message-ID: <341046.95087.qm@web57108.mail.re3.yahoo.com> NMT Ban:? Success or Failure? The NMT ban from Gabtoli to Russell Square was meant to be an experiment, the results of which would determine whether it would be extended.? From HDRC?s and our analysis, the experiment was in fact a failure and should not have been continued.? Even the World Bank, which initially pushed the ban, later admitted that the ban had not been implemented properly.* ? On 30 December, we received an e-mail from Guang Z. Chen, Sector Manager, Transport, South Asia Region of The World Bank.? In his e-mail, he stated that ?a number of key measures should be completed or in place before conversion of the next sections of arterial corridor to NMT-free operations.? In our view, these key measures include:? The provision of alternative/ complementary NMT routes for network continuity or for access to specific destinations (eg hospitals, markets, schools, etc), ... the provision of additional bus services, and effective enforcement of parking prohibitions along these corridors - to ensure that road capacity freed up as a result of the conversion leads to substantially improved public transport services along the corridor. ... ? ?We have advised the Government of Bangladesh and DTCB repeatedly and requested them to ensure that the above measures are implemented/in place BEFORE the conversion of the next sections of arterial road to NMT-free operations, so that the proposed action aimed at improving traffic conditions and circulation in Dhaka causes minimal severance of NMT networks and adequately mitigates adverse impacts on livelihood.? ? Where are the alternative/complementary NMT routes?? Where the additional bus services?? Where the provision of parking along the corridors?? How then can the ban be extended?? And yet it was. ? Syed Siful Alam?Shovan shovan1209@yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090615/dfd93402/attachment.html From adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com Mon Jun 15 21:12:34 2009 From: adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com (Dr Adhiraj Joglekar) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:12:34 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" Message-ID: I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. Cheers Adhiraj On 6/15/09, sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org wrote: > Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than > "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." > > > ######################################################################## > Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest > > IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your > reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are > responding to. Many thanks. > > About this mailing list see: > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > ######################################################################## > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) > 2. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Sujit Patwardhan) > 3. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Carlosfelipe Pardo) > 4. Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" (Sarath Guttikunda) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 09:42:03 +0200 > From: "Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory" > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > > Message-ID: <4A34A9CB.3090505@greenidea.eu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi Sudhir, > > Do you mean 20-25% as a goal by 2020? > > Prague has about 25% private car modal share and its pretty darn > horrible. Of course I am not sure how this looks in other much larger > cities but when so much driving is still possible, it is likely that a > lot of people will still have private cars which end up sitting around > most of the time, stored in public space. Stored on streets. A street is > a public space between buildings, but when used for car storage it is > simply a parking lot with a bit of natural activity, and with homes on > the sides. (in addition to businesses and a few other facilities). I > think we need to start asking ourselves why we want to live next to > parking lots. > > - T > > Sudhir wrote: >> Hi Carlos and others, >> >> Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and >> priority is on public transport. >> >> Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good >> investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think >> its a very good move...... >> >> The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i >> would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with >> proportionate investment in 2020. >> >> In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private >> automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) >> >> best regards >> Sudhir >> >> >> >> >> >> 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > > >> >> Hi, >> >> An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future >> public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is >> seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a >> problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally >> say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or >> the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport >> users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be >> achieved. >> >> Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use >> some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the >> "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad >> in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding >> bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the >> win-win situation. >> >> Carlos. >> >> Sudhir wrote: >> >> >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> >> see >> >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway >> trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus >> stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will >> account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. >> "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological >> and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed >> and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing >> Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys >> in downtown areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will >> construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's >> needs for development, by implementing four major projects >> including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more >> attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of >> the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the >> journeys will be via public transport during the commuting >> period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total >> passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over >> 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means >> that the average commuting time within the downtown area will >> be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new >> towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and >> the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay >> Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total >> amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower >> than that in 2008. Read More @ >> >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- To >> search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- If >> you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to >> join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of >> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a >> focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). > > > -- > -------------------------------------------- > > Todd Edelman > Green Idea Factory > > Urbanstr. 45 > D-10967 Berlin > Germany > > Skype: toddedelman > Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 > Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 > > edelman@greenidea.eu > www.greenidea.eu > www.facebook.com/toddedelman > www.flickr.com/photos/edelman > > CAR is over. If you want it. > > "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" > - B. Brecht (with slight modification) > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/0162ab92/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:24:47 +0530 > From: Sujit Patwardhan > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > To: edelman@greenidea.eu > Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > > Message-ID: > <8fba064c0906140254g51f4d54fm54cd0e73c34ce76@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > These are the right questions, but finding the right answers will not be > easy as long as we are unable to convince the decision makers that unless we > put a stop to the present car-oriented development, our problems will only > get worse. > -- > Sujit > > > > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > wrote: > >> Hi Sudhir, >> >> Do you mean 20-25% as a goal by 2020? >> >> Prague has about 25% private car modal share and its pretty darn horrible. >> Of course I am not sure how this looks in other much larger cities but >> when >> so much driving is still possible, it is likely that a lot of people will >> still have private cars which end up sitting around most of the time, >> stored >> in public space. Stored on streets. A street is a public space between >> buildings, but when used for car storage it is simply a parking lot with a >> bit of natural activity, and with homes on the sides. (in addition to >> businesses and a few other facilities). I think we need to start asking >> ourselves why we want to live next to parking lots. >> >> - T >> >> Sudhir wrote: >> >> Hi Carlos and others, >> >> Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and >> priority is on public transport. >> >> Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good investment >> on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think its a very good >> move...... >> >> The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i would >> be >> happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with proportionate >> investment in 2020. >> >> In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private automobiles >> (20% in 2004) :-) >> >> best regards >> Sudhir >> >> >> >> >> >> 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public >>> transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered >>> (or >>> asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places I've >>> asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users will >>> come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that >>> bicycle >>> or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea how this >>> will be achieved. >>> >>> Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some >>> years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of >>> cars. >>> So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I mean, >>> will >>> they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? >>> Not >>> sure if it's the win-win situation. >>> >>> Carlos. >>> >>> Sudhir wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >>>> >>>> see >>>> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >>>> >>>> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >>>> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be >>>> shortened to >>>> 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 >>>> minutes; >>>> public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >>>> areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological and >>>> green >>>> transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed and approved by the >>>> Standing Committee of CPC Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the >>>> "public >>>> transport city". >>>> >>>> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >>>> >>>> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >>>> downtown >>>> areas >>>> >>>> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >>>> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >>>> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >>>> >>>> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >>>> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown >>>> areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via public >>>> transport >>>> during the commuting period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 >>>> percent >>>> of total passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >>>> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over 25 million; >>>> building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means that the average >>>> commuting time within the downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the >>>> travel time from the furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be >>>> no >>>> more than 1 hour, and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in >>>> the >>>> Bohai Bay Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total >>>> amount of >>>> major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. >>>> Read >>>> More @ >>>> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sudhir Gota >>>> Transport Specialist >>>> CAI-Asia Center >>>> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >>>> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >>>> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >>>> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >>>> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >>>> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >>>> Skype : sudhirgota >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------- To search the >>>> archives of sustran-discuss visit >>>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------- If you get >>>> sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >>>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >>>> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >>>> >>>> ================================================================ >>>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >>>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >>>> (the 'Global South'). >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss >> visithttp://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). >> >> >> >> -- >> -------------------------------------------- >> >> Todd Edelman >> Green Idea Factory >> >> Urbanstr. 45 >> D-10967 Berlin >> Germany >> >> Skype: toddedelman >> Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 >> Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 >> edelman@greenidea.euwww.greenidea.euwww.facebook.com/toddedelmanwww.flickr.com/photos/edelman >> >> CAR is over. If you want it. >> >> "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" >> - B. Brecht (with slight modification) >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >> (the 'Global South'). >> > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment > to destroy the city? > > Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel > Munich 1970 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sujit Patwardhan > patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com > sujitjp@gmail.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India > Tel: +91 20 25537955 > Cell: +91 98220 26627 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Parisar: www.parisar.org > PTTF: www.pttf.net > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/240df632/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:50:46 +0100 > From: Carlosfelipe Pardo > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > To: Sudhir > Cc: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > > Message-ID: <4A34D606.3010806@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Sudhir, > > You're right, sorry for the "black hat" You are right that it's much > better to have more public transport prioritized than ring roads.in my > position. What I meant is that the policy should include the reversal of > anti-bicycle measures and even the creation of more pro-bicycle > measures, and the continuation of car restriction measures (which > started with the odd-even scheme during the Olympics but I'm not sure if > any other similar measure has been implemented). > > I guess my point is that many measures can be seen as positive, but they > are only effective when they are part of a broader agenda of sustainable > urban transport (similar to what Sujit has said). > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: >> Hi Carlos and others, >> >> Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and >> priority is on public transport. >> >> Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good >> investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think >> its a very good move...... >> >> The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i >> would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with >> proportionate investment in 2020. >> >> In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private >> automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) >> >> best regards >> Sudhir >> >> >> >> >> >> 2009/6/13 Carlosfelipe Pardo > > >> >> Hi, >> >> An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future >> public transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is >> seldom answered (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a >> problem. In many places I've asked that question and they normally >> say that future bicycle users will come from public transport, or >> the opposite. And when they say that bicycle or public transport >> users will come from cars, they have no idea how this will be >> achieved. >> >> Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use >> some years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the >> "promotion" of cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad >> in this scenario? I mean, will they end up with no one riding >> bicycles and the rest in cars or buses? Not sure if it's the >> win-win situation. >> >> Carlos. >> >> Sudhir wrote: >> >> >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> >> see >> >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> In peak hours, the minimum departure interval for subway >> trains will be shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus >> stops will be reduced to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will >> account for 45 percent of the journeys in downtown areas. >> "Beijing's implementation plan on humanistic, technological >> and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was recently reviewed >> and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC Beijing >> Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys >> in downtown areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will >> construct a new transport system meeting the capital city's >> needs for development, by implementing four major projects >> including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more >> attractive. Public transport will account for 45 percent of >> the journeys in downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the >> journeys will be via public transport during the commuting >> period. Rail transit will undertake around 50 percent of total >> passenger traffic of public transport, and the average daily >> passenger flow by rail transit and bus combined will be over >> 25 million; building a transport circle of "1-1-2" hours means >> that the average commuting time within the downtown area will >> be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the furthest new >> towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, and >> the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay >> Rim economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total >> amount of major pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower >> than that in 2008. Read More @ >> >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- To >> search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- If >> you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to >> join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of >> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a >> focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 17:28:43 +0530 > From: Sarath Guttikunda > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > To: "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" > > Message-ID: > <683ba1ca0906140458v1e1e82c2o1bca9f4725d88ffa@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > A well written article in *Hindustan Times*, looking at the growing commuter > problems in Beijing, despite six ring roads and comparisons to Delhi, which > is building its third ring road and a metro line. > > *From Beijing, a lesson for Delhi > Sunday, June 14th, 2009 > * > http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=255bf11f-8bcd-41f6-985e-9593ecfa5972 > > With regards, > Sarath > > -- > Sarath Guttikunda > New Delhi, India > Phone: +91 9891 315 946 > Email: sguttikunda@gmail.com > http://www.urbanemissions.info > > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Carlosfelipe Pardo > wrote: > >> Sudhir, >> >> You're right, sorry for the "black hat" You are right that it's much >> better to have more public transport prioritized than ring roads.in my >> position. What I meant is that the policy should include the reversal of >> anti-bicycle measures and even the creation of more pro-bicycle >> measures, and the continuation of car restriction measures (which >> started with the odd-even scheme during the Olympics but I'm not sure if >> any other similar measure has been implemented). >> >> I guess my point is that many measures can be seen as positive, but they >> are only effective when they are part of a broader agenda of sustainable >> urban transport (similar to what Sujit has said). >> >> Best regards, >> >> Carlos. >> >> Sudhir wrote: >> > Hi Carlos and others, >> > >> > Good news is instead of one more ring road at least the investment and >> > priority is on public transport. >> > >> > Now, if they keep up the funding on public transport with good >> > investment on non motorized transport and provide incentives, i think >> > its a very good move...... >> > >> > The question is how much of private transport share is bearable? i >> > would be happy with 20-25% of private mode share in Asian cities with >> > proportionate investment in 2020. >> > >> > In short if they can freeze the current mode share of private >> > automobiles (20% in 2004) :-) >> > >> > best regards >> > Sudhir >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090614/43a57340/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 13 > *********************************************** > From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jun 16 14:56:06 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 07:56:06 +0200 Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Reducing transportation's carbon consumption - Comments Message-ID: <00f701c9ee47$2d24e090$876ea1b0$@britton@ecoplan.org> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SjcoICtrgpI/AAAAAAAAA5A/mgIgKt6QU64/s2 00/p2p-nma.jpg Last Thursday, 11 June, we posted to World Streets an advanced working draft of a proposal and recommendations for a joint work program of the US Dept of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency in our area of expertise -- to be submitted after peer review here, and subsequent amendment, to the public site of organized by the National Journal in Washington DC where expert opinion is being gathered in a broad-based collaborative effort to provide high profile information and insights for the incoming Obama policy teams in those two important institutions. The original question posed by the National Journal team can be found here . along with all the responses to be posted as of this date. Our original draft posting of 11 June here . * Click here to access the Comments and peer discussion as of this date. (Recommended!) Our continuous challenge here, and beyond, is how can we help assemble the ideas, energies, and expertise of the broadest range of sources and views to help inform and guide public policy. While the other half of democracy is active citizenry, it is not always so evident how to achieve that. Each of us has to do their part. This process of public consultation and open peer review of which you have one example here is one we take very seriously, and if you have the time and taste to dig in here you will see why. As editor I find that this interactive process of mutually challenging our ideas is one of the great strengths of this World Streets project. And you, of course, are invited to add your comments to the above. Eric Britton Editor -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090616/ee93659e/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 4903 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090616/ee93659e/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3473 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090616/ee93659e/attachment-0001.jpe From voodikon at yahoo.com Tue Jun 16 19:43:42 2009 From: voodikon at yahoo.com (jane.) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 03:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Message-ID: <104032.34627.qm@web39501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On the subject, TIME ran an article today about e-bikes in China: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1904334,00.html Probably won't shed much light on these particular matters, but it was an interesting read nonetheless and as an added bonus links to a slideshow of bicycle photos. Unfortunately its conclusion is still very much car-centric, presuming that e-cars will be the way of the future. Jane --- On Mon, 6/15/09, Sudhir wrote: From: Sudhir Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 To: "Peter Lutman" Cc: "Simon Bishop" , "Cherry, Christopher Robin" , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Date: Monday, June 15, 2009, 9:36 PM Dear Peter, Thanks for the mail and please note the? e-bike analysis from Chris Cherry from China - http://www.baq2008.org/system/files/sp5_Cherry+presentation.pdf ... its interesting to note about e-bus with battery and wires. i have not seen any research on this. It would be interesting to note the impact of electric bus in China considering the lifecycle analysis...? I am cc'ing chris if he can throw some light on the impact of e-buses. the logic of seeing the transport problem from only emissions perspective is not good.. but continuing the discussions on emissions... I would argue that buses and cars emissions are not the same on passenger km basis in Asia as the calculations depend on occupancies and we should never compare bad bus scenario with good car scenario.? And we need to take the scenario of " what-if" seriously.. thanks Sudhir 2009/6/15 Peter Lutman Dear Sudhir, ? I have been following the discussion about Beijing's pro-public transport policies and I notice the comments about diesel-powered buses as almost as polluting per passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT route in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of suburban routes, it should be remembered that the central areas of the Chinese Capital are served by a very frequent and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new Trolleybuses were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics and since - and these vehilces produce neither noise nor air pollution at the point of operation. For the weird people who do not like overhead wires and feel that 'visual pollution' is as damaging to health and happiness as air pollution, the Trolleybuses operate on battery power across the main boulevard and through the central shopping streets, where there are no wires. ? Peter Lutman FCILT ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** ? ? ----- Original Message ----- From: Sudhir To: Simon Bishop Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 Dear Simon and Others could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project deadline.... :-) 1.??? On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous ring-road development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by Sujit- http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) it also talks about cycling... More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 bicycle rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles available for rent exceeding 50,000 units.? I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should get more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions of metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am? happy with either metro or BRTS as long as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose master thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe it is congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects for long, White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level interchanges as seen in Delhi. 2.??? Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to clean the air which everyone breaths).? It should not be at the risk of providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. 3.??? I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month (http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but again i am not sure.. 4.??? Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia with high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they get 25% of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT and PT get majority of investment and priority. thanks Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. ?From where I'm sitting in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' solution to growing automobile use. ?A huge amount of emphasis is put on the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the other externalities). ?Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge modal share. I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small shift to it from the car (6%). ?The fact is that cars are damn convenient and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing so. ?The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. ?I hope that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white elephant. The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and faster than the bus over short to medium distances. ?Why swap a more convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? ?The only thing that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. ?Where you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of the car. ?Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times greater - that's not much of an improvement. ?In Taipei, taking account of door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! ?This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -----Inline Attachment Follows----- -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090616/5e4a2a74/attachment.html From cherry at utk.edu Tue Jun 16 22:25:50 2009 From: cherry at utk.edu (Chris Cherry) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:25:50 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I haven?t done or seen much research on the relative effect of trolley buses vis-a-vis diesel buses. One study conducted over a decade ago analyzes the San Francisco Muni bus system, but direct comparisons are difficult because of terrain issues and SF?s use of trolley buses on the steepest routes because of performance characteristics. Moreover, the most obvious problem with direct comparisons is the regional differences of electricity emissions, depending on source. One other issue that is gaining traction is actually measuring exposure (and thus public health) differences (regardless of emission rate) between presumably rural power plant emissions compared to tailpipe emissions. I?m working on a conference paper that will be presented at the PACE summer camp in Kunming in July, looking at this issue. Initial results show that power plant emissions have one order of magnitude lower exposure efficiency (intake fraction) in most Chinese cities compared to tailpipe emissions in the city, so electric vehicles are at an initial 10x advantage regardless of emission rate. The PACE paper is early results and I?ll most likely have a more complete report to share in the fall if you?re interested. Chris Cherry Assistant Professor Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Tennessee-Knoxville 223 Perkins Hall Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 phone: 865-974-7710 mobile: 865-684-8106 fax: 865-974-2669 http://web.utk.edu/~cherry On 6/15/09 9:36 AM, "Sudhir" wrote: > Dear Peter, > > Thanks for the mail and please note the? e-bike analysis from Chris Cherry > from China - http://www.baq2008.org/system/files/sp5_Cherry+presentation.pdf > ... > > its interesting to note about e-bus with battery and wires. i have not seen > any research on this. It would be interesting to note the impact of electric > bus in China considering the lifecycle analysis...? I am cc'ing chris if he > can throw some light on the impact of e-buses. > > the logic of seeing the transport problem from only emissions perspective is > not good.. but continuing the discussions on emissions... > > I would argue that buses and cars emissions are not the same on passenger km > basis in Asia as the calculations depend on occupancies and we should never > compare bad bus scenario with good car scenario.? And we need to take the > scenario of " what-if" seriously.. > > thanks > Sudhir > > > > 2009/6/15 Peter Lutman >> Dear Sudhir, >> ? >> I have been following the discussion about Beijing's pro-public transport >> policies and I notice the comments about diesel-powered buses as almost as >> polluting per passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT route >> in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of suburban routes, it should >> be remembered that the central areas of the Chinese Capital are served by a >> very frequent and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new Trolleybuses >> were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics and since - and these vehilces >> produce neither noise nor air pollution at the point of operation. For the >> weird people who do not like overhead wires and feel that 'visual pollution' >> is as damaging to health and happiness as air pollution, the Trolleybuses >> operate on battery power across the main boulevard and through the central >> shopping streets, where there are no wires. >> ? >> Peter Lutman FCILT >> ******************************************************************** >> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended >> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended >> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. >> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or >> distribute its contents to any other person. >> ******************************************************************** >> ? >> ? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: Sudhir >>> >>> To: Simon Bishop >>> >>> Cc: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >>> >>> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM >>> >>> Subject: [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 >>> >>> >>> Dear Simon and Others >>> >>> could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project >>> deadline.... :-) >>> >>> 1.??? On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. >>> Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT >>> integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are >>> inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major >>> change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, >>> but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous ring-road >>> development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by Sujit- >>> http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) it also >>> talks about cycling... >>> >>> More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy >>> passenger flow >>> Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk >>> network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces >>> will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 >>> bicycle rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles >>> available for rent exceeding 50,000 units.? >>> >>> I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how >>> many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the >>> mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should >>> get more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions >>> of metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am? happy with either metro or BRTS as >>> long as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose >>> master thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe >>> it is congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects >>> for long, White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level >>> interchanges as seen in Delhi. >>> >>> 2.??? Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) >>> that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people >>> but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I >>> pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam >>> because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was >>> subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to >>> clean the air which everyone breaths).? It should not be at the risk of >>> providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But >>> considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized >>> or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. >>> >>> 3.??? I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses >>> applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail >>> Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month >>> (http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his >>> paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can >>> feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from >>> any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on >>> passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but >>> again i am not sure.. >>> >>> 4.??? Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia with >>> high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal >>> automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they get 25% >>> of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT and PT get >>> majority of investment and priority. >>> >>> thanks >>> Sudhir Gota >>> Transport Specialist >>> CAI-Asia Center >>> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >>> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >>> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >>> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >>> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >>> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >>> Skype : sudhirgota >>> >>> >>> 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop >>> >>>> Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. ?From where I'm sitting >>>> in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean >>>> motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' >>>> solution to growing automobile use. ?A huge amount of emphasis is put on >>>> the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all >>>> the other externalities). ?Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a >>>> huge modal share. >>>> >>>> I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could >>>> make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small >>>> shift to it from the car (6%). ?The fact is that cars are damn convenient >>>> and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing >>>> so. ?The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY >>>> because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. ?I hope >>>> that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a >>>> lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white >>>> elephant. >>>> >>>> The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and >>>> faster than the bus over short to medium distances. ?Why swap a more >>>> convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? ?The only thing >>>> that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and >>>> motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). >>>> >>>> In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. ?Where >>>> you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and >>>> feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that >>>> of the car. ?Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a >>>> bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 >>>> times greater - that's not much of an improvement. ?In Taipei, taking >>>> account of door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy >>>> than a car! ?This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public >>>> transport, particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the >>>> better, and there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or >>>> walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand >>>> Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >>> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real >>> sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >>> >>> ================================================================ >>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries >>> (the 'Global South'). > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090616/bbc2851a/attachment.html From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Wed Jun 17 06:28:59 2009 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:28:59 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" In-Reply-To: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> References: <4A339860.8050202@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090616172859.82043jv0jellsneo@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Carlos Felipe Complicating the issue is that as cities grow in size, average travel distances to work get longer and bicycle trips become infeasible for many people. Thus, efforts have to be made to stop the segregation of residential and employment destinations to provide more nearby work possibilities. It should also be possible to carry bikes on trains and to increase bikeshare facilities at major bus and train stations. Eric Bruun Quoting Carlosfelipe Pardo : > Hi, > > An interesting question is if they in Beijing expect the future public > transport users to come from cars or bicycles... this is seldom answered > (or asked) in any of these schemes and remains a problem. In many places > I've asked that question and they normally say that future bicycle users > will come from public transport, or the opposite. And when they say that > bicycle or public transport users will come from cars, they have no idea > how this will be achieved. > > Beijing used to have an extremely high mode share of bicycle use some > years ago, and it has now fallen to pieces due to the "promotion" of > cars. So is promoting public transport good or bad in this scenario? I > mean, will they end up with no one riding bicycles and the rest in cars > or buses? Not sure if it's the win-win situation. > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: >> >> /Beijing has set a target, how about other cities??/ >> >> see http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. In peak >> hours, the minimum departure interval for subway trains will be >> shortened to 2 minutes; the waiting time at bus stops will be reduced >> to 3 to 5 minutes; public transport will account for 45 percent of the >> journeys in downtown areas. "Beijing's implementation plan on >> humanistic, technological and green transport" (from 2009 to 2015) was >> recently reviewed and approved by the Standing Committee of CPC >> Beijing Municipal Committee, unveiling the "public transport city". >> >> Beijing will transform into a "public transport city" by 2015. >> >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas >> >> According to the plan, from 2009 to 2015, Beijing will construct a new >> transport system meeting the capital city's needs for development, by >> implementing four major projects including rail transit network project. >> >> By then, the public transport will become remarkably more attractive. >> Public transport will account for 45 percent of the journeys in >> downtown areas, while over 50 percent of the journeys will be via >> public transport during the commuting period. Rail transit will >> undertake around 50 percent of total passenger traffic of public >> transport, and the average daily passenger flow by rail transit and >> bus combined will be over 25 million; building a transport circle of >> "1-1-2" hours means that the average commuting time within the >> downtown area will be no more than 1 hour, the travel time from the >> furthest new towns to the Fifth Ring Road will be no more than 1 hour, >> and the travel time from Beijing to major cities in the Bohai Bay Rim >> economic region will be less than 2 hours. The total amount of major >> pollutants emitted by vehicles will be lower than that in 2008. Read >> More @ >> http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/beijingnews/200906/t20090612_524515.htm >> >> -- >> Sudhir Gota >> Transport Specialist >> CAI-Asia Center >> Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, >> ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City >> Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 >> Tel: +63-2-395-2843 >> Fax: +63-2-395-2846 >> http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia >> Skype : sudhirgota >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >> http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >> real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >> ================================================================ >> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >> countries (the 'Global South'). > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the > real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing > countries (the 'Global South'). > > From whook at itdp.org Wed Jun 17 14:47:52 2009 From: whook at itdp.org (Walter Hook) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 01:47:52 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: i wrote a paper on trolley buses in sao paulo with some data. i think it is on our web site. seems like a reasonable option in many cases. On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Chris Cherry wrote: > I haven?t done or seen much research on the relative effect of trolley > buses vis-a-vis diesel buses. One study conducted over a decade ago analyzes > the San Francisco Muni bus system, but direct comparisons are difficult > because of terrain issues and SF?s use of trolley buses on the steepest > routes because of performance characteristics. Moreover, the most obvious > problem with direct comparisons is the regional differences of electricity > emissions, depending on source. One other issue that is gaining traction is > actually measuring exposure (and thus public health) differences (regardless > of emission rate) between presumably rural power plant emissions compared to > tailpipe emissions. I?m working on a conference paper that will be > presented at the PACE summer camp in Kunming in July, looking at this issue. > Initial results show that power plant emissions have one order of magnitude > lower exposure efficiency (intake fraction) in most Chinese cities compared > to tailpipe emissions in the city, so electric vehicles are at an initial > 10x advantage regardless of emission rate. The PACE paper is early results > and I?ll most likely have a more complete report to share in the fall if > you?re interested. > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > *http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > * > > On 6/15/09 9:36 AM, "Sudhir" wrote: > > Dear Peter, > > Thanks for the mail and please note the e-bike analysis from Chris Cherry > from China - > http://www.baq2008.org/system/files/sp5_Cherry+presentation.pdf ... > > its interesting to note about e-bus with battery and wires. i have not seen > any research on this. It would be interesting to note the impact of electric > bus in China considering the lifecycle analysis... I am cc'ing chris if he > can throw some light on the impact of e-buses. > > the logic of seeing the transport problem from only emissions perspective > is not good.. but continuing the discussions on emissions... > > I would argue that buses and cars emissions are not the same on passenger > km basis in Asia as the calculations depend on occupancies and we should > never compare bad bus scenario with good car scenario. And we need to take > the scenario of " what-if" seriously.. > > thanks > Sudhir > > > > 2009/6/15 Peter Lutman > > Dear Sudhir, > > I have been following the discussion about Beijing's pro-public transport > policies and I notice the comments about diesel-powered buses as almost as > polluting per passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT route > in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of suburban routes, it > should be remembered that the central areas of the Chinese Capital are > served by a very frequent and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new > Trolleybuses were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics and since - and > these vehilces produce neither noise nor air pollution at the point of > operation. For the weird people who do not like overhead wires and feel that > 'visual pollution' is as damaging to health and happiness as air pollution, > the Trolleybuses operate on battery power across the main boulevard and > through the central shopping streets, where there are no wires. > > Peter Lutman FCILT > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:* Sudhir > > > *To:* Simon Bishop > > > > *Cc:* sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM > > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 12 > > > Dear Simon and Others > > could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite of looming project > deadline.... :-) > > 1. On the question of Beijing - I agree with many of your statements. > Good public transport is not BRTS or Metro but one with good NMT > integration. For me both public transport and non motorized transport are > inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing initiatives. I see a major > change in its focus and i am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, > but i believe that what they are doing is to negate their previous > ring-road development strategy. If you look at this link (provided by > Sujit- http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) > it also talks about cycling... > > *More bicycle parking spaces will be established in areas with heavy > passenger flow > Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle lanes and sidewalk > network for pedestrians will be constructed and more bicycle parking spaces > will be established in areas with heavy passenger flow. Around 1,000 > bicycle rental service stands will be set up, with the number of bicycles > available for rent exceeding 50,000 units. > * > I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even don't know as to how > many bike lanes they are proposing but yet you can feel the change in the > mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from Olympics. We should > get more insights from our Chinese colleagues...We have had many sessions > of metro vs BRTS in sustran and I am happy with either metro or BRTS as > long as they put the money for NMT and public Transport. For me whose > master thesis was on flyovers (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe > it is congested again :-) ) and having worked in infrastructure projects > for long, White elephants like metro?s are much better than multi-level > interchanges as seen in Delhi. > > 2. Regarding free public transport - I believe ( my personal opinion) > that you don't have to provide free public transport to only attract people > but to reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... ( why should I > pay when I am standing, since I did not get any seat, struck in a jam > because of the traffic by the people travelling in their own car which was > subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while making my effort to > clean the air which everyone breaths). It should not be at the risk of > providing sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, good... But > considering the poor people paying for tickets i would argue for subsidized > or free yet comfortable services... It is much better than subsidized fuel. > > > 3. I don't again agree to London example of high emissions buses > applicable in any format to Asia. I had good discussions with Mikhail > Chester whose analysis is the topic of the month ( > http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). If you look at his > paper and the media quotes ( there are several from past week)... you can > feel as to how story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers from > any Asian city and what you would see is that Cars can never be compared on > passenger km basis. With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but > again i am not sure.. > > 4. Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in cities, I think in Asia > with high probability of private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of > personal automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as long as they > get 25% of investments and pay all external costs while people using NMT > and PT get majority of investment and priority. > > thanks > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > > 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop > > > Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. From where I'm sitting > in Delhi there is a tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I mean > motorized and electrified, through rose tinted glasses as if it is 'the' > solution to growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis is put on > the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve congestion (never mind about all the > other externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored despite holding a huge > modal share. > > I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who showed that you could > make public transport free in the UK and still only effect a very small > shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that cars are damn convenient > and people will use them unless they are literally prized away from doing > so. The vast majority of people use public transport in London and NY > because they have to, and parking control is the main mechanism. I hope > that Beijing's approach will witness parking restraint and pricing as a > lynchpin of its policy, otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white > elephant. > > The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role of cycling as better and > faster than the bus over short to medium distances. Why swap a more > convenient form of transport for a less convenient one? The only thing > that can compete with the car over these distances is the bicycle (and > motorcycle, which should also be deterred for safety reasons). > > In terms of our greatest challenge, global warming I am perturbed. Where > you have quality bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak and > feeder services) they consume amounts of per capita energy rivaling that of > the car. Quoting London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of a bus > is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 times and SO2 emissions 25 times > greater - that's not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking account of > door to door emissions, the Metro actually consumes more energy than a car! > This should not be construed as an argument AGAINST public transport, > particularly buses, after all the more of us that use them the better, and > there will always be a need for those who cannot cycle or walk, but it IS > an argument for Beijing to prioritize Travel Demand > Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as the key policy to follow. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090617/655671a7/attachment.html From sutp at sutp.org Wed Jun 17 15:55:01 2009 From: sutp at sutp.org (SUTP Team) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:25:01 +0530 Subject: [sustran] GTZ SUTP's Sourcebook on Sustainable Transport available as print version Message-ID: <4A389345.5020301@sutp.org> GTZ SUTP?s flagship publication ?Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Countries? has been adapted for the South Asian audience and is available as a print version. The South Asian version of the sourcebook is titled ?Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in South Asian Cities?. The two volumes of this edition contain 12 modules specifically selected and adapted for the South Asian context. Dr. Ramachandran, Secretary to the Government of India (Urban Development), Ministry of Urban Development, underlines in his foreword: ?The Sourcebook can serve as a toolkit for policy-makers in the state and city governments and support them in adopting sustainable transport solutions for their respective cities?. Prof. Shivanand Swamy, Associate Director, CEPT, points out in his preface to the publication: ?that [it] will provide guidance to the city administrators and planners in a variety of topics from urban transport institutions to details of planning for non-motorized transport, including other important issues such as bus regulation and planning and bus rapid transit.? Both dignitaries agree that the publication would increase the understanding of the readers on various urban transport issues and help policy-makers make sustainable choices for their cities. The sourcebook supports the view of the National Urban Transport Policy-2006 (NUTP)'s recommendation on moving people and not vehicles, among various other principles. The above mentioned edition is published by McMillan Publishers, New Delhi and is available for purchase from the publishers. Queries about purchasing the print copies can be sent to sutp[at]sutp.org or to Mr. Santhosh Kodukula (santhoshk.kodukula[at]gtz.de). SUTP Team -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090617/6ba30c57/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Wed Jun 17 16:48:57 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:48:57 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A389FE9.5000106@greenidea.eu> Hi Chris, While I am sure your paper will have have useful results, a comparison between trolley and Diesel buses only seems a little old fashioned. Better, it seems, would be one between those with on- or "off-board" traction, i.e. trolley buses with different sources of energy AND buses which carry their own engine, or indeed engine and motors. For the latter I am speaking of course of the various types of Diesel used in Diesel-engined buses, but also CNG/Bio-methane buses and Diesel-electrics with and without ultracapacitors. Or even methane-electrics, if they exist. There are also trolleys with supplemental engines to get through non-wired areas, but while becoming more common (see Skoda transportation) are not a true "hybrid". All of these are present in greater or lesser numbers in actual daily use, and, given the relatively short lifespan of buses, appear as new solutions so often in cities as to be almost untrackable. I lived in San Francisco for a long time and found trolley buses vastly superior in terms of audible noise compared to the Diesels there, but somewhat inferior in terms of visual noise, i.e. all the wires and the poles to support them. I am also curious about trolley buses and transmission-loss, i.e the relative energy efficiency of electric-powered buses in regards to the actual physical location of a power source. This sort of look of course also applies to buses with on-board power, i.e. is the fuel from recycled waste cooking oil ? (and how much energy is embedded in that) or imported across vast distances, e.g. natural gas from Russia to Western Europe.... But also it seems that in systems with both trolley buses and Diesels, etc. the former would have higher occupancy rates as they would tend to operate more in central areas. This also effects affects. (Affects effects?). - T Walter Hook wrote: > i wrote a paper on trolley buses in sao paulo with some data. i think > it is on our web site. > > seems like a reasonable option in many cases. > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Chris Cherry > wrote: > > I haven?t done or seen much research on the relative effect of > trolley buses vis-a-vis diesel buses. One study conducted over a > decade ago analyzes the San Francisco Muni bus system, but direct > comparisons are difficult because of terrain issues and SF?s use > of trolley buses on the steepest routes because of performance > characteristics. Moreover, the most obvious problem with direct > comparisons is the regional differences of electricity emissions, > depending on source. One other issue that is gaining traction is > actually measuring exposure (and thus public health) differences > (regardless of emission rate) between presumably rural power plant > emissions compared to tailpipe emissions. I?m working on a > conference paper that will be presented at the PACE summer camp in > Kunming in July, looking at this issue. Initial results show that > power plant emissions have one order of magnitude lower exposure > efficiency (intake fraction) in most Chinese cities compared to > tailpipe emissions in the city, so electric vehicles are at an > initial 10x advantage regardless of emission rate. The PACE paper > is early results and I?ll most likely have a more complete report > to share in the fall if you?re interested. > > > Chris Cherry > Assistant Professor > Civil and Environmental Engineering > University of Tennessee-Knoxville > 223 Perkins Hall > Knoxville, TN 37996-2010 > phone: 865-974-7710 > mobile: 865-684-8106 > fax: 865-974-2669 > _http://web.utk.edu/~cherry > > _ > > On 6/15/09 9:36 AM, "Sudhir" > wrote: > > Dear Peter, > > Thanks for the mail and please note the e-bike analysis from > Chris Cherry from China - > http://www.baq2008.org/system/files/sp5_Cherry+presentation.pdf > ... > > its interesting to note about e-bus with battery and wires. i > have not seen any research on this. It would be interesting to > note the impact of electric bus in China considering the > lifecycle analysis... I am cc'ing chris if he can throw some > light on the impact of e-buses. > > the logic of seeing the transport problem from only emissions > perspective is not good.. but continuing the discussions on > emissions... > > I would argue that buses and cars emissions are not the same > on passenger km basis in Asia as the calculations depend on > occupancies and we should never compare bad bus scenario with > good car scenario. And we need to take the scenario of " > what-if" seriously.. > > thanks > Sudhir > > > > 2009/6/15 Peter Lutman > > > Dear Sudhir, > > I have been following the discussion about Beijing's > pro-public transport policies and I notice the comments > about diesel-powered buses as almost as polluting per > passenger kilometre as private cars. While the first BRT > route in Beijing uses diesel buses as do the hundreds of > suburban routes, it should be remembered that the central > areas of the Chinese Capital are served by a very frequent > and intensive Trolleybus network. Hundreds of new > Trolleybuses were acquired both before the 2008 Olympics > and since - and these vehilces produce neither noise nor > air pollution at the point of operation. For the weird > people who do not like overhead wires and feel that > 'visual pollution' is as damaging to health and happiness > as air pollution, the Trolleybuses operate on battery > power across the main boulevard and through the central > shopping streets, where there are no wires. > > Peter Lutman FCILT > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the > intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the > intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the > sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor > disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:* Sudhir > > *To:* Simon Bishop > > *Cc:* sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > > *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2009 9:55 AM > > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol > 70, Issue 12 > > > Dear Simon and Others > > could not stop myself from sending this mail in spite > of looming project deadline.... :-) > > 1. On the question of Beijing - I agree with many > of your statements. Good public transport is not BRTS > or Metro but one with good NMT integration. For me > both public transport and non motorized transport are > inclusive and exclusive. But I defer on Beijing > initiatives. I see a major change in its focus and i > am happy with this. I have never been to Beijing, but > i believe that what they are doing is to negate their > previous ring-road development strategy. If you look > at this link (provided by Sujit- > http://www.cctv.com/english/special/excl/20090610/110347_1.shtml) > it also talks about cycling... > > /More bicycle parking spaces will be established in > areas with heavy passenger flow > Pedestrian and bicycle service project: special cycle > lanes and sidewalk network for pedestrians will be > constructed and more bicycle parking spaces will be > established in areas with heavy passenger flow. > Around 1,000 bicycle rental service stands will be > set up, with the number of bicycles available for rent > exceeding 50,000 units. > / > I agree that it?s not a major investment and i even > don't know as to how many bike lanes they are > proposing but yet you can feel the change in the > mindset. They have been focusing heavily on TDM from > Olympics. We should get more insights from our Chinese > colleagues...We have had many sessions of metro vs > BRTS in sustran and I am happy with either metro or > BRTS as long as they put the money for NMT and public > Transport. For me whose master thesis was on flyovers > (I made it feasible in 2003 and and i believe it is > congested again :-) ) and having worked in > infrastructure projects for long, White elephants like > metro?s are much better than multi-level interchanges > as seen in Delhi. > > 2. Regarding free public transport - I believe ( > my personal opinion) that you don't have to provide > free public transport to only attract people but to > reward people for traveling in an eco friendly way... > ( why should I pay when I am standing, since I did not > get any seat, struck in a jam because of the traffic > by the people travelling in their own car which was > subsidized by government, consuming polluted air while > making my effort to clean the air which everyone > breaths). It should not be at the risk of providing > sub standard services... If people can afford to pay, > good... But considering the poor people paying for > tickets i would argue for subsidized or free yet > comfortable services... It is much better than > subsidized fuel. > > 3. I don't again agree to London example of high > emissions buses applicable in any format to Asia. I > had good discussions with Mikhail Chester whose > analysis is the topic of the month > (http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/). > If you look at his paper and the media quotes ( there > are several from past week)... you can feel as to how > story was modified with? We can calculate the numbers > from any Asian city and what you would see is that > Cars can never be compared on passenger km basis. > With two wheelers ? there may be possibilities.. but > again i am not sure.. > > 4. Regarding Todd's comment on 25% share in > cities, I think in Asia with high probability of > private vehicles being two wheelers, 25% of personal > automobile share would be okay ( i would be happy) as > long as they get 25% of investments and pay all > external costs while people using NMT and PT get > majority of investment and priority. > > thanks > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > > > 2009/6/15 Simon Bishop > > > > Like Carlos I am skeptical of this announcement. > From where I'm sitting in Delhi there is a > tendency to see 'public transport', and by that I > mean motorized and electrified, through rose > tinted glasses as if it is 'the' solution to > growing automobile use. A huge amount of emphasis > is put on the Metro and now BRT as ways to solve > congestion (never mind about all the other > externalities). Bicycles and legs are ignored > despite holding a huge modal share. > > I think it was the Indian economist Dasgupta who > showed that you could make public transport free > in the UK and still only effect a very small > shift to it from the car (6%). The fact is that > cars are damn convenient and people will use them > unless they are literally prized away from doing > so. The vast majority of people use public > transport in London and NY because they have to, > and parking control is the main mechanism. I > hope that Beijing's approach will witness parking > restraint and pricing as a lynchpin of its policy, > otherwise it will be a funding drain and a white > elephant. > > The rose tinted spectacles also ignore the role > of cycling as better and faster than the bus over > short to medium distances. Why swap a more > convenient form of transport for a less > convenient one? The only thing that can compete > with the car over these distances is the bicycle > (and motorcycle, which should also be deterred > for safety reasons). > > In terms of our greatest challenge, global > warming I am perturbed. Where you have quality > bus systems (with good timetables in the off peak > and feeder services) they consume amounts of per > capita energy rivaling that of the car. Quoting > London again, the average actual CO2 emissions of > a bus is 40% that of a car, PM10 emissions are 3 > times and SO2 emissions 25 times greater - that's > not much of an improvement. In Taipei, taking > account of door to door emissions, the Metro > actually consumes more energy than a car! This > should not be construed as an argument AGAINST > public transport, particularly buses, after all > the more of us that use them the better, and > there will always be a need for those who cannot > cycle or walk, but it IS an argument for Beijing > to prioritize Travel Demand > Management/Walking/Cycling/Land Use Planning as > the key policy to follow. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go > to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > to join the real sustran-discuss and get full > membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport > with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join > the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus > on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090617/8f003910/attachment.html From lutman at globalnet.co.uk Wed Jun 17 22:50:31 2009 From: lutman at globalnet.co.uk (Peter Lutman) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:50:31 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel In-Reply-To: <4A389FE9.5000106@greenidea.eu> References: <4A389FE9.5000106@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <0633EE40BC8B4C15891EFB1DE4996EEA@PeterPC> Dear Todd, While you have a point about the various combinations of fuel / motive power, so many of these appear to 'gimmicks' or even actively dangerous that they hardly merit serious research. There are systems which clearly lead the way. Arnhem in Holland and Lyons in France use trolleybuses with car engines driving a generator for the occasional off-wire diversion. San Francisco uses batteries for the same reason, but given the 21% slopes, I doubt whether they would get a laden bus up the 1 or 24 routes. And of course Vancouver which has renewed its large fleet is another system using batteries as the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). In China Beijing and Guangzhou (both flat cities) also use battery APUs and, like the others mentioned, are extremely popular and efficient 'leader' systems. In France, Nancy decided to install guided trolleybuses (steered in the suburbs) and the guidance rail system caused major problems. Even after months of testing, the guided sections of the system are slow and noisy. Caen installed a wholly guided system, so they could use a pantograph to collect the 600V power and the single guidance rail as the negative earth return. Even they have had a recent spectacular derailment causing a 2-day suspension of service. These are further examples of 'gimmicks' just to be different which can be ignored. Economically, one needs sufficient demand to justify 6 journeys per hour over most of the system to justify the power supply infrastructure for trolleybus operation. With APUs short extensions can be tried without extending the overhead (Guangzhou serves a new suburban bus interchange successfully in this way with routes 109-112). Visual Noise as Todd describes it, is not a negative but rather a positive element. The rails and wires for a tramway show potential users that there is public transport infrastructure and contribute to its appeal. (According to the LRTA website, when Liverpool, UK, replaced its tramway system with diesel buses only 70% of the tram patronage was retained by public transport). Similarly the overhead wires attract people to trolleybus routes which in many instances have attracted 16-20% gains in patronage when replacing diesel buses on the same route. Of course the smooth, silent, comfortable ride will also be a help in achieving this, so the Chinese experiments in Shanghai with super-capacitor electric buses which top-up their charge at every third bus stop may still improve on their diesel counterparts. Obviously there will be many lower demand routes which can only economically be served by hydrocarbon fuelled buses. I am all in favour of clean, low sulphur diesel fuel. Again, however, the LPG/CNG/Hydrogen/Hybrid alternatives generally appear 'gimmicky' and in Swiss and USA cities where there have been spectacular explosions with some of these alternative fuels they appear to have significant safety drawbacks. Is it really worth researching modes which fail to achieve their targeted benefits and are generally avoided by most commercial bus operators? Richard M Soberman wrote a report considering the economic aspects of reintroducing trolley buses in Toronto (January 2009), and while some of his conclusions may be arguable (trolleybuses and their infrastructure can last three times as long as diesel vehicles) there may be useful data there. It might also be worth considering management attitudes and abilities and their impact on the economics of different modes with particular reference to Edmonton's hasty abandonment of its electric system and tearing down millions of dollars worth of infrastructure. Peter Lutman FCILT ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Cc: Simon Bishop ; Chris Cherry Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:48 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel Hi Chris, While I am sure your paper will have have useful results, a comparison between trolley and Diesel buses only seems a little old fashioned. Better, it seems, would be one between those with on- or "off-board" traction, i.e. trolley buses with different sources of energy AND buses which carry their own engine, or indeed engine and motors. For the latter I am speaking of course of the various types of Diesel used in Diesel-engined buses, but also CNG/Bio-methane buses and Diesel-electrics with and without ultracapacitors. Or even methane-electrics, if they exist. There are also trolleys with supplemental engines to get through non-wired areas, but while becoming more common (see Skoda transportation) are not a true "hybrid". All of these are present in greater or lesser numbers in actual daily use, and, given the relatively short lifespan of buses, appear as new solutions so often in cities as to be almost untrackable. I lived in San Francisco for a long time and found trolley buses vastly superior in terms of audible noise compared to the Diesels there, but somewhat inferior in terms of visual noise, i.e. all the wires and the poles to support them. I am also curious about trolley buses and transmission-loss, i.e the relative energy efficiency of electric-powered buses in regards to the actual physical location of a power source. This sort of look of course also applies to buses with on-board power, i.e. is the fuel from recycled waste cooking oil ? (and how much energy is embedded in that) or imported across vast distances, e.g. natural gas from Russia to Western Europe.... But also it seems that in systems with both trolley buses and Diesels, etc. the former would have higher occupancy rates as they would tend to operate more in central areas. This also affects effects. - T -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090617/1b0509f4/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Thu Jun 18 02:03:02 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:03:02 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel In-Reply-To: <0633EE40BC8B4C15891EFB1DE4996EEA@PeterPC> References: <4A389FE9.5000106@greenidea.eu> <0633EE40BC8B4C15891EFB1DE4996EEA@PeterPC> Message-ID: <4A3921C6.4020308@greenidea.eu> Hi, Peter Lutman wrote: > Dear Todd, > > While you have a point about the various combinations of fuel / motive > power, so many of these appear to 'gimmicks' or even actively > dangerous that they hardly merit serious research. WHEN cars took to the roads for the first time, they had all sorts of problems with their engines. People used to have to walk down the street in front of them with a warning flag. Going back a bit, horses left lovely organiser fertilizer around which now has to be replaced by petroleum based stuff. Things can work well or not so well in both directions. > There are systems which clearly lead the way. Arnhem in Holland and > Lyons in France use trolleybuses with car engines driving a generator > for the occasional off-wire diversion. Also in some parts of Slovakia and the Czech Republic, > San Francisco uses batteries for the same reason, but given the 21% > slopes, I doubt whether they would get a laden bus up the 1 or 24 routes. THANKS, didnt know about that. > And of course Vancouver which has renewed its large fleet is another > system using batteries as the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). > In China Beijing and Guangzhou (both flat cities) also use battery > APUs and, like the others mentioned, are extremely popular and > efficient 'leader' systems. GOOD > In France, Nancy decided to install guided trolleybuses (steered in > the suburbs) and the guidance rail system caused major problems. Even > after months of testing, the guided sections of the system are slow > and noisy. Caen installed a wholly guided system, so they could use a > pantograph to collect the 600V power and the single guidance rail as > the negative earth return. Even they have had a recent spectacular > derailment causing a 2-day suspension of service. These are further > examples of 'gimmicks' just to be different which can be ignored. > Economically, one needs sufficient demand to justify 6 journeys per > hour over most of the system to justify the power supply > infrastructure for trolleybus operation. SOUNDS good. > With APUs short extensions can be tried without extending the overhead > (Guangzhou serves a new suburban bus interchange successfully in this > way with routes 109-112). OK > Visual Noise as Todd describes it, is not a negative but rather a > positive element. The rails and wires for a tramway show potential > users that there is public transport infrastructure and contribute to > its appeal. (According to the LRTA website, when Liverpool, UK, > replaced its tramway system with diesel buses only 70% of the tram > patronage was retained by public transport). Similarly the overhead > wires attract people to trolleybus routes which in many instances have > attracted 16-20% gains in patronage when replacing diesel buses on the > same route. YES, of course it is positive for the way you describe but just as an additional benefit. I think rails make the case for trams. Picking a trolley should be decided "blind". > Of course the smooth, silent, comfortable ride will also be a help in > achieving this, so the Chinese experiments in Shanghai with > super-capacitor electric buses which top-up their charge at every > third bus stop may still improve on their diesel counterparts. OH, I didnt know that method of using ultracaps was already being used in China... I just knew about its proposed or theoretical application in Europe. Thanks. > Obviously there will be many lower demand routes which can only > economically be served by hydrocarbon fuelled buses. I am all in > favour of clean, low sulphur diesel fuel. FROM what petroleum source? Oilsands? Iraq? > Again, however, the LPG/CNG/Hydrogen/Hybrid alternatives generally > appear 'gimmicky' and in Swiss and USA cities where there have been > spectacular explosions with some of these alternative fuels they > appear to have significant safety drawbacks. Is it really worth > researching modes which fail to achieve their targeted benefits and > are generally avoided by most commercial bus operators? CNG buses are used all over for years... how many explosions in that time? > Richard M Soberman wrote a report considering the economic aspects of > reintroducing trolley buses in Toronto (January 2009), and while some > of his conclusions may be arguable (trolleybuses and their > infrastructure can last three times as long as diesel vehicles) there > may be useful data there. It might also be worth considering > management attitudes and abilities and their impact on the economics > of different modes with particular reference to Edmonton's hasty > abandonment of its electric system and tearing down millions of > dollars worth of infrastructure. NYC and Prague also removed their trolley bus systems.... not sure what reports exist. - T > > > Peter Lutman FCILT > > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory > > *To:* sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > *Cc:* Simon Bishop ; Chris Cherry > > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:48 AM > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: Electric Trolley Buses vs. Diesel > > Hi Chris, > > While I am sure your paper will have have useful results, a > comparison between trolley and Diesel buses only seems a little > old fashioned. > > Better, it seems, would be one between those with on- or > "off-board" traction, i.e. trolley buses with different sources of > energy AND buses which carry their own engine, or indeed engine > and motors. For the latter I am speaking of course of the various > types of Diesel used in Diesel-engined buses, but also > CNG/Bio-methane buses and Diesel-electrics with and without > ultracapacitors. Or even methane-electrics, if they exist. There > are also trolleys with supplemental engines to get through > non-wired areas, but while becoming more common (see Skoda > transportation) are not a true "hybrid". All of these are present > in greater or lesser numbers in actual daily use, and, given the > relatively short lifespan of buses, appear as new solutions so > often in cities as to be almost untrackable. > > I lived in San Francisco for a long time and found trolley buses > vastly superior in terms of audible noise compared to the Diesels > there, but somewhat inferior in terms of visual noise, i.e. all > the wires and the poles to support them. > > I am also curious about trolley buses and transmission-loss, i.e > the relative energy efficiency of electric-powered buses in > regards to the actual physical location of a power source. This > sort of look of course also applies to buses with on-board power, > i.e. is the fuel from recycled waste cooking oil ? (and how much > energy is embedded in that) or imported across vast distances, > e.g. natural gas from Russia to Western Europe.... > > But also it seems that in systems with both trolley buses and > Diesels, etc. the former would have higher occupancy rates as they > would tend to operate more in central areas. This also affects > effects. > > - T > > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090617/e0a3b8ad/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 19 16:04:38 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:04:38 +0200 Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Drive Train Technology vs. New Mobility Message-ID: <013a01c9f0ac$398a35d0$ac9ea170$@britton@ecoplan.org> >From World Streets today: - Chris Bradshaw, Ottawa, Canada The real efficiency in transportation will come from social innovations, or should I say, return to social practices. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SjpaPU-hOZI/AAAAAAAAA7g/w8Wc1fATcYo/s2 00/ws-bradshaw.jpgAs a former carshare provider, I consider sharing to be mankind's oldest technology. "Technology?" Yes, because it takes some invention to get it to work so that it is sustainable -- so that it doesn't self-destruct. When sharing occurs on a small scale -- within the family or between neighbours and friends -- it needs little technology other than people being kind and attentive to a small number of others. Simple individual memory keeps track of favour and payback. Many cars are shared on this informal scale. When it occurs at a larger scale, more formality is necessary. And there is a role for electronic/communications technology and formality of roles. Who owns the cars? Who makes sure they are roadworthy? Who makes sure each user pays his rightful share of the common costs? Who decides whether rules on access are being followed. More complicated? Yes, but also more flexible and more powerfully efficient. The informal method can only handle maybe three drivers, and what happens when two of them want the vehicle for the same time slot? Formal sharing can handle the 20-60 users that currently is the rule, and that is for a boutique market that hasn't yet led to land-use reforms that will squeeze out distance for all people's trips. It is also before we get advanced carsharing in which several members going the same way simultaneously can share (trans-seat,' see next), and at the destination, the car is released for another route and driver, rather than sitting idle, thanks to each leg of the trip being separately reserved. Our suburbs and our competitive consumption patterns ("I have more/better 'stuff' that you.") have done a great deal to make sharing a dirty word. People have been coached by champions of consumer growth to protect their privacy, no matter how lonely that makes them. And how expensive it is to acquire so much stuff, most of which is not the right model for the buyer, is under-utilized, and is ineptly maintained? People drive cars alone not just because they want fast, no -wait transportation; they also are buying privacy (and if many other people are seeking the same on the same section of road at the same time, the no-wait criterion will vanish). Many, much of the time, don't even want to share a ('their') car with other members of the household. But we are seeing with the internet that people who are guarded in their dealings with neighbours and friends are quite open with complete strangers in the anonymous world of the internet. Formal carsharing uses this propensity to provide essentially anonymous sharing, mediated by a computer and its service organization. My concept of transit, which I have dubbed "trans-seat," uses shared vehicles to allow this sharing to expand from consecutive to simultaneous, but without the ridesharing experience which tries to create an instant community, but soon becomes 4-7 people plugged into personal MP3 players and phones. It seems that people are more keen on being open to strangers when they aren 't trapped into a repetitive situation. This is the market which "trans-seat" will try to tap, making it a kind of sharing between ridesharing and transit. With each seat accessible to the outside via its own door, there will not be any need for sharing physical space inside the vehicle. There will also be no "standing" area -- either you have a seat or you are not a passenger (no second-class patrons). Reservations will also be possible, so that a trip across town via several vehicles, for a small fee, can be seat-guaranteed (including a bicycle seat) for each 'leg' of the trip. The 'trans-seat' vehicle's driver, another member going somewhere, but who meets higher driver standards, will get a break on his travel fees for doing the extra chore of piloting (although not going off his route, as those accessing a seat will walk to a 'pod' -- pedestrian-oriented depot -- on the nearest arterial on their own (taxis and valet carsharing/rental will still do the door-to-door thing). These are some of the elements of sharing in transportation that I have been thinking about. They are all intended to squeeze out all the extra metal and space that are not productive. That re-establishes walking as the primary mode for neighbourhoods, transit and 'trans-seat' for inter-neighbourhood travel in cities, and common-carriers (bus, train, boat, plane) for the rarer long trips. There won't be much room for the personal car, except in museums. If we get it right, people will find more freedom and enough privacy to make them wonder what was it they saw in having, maintaining, storing, and earning money to transform public thoroughfares and semi-public parking lots into private spaces, especially when they have to pay the piper for the privilege. About the author: Chris retired from city & regional planning in 1996, and co-founded Ottawa's carsharing company, Vrtucar in 2000. He has been an advocate for walking and pedestrian rights for 30 years. In retirement, he is championing a society-wide transition to a second-generation version of carsharing (integrating car-sharing, taxis, ridesharing, car-rental, and delivery). He lives 'car-lite' in downtown Ottawa with his wife of 40 years. -- Posted By Eric Britton to World Streets at 6/19/2009 05:34:00 AM __._,_.___ . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/2703c124/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 4239 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/2703c124/attachment.jpe From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 19 19:07:33 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:07:33 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Quo vadis Sustran Message-ID: <01ba01c9f0c5$c564c930$502e5b90$@britton@ecoplan.org> Dear Sustran Friends, In my enthusiasm for keeping focus on the original Sustran region for the reasons we have discussed, I decided to post a little poll to World Streets at www.worldstreets.org , the result of which I can now report to you. Visitors were invited to indicate their preference for either (a) Asia/Pacific (the original Sustran focus), (b) Asia only, or (c) Asia +Africa + Latin America + Middle East. I was inwardly confident that (a) was going to win the day. Wrong! Fatally wrong. We had 26 of our number who expressed their preferences, 20 (76%) voted for (c), 5 for my favorite pony, and a grand total of one to make us into an Asia only forum. Blow me down. One thing about democracy is that it surprises. So the ayes have it, but let me have a last shot at sharing my views with you on this. If there were one part of the world in which I would like to focus my own networking efforts it would be Africa. But I have yet to figure to how to do this usefully. The attached map of recent visitors coming in today reveals a familiar pattern for the New Mobility Agenda website. The EU area and North America are networking just fine, and while you can't see it here, Latin America (entirely driven by Spanish and Portuguese) is increasingly well networking as the result of some hard work by a few people over the last several year. But poor Africa is out of touch, and not only in this map. Here is what I think is going to happen next. The actual bulk of the discussions will continue to focus on the original Sustran region de facto. What we need however is to increase the level of discourse and exchange which incidentally in the last weeks has picked up nicely. But we do need to extend the group, and somehow need to figure out how to make that Sustran/China handshake work. We will hear episodically from Latin America, Europe and North America, but the main course will continue to be Asia/Pacific. Here by the way is the chart showing the number of postings per month over the last decade., from 3 to 150, a fair range and a message in itself. To close out this note announcing my crushing defeat at your collective hands, a word on the social quality of our Sustran family. Like all of you I have been around a fair number of these groups, of wildly varying quality and sociability. But Sustran is certainly the most genteel, the most gentle of them all. May we continue to get together with our ideas, news and suggestions in this wonderful spirit. Eric Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/21904247/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 11269 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/21904247/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 25439 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/21904247/attachment.jpe From Lize at sustainable.org.za Fri Jun 19 21:16:26 2009 From: Lize at sustainable.org.za (Lize Jennings) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:16:26 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Quo vadis Sustran In-Reply-To: <01ba01c9f0c5$c564c930$502e5b90$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <01ba01c9f0c5$c564c930$502e5b90$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <000f01c9f0d7$c81935a0$584ba0e0$@org.za> Hello from South Africa I've been part of this discussion group for the last three years since starting work in the field of sustainable transport (coming from an environmental background rather than a transport background). I've enjoyed the discussion from other parts of the world and the experiences from other developing countries and seeing how we can gain from what other cities have done. I must admit that I have been quiet about my experiences in SA, but will endeavor to share more stories from South Africa, in particularly Cape Town where I am based over time in increase the African voice on this group. Regards Lize Lize Jennings Project Manager Sustainable Energy Africa Tel: 021 702 3622 Fax: 021 702 3625 Cell: 083 414 7384 E-mail: Lize@sustainable.org.za SEA Website: www.sustainable.org.za Tran:SIT Website : www.sustainable.org.za/transit From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton Sent: 19 June 2009 12:08 PM To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Quo vadis Sustran Dear Sustran Friends, In my enthusiasm for keeping focus on the original Sustran region for the reasons we have discussed, I decided to post a little poll to World Streets at www.worldstreets.org , the result of which I can now report to you. Visitors were invited to indicate their preference for either (a) Asia/Pacific (the original Sustran focus), (b) Asia only, or (c) Asia +Africa + Latin America + Middle East. I was inwardly confident that (a) was going to win the day. Wrong! Fatally wrong. We had 26 of our number who expressed their preferences, 20 (76%) voted for (c), 5 for my favorite pony, and a grand total of one to make us into an Asia only forum. Blow me down. One thing about democracy is that it surprises. So the ayes have it, but let me have a last shot at sharing my views with you on this. If there were one part of the world in which I would like to focus my own networking efforts it would be Africa. But I have yet to figure to how to do this usefully. The attached map of recent visitors coming in today reveals a familiar pattern for the New Mobility Agenda website. The EU area and North America are networking just fine, and while you can't see it here, Latin America (entirely driven by Spanish and Portuguese) is increasingly well networking as the result of some hard work by a few people over the last several year. But poor Africa is out of touch, and not only in this map. Here is what I think is going to happen next. The actual bulk of the discussions will continue to focus on the original Sustran region de facto. What we need however is to increase the level of discourse and exchange which incidentally in the last weeks has picked up nicely. But we do need to extend the group, and somehow need to figure out how to make that Sustran/China handshake work. We will hear episodically from Latin America, Europe and North America, but the main course will continue to be Asia/Pacific. Here by the way is the chart showing the number of postings per month over the last decade., from 3 to 150, a fair range and a message in itself. To close out this note announcing my crushing defeat at your collective hands, a word on the social quality of our Sustran family. Like all of you I have been around a fair number of these groups, of wildly varying quality and sociability. But Sustran is certainly the most genteel, the most gentle of them all. May we continue to get together with our ideas, news and suggestions in this wonderful spirit. Eric Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/aafd0ef9/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 11269 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/aafd0ef9/attachment.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 25439 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/aafd0ef9/attachment.jpe From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 19 22:35:08 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:35:08 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Take two minutes please. Thanks. Eric Britton Message-ID: <026e01c9f0e2$c5b4ded0$511e9c70$@britton@ecoplan.org> If you have had a chance to swing over to World Streets - www.worldstreets.org - any time since we went on line on 2 March, you may have found some good value there. And if you have I would like to invite you now to click here in order to send us a couple of lines of encouragement. You'll see how it works once there. This should take you all of two minutes to whip off two short lines -- and this we can then take to various agencies and foundations whom we intend to approach for support. Getting out a daily edition of Streets, plus maintain our other new mobility focus sites such as this one, is a surprisingly big deal in terms of time and resources required. But if you are taking the time to read this note, you know that this work can be useful. We have never charged for anything for our public interest web sites since the New Mobility Agenda first got into gear back in 1988 -- and would hate to do so. Against not only our principles of free access, but also it would also have the pernicious effect of narrowing the number of people thinking about sustainable transport, sustainable cities, and sustainable lives. That would be a great pity and a loss. So all you have to do is click here right now, spin your short sentence, and then you will know that you have done your part. And we can continue to do ours. Thanks, Eric Britton - editor@worldstreets.org Editor, World Streets Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton This map records the origins of people who have come into World Streets for a read this morning. (If only we served coffee too.) cid:image006.png@01C9F0D5.FB9A6630 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/d709c1a2/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 180181 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/d709c1a2/attachment-0001.png From etts at indigo.ie Sat Jun 20 00:01:57 2009 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:01:57 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality buses later. I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" To: Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > Cheers > > Adhiraj > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/801be39e/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Sat Jun 20 03:46:13 2009 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:46:13 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> References: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> Message-ID: <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> I think it is very important to start improving public transit service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the lower end of the market. The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: >Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which >value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of >money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we >spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against >the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? > >Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the >expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were >growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want >buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) >engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from >donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more >sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That >said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the >quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do >have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > >In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > >1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum >acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a >big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that >makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is >to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so >obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually >consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what >features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what >would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where >do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and >where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? > >2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, >spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value >after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of >reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a >vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? >Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other >makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the >Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? > >3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be >undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses >additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side >issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full >knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year >economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can >offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business >and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of >better quality buses later. > >I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite >the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city >needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive >bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find >we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. > >For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on >previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual >outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We >need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for >good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and >decision-takers. > >With best wishes, > > >Brendan. >_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >Brendan Finn e-mail : >etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" ><adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> >To: ><sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> >Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM >Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more > investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one > has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For > example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - > but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in > Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the > craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior > in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London > buses for past 8 years and being a medic I > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's > spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called > differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of > their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence > of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and > now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who > are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to > see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be > struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only > because it got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this > regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to > confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > >-------------------------------------------------------- >To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > >-------------------------------------------------------- >If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to >http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the >real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >countries (the 'Global South'). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/a3f91b28/attachment.html From etts at indigo.ie Sat Jun 20 04:23:17 2009 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:23:17 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: Dear Todd, I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations in the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples of their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour and fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is often because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - which would be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper maintenance costs. In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are faced in Global South that are not so important in the developed/high-wage economies: 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more expensive maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match the revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same payment terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make the repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest rates, with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable collateral requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go to bus repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after 5 years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not possible to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This forces many cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of high-quality buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand or keeping the bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or (b) going for a higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and brings in more revenue immediately. 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of protection from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the longer your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be a good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their knowledge with us. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Todd Alexander Litman To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? I think it is very important to start improving public transit service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the lower end of the market. The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality buses later. I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > Cheers > > Adhiraj > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/fd0e20af/attachment.html From patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com Sat Jun 20 05:02:32 2009 From: patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:32:32 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: References: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <8fba064c0906191302p274cc000i40d428aa41f4b7b6@mail.gmail.com> It depends on ones objectives. Even when the priority is for improvement of the basic city bus service, one must understand that introduction of better quality, semi-low floor or low floor buses, AC buses and even BRT are perfectly valid efforts that deserve to be supported by Citizens/NGOs involved in sustainable transportation advocacy. It's not enough to say that one can buy three ordinary buses for the cost of one high quality AC bus. This is because the poor image of bus based public transport needs an urgent make-over if it is to win the support and ridership from the elite class of citizens, who today are strongly pushing for more and more infrastructure for the automobile dominated transportation model - such as flyovers, elevated roads, and free/cheap parking facilities - all of which work against NMT and Public Transport. -- Sujit On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Brendan Finn wrote: > Dear Todd, > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations in > the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area > primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples of > their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour and > fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is > often because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - which > would be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding > proper maintenance costs. > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are > faced in Global South that are not so important in the developed/high-wage > economies: > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more expensive > maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher > proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare > might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It > takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match the > revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the > spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same payment > terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make the > repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest rates, > with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable collateral > requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go to bus > repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after 5 > years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not possible > to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This forces many > cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of high-quality > buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand or keeping the > bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or (b) going for a > higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and brings in more > revenue immediately. > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of > subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of protection > from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be > disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the longer > your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these > aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be a > good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their knowledge > with us. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Todd Alexander Litman > *To:* Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit service > quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable > service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless > services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such > as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization > rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we > are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the > lower end of the market. > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle > capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little > more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders > (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a > worthwhile investment. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set > drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly > for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we > balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a > larger number of less-expensive models? > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. > People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break > down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often > the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and > engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them > more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past > decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you > really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable > standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price > to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There > is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and > target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and > bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to > understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, > what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do > we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we > waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare > parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 > years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the > later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same > performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where > Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. > How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up > in the cost-quality curve? > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? > If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it > better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance > vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 > year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and > revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality > buses later. > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many > inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its > own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the > best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce > investment money. > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes > compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn > where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share > that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment > needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the > monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in > India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? > I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses > that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any > inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > past 8 years and being a medic I > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine > than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified > by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. > posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people > leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon > in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed > of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see > someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to > get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it > got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard > elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as > simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment to destroy the city? Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel Munich 1970 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sujit Patwardhan patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com sujitjp@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India Tel: +91 20 25537955 Cell: +91 98220 26627 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Parisar: www.parisar.org PTTF: www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090620/fec5d82c/attachment.html From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Sat Jun 20 05:16:24 2009 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:16:24 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: References: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <20090619161624.157811a3qhqciiis@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Todd and Brendan: You are both right. So it would make sense for the richer countries to give financial add in the form of modern buses. Better that they export subsidized buses than subsidized weapons, SUVs, etc. Eric Bruun Quoting Brendan Finn : > Dear Todd, > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus > operations in the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', > which is the area primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many > multiples of their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many > countries labour and fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the > costs. However, this is often because the companies are operating > fully depreciated vehicles - which would be considered life-expired > elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper maintenance costs. > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues > are faced in Global South that are not so important in the > developed/high-wage economies: > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more > expensive maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a > much higher proportion of the total costs. From the payback > viewpoint, a single fare might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less > in Africa or parts of Asia. It takes the revenue of 10 passengers in > many African/Asian cities to match the revenue from 1 North American > or European passenger, but the bus and the spare parts cost the same > amount in both countries. > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same > payment terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required > to make the repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at > higher interest rates, with a significant deposit, and sometimes > with unreasonable collateral requirements. This means that a lot > more of the daily earnings go to bus repayment in the early years, > even if you do fully own the bus after 5 years. However, you might > have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not > possible to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. > This forces many cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller > number of high-quality buses insufficient to meet the need - leading > to unmet demand or keeping the bad-quality vehicles in circulation > for a few more years; or (b) going for a higher number of lower-cost > buses that meets the need and brings in more revenue immediately. > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, > of subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of > protection from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases > there may be disruption of social order and stability. The more you > spend and the longer your payback period, the more vulnerable you > become. > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these > aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This > would be a good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to > share their knowledge with us. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Todd Alexander Litman > To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit > service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and > more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as > on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service > performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or > passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service > maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are > encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve > the lower end of the market. > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. > Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If > spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability > or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who > would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which > value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of > money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we > spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against > the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive > models? > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that > the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were > growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want > buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) > engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from > donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more > sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That > said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the > quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do > have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum > acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a > big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that > makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is > to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so > obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually > consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what > features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what > would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where > do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and > where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost > little? > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including > maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its > residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is > the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle > life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year > as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes > and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much > ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in > the cost-quality curve? > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses > additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side > issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full > knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year > economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business > and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of > better quality buses later. > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, > despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each > city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more > expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we > might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following > up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the > actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and > justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original > expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among > practitioners and decision-takers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more > investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has > to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For > example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - > but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in > Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the > craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in > cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with > green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > past 8 years and being a medic I > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to > one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called > differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of > their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see > evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a > Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus > user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai > who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great > to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be > struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral > reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only > because it got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this > regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to > confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > From etts at indigo.ie Sat Jun 20 05:36:02 2009 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:36:02 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: <8fba064c0906191302p274cc000i40d428aa41f4b7b6@mail.gmail.com> References: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <8fba064c0906191302p274cc000i40d428aa41f4b7b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Sujit, I completely agree with you that it depends on the objectives. This is why I stressed in my first posting the importance of talking to the customers. We need to understand what is important to them and their relative priorities. This applies to all of us 'experts' - city authorities, bus operators, planners, researchers, consultants, and advocacy groups. If the customers tell us that air-con, low-floor, modernity and self-image are the most important things, then we must focus on quality and spend more on each bus. But if they tell us that what is important is to be able to get to many different places (i.e. more routes in a well developed network) or that they want more frequent services, or they want less crowding, or they want cheap tariffs, then we probably need to focus more on volume. Of course, we have different groups of customers using the same services, and they are likely to have different priorities each from the other. We have to consider those who already travel with us; those who are eager to use the public transport if we make it more available to them; and those who today don't desire to use public transport and it is up to us to make it attractive to them. How do we balance these interests? I believe that there is no single 'right answer' to this. The value of a forum like Sustrans is that we can share our views and experiences. Ideally this would give us a broader perspective when we are faced with bus investment decisions. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Sujit Patwardhan To: Brendan Finn Cc: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org ; Todd Alexander Litman Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 9:02 PM Subject: Re: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? It depends on ones objectives. Even when the priority is for improvement of the basic city bus service, one must understand that introduction of better quality, semi-low floor or low floor buses, AC buses and even BRT are perfectly valid efforts that deserve to be supported by Citizens/NGOs involved in sustainable transportation advocacy. It's not enough to say that one can buy three ordinary buses for the cost of one high quality AC bus. This is because the poor image of bus based public transport needs an urgent make-over if it is to win the support and ridership from the elite class of citizens, who today are strongly pushing for more and more infrastructure for the automobile dominated transportation model - such as flyovers, elevated roads, and free/cheap parking facilities - all of which work against NMT and Public Transport. -- Sujit On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Brendan Finn wrote: Dear Todd, I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations in the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples of their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour and fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is often because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - which would be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper maintenance costs. In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are faced in Global South that are not so important in the developed/high-wage economies: 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more expensive maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match the revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same payment terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make the repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest rates, with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable collateral requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go to bus repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after 5 years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not possible to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This forces many cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of high-quality buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand or keeping the bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or (b) going for a higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and brings in more revenue immediately. 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of protection from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the longer your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be a good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their knowledge with us. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Todd Alexander Litman To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? I think it is very important to start improving public transit service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the lower end of the market. The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality buses later. I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. With best wishes, Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > Cheers > > Adhiraj > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/14700133/attachment.html From voodikon at yahoo.com Sat Jun 20 20:50:28 2009 From: voodikon at yahoo.com (jane.) Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? Message-ID: <126652.15512.qm@web39508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Bus safety became a--pardon the pun--hot topic in the Chinese media a few weeks ago, after a Chengdu city bus caught fire, killing 25 or 26 and injuring 76 to the point of hospitalization (seven had burns on over 95% of their bodies). Investigators believe that somebody brought a can of gasoline on board, which then tipped over, soaking the bus, and finally, the whole thing somehow ignited. One issue here is that there are no enforced rules about what can and cannot be brought aboard buses--so everything from live animals (pets and farmstock) to large, unidentified baggage of all sorts (vendors frequently bus their goods into the city from the outskirts) to hazardous chemicals. But the second issue that media reports focused on was why so many people fell victim to the fire. One reason was overcrowding on the bus; another was that although the bus was reportedly equipped with safety hammers to break the windows, the panicked passengers either didn't know how or didn't think to use them. Some links: Bus fire story: http://www.gochengdoo.com/en/blog/item/955/bus_fire_on_third_ring_road_leaves_more_than_20_dead Citywide bus-safety overhaul report: http://www.cctv.com/program/chinatoday/20090616/102719.shtml (Note that a reported 1,000 new buses will enter Chengdu's fleet this September. In the four years that I've been here I've personally witnessed three generations of buses already. Despite the continual improvements made to the buses themselves, overcrowding remains, from my vantage point as a passenger, the largest deterrent from taking the bus. Besides, this is a very bikeable city, although with the high incidence of bike theft biking can be a pricey habit.) Underlining the urgency of the safety issue, the week following the Chengdu bus fire, a bus in Shenzhen apparently exploded. I don't know the full details on that as many of the reports were blocked within the country. Jane --- On Sat, 6/20/09, Todd Alexander Litman wrote: From: Todd Alexander Litman Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? To: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" , sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Date: Saturday, June 20, 2009, 2:46 AM I think it is very important to start improving public transit service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the lower end of the market. The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? ? Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. ? In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: ? 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? ? 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? ? 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality buses later. ? I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. ? For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. ? With best wishes, ? ? Brendan. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brendan Finn????????? e-mail : etts@indigo.ie ????????? tel : +353.87.2530286 ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > Cheers > > Adhiraj > -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA ?Efficiency - Equity - Clarity? -----Inline Attachment Follows----- -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090620/740099d8/attachment.html From adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com Sat Jun 20 15:35:55 2009 From: adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com (Dr Adhiraj Joglekar) Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 07:35:55 +0100 Subject: [sustran] How much money should we spend on nicer buses? Message-ID: Dear all, Thank you for the very useful comments. I find cities in India find themselves in a 'catch' not knowing where to begin. Let me give some examples to make my point - 1. The city of Pune has one of the most useless bus based public transport systems. With majority of the 1200 odd buses in shambles - from windows that rattle like sub-machine guns, rusty, dusty.........basically run down. Some 700 buses ply on trunk roads leaving hardly anything for rest of the city (spread over 220 sq km). This equates as one bus every hour or so. No wonder only a fifth of the trips at best happen on the buses. 2. Now trying to solve the problem like above, where the basics are lacking (route and frequency rationalisation) - where does one start? From buying a handful of Volvo buses / AC buses or many more mid-range buses that offer decent comfort. If simple lick of white paint could solve our problems, perhaps buying AC buses would do it. 3. Now lets move to Mumbai. Focus only on the main island city (and not the 5 other corporations that encompass the metropolitan region, all of these regions have their own bus service which are even worse of than Pune city described above). Some 3300 buses manage a healthy 4.5 million passenger trips per day. Having used this service for 20 years, I find the comfort levels (apart from over crowding at times, but the reasons for this is a topic for another thread) even in a ordinary non-AC bus were similar to any bus I have used in London in past 8 years. 4. Public consultation is massively important as Brendan points out. I am more an empowered PT user and have nothing to claim as a transport expert. I would hope I represent views shared by many Mumbai bus users - people in Mumbai use buses because they offer reasonable comfort, are safe even late nights, cover every nook and corner of the city, have well worked out routes with brilliant frequencies and above all buses are punctual/reliable. These factors have a far bigger weight in the mind of the regular bus user than comfort of the Volvo AC, the charm of which wears away quickly. Public consults are also a superb way of making people aware of unreasonable expectations. It would be unreasonable for NHS for example to start funding nose jobs simply because every one expects to have a nice straight nose. People should be asked to wonder and reflect on what level of comfort is needed keeping in mind that the average journey in Mumbai (and rest of Indian cities) is about 8km. One would hope that any rational thinker will differentiate the comfort needs of buses that run for hours inter-city and those that are meant to provide urban means of transport. 5. Going back to the time when Mumbai started its AC bus service. The fleet size so small that only 3 or 4 routes would have a AC bus at one bus per hour. This was over and above the general bus service. People like me who could afford to spend on the higher ticket price would get to a bus stop. Can you imagine anyone waiting for that AC bus which may arrive 30 minutes from now, now when I could take the fairly decent bus that arrives every 5 minutes to my destination? 6. The point I was making previously was - who uses these premium services? The loyal bus user who may end up at the bus stop, finds an AC bus arrive by chance in 5 minutes, can afford it and so takes it or the people known to driving in the comforts of their cars who some believe will switch to buses simply because a handful are AC? Can we imagine people used to comforts of their cars leave the same for buses that run only on handful of routes that too at frequencies of 1 bus per hour? I think not. 7. More the bus classes, more difficult is the task of route and frequency rationalisation. One would think India would have learnt from its history of caste (and the politics that stems frrom it) that creating differences is a bad idea. 8. Now let's move to Bangalore - where I must say I go by heresay and having looked up some news reports and BMTC website. 5000 buses run in the most irrational manner as far as routes and frequencies are concerned (and despite 1000 more buses than Mumbai manage only 3.8 million passenger trips). Only 200 or so buses are Volvo's which come with an exclusive price tag. But if my calculations and understanding is correct, these Volvo buses are running at a loss (in the only bus company that claims to make profits in India). So who subsidises these buses in a way (as the loss has to be made up) - the regular bus users. Who uses them, I dare say a chunk of regular bus users who can spend more. 9. Audaciously, there was a Bangalore bus transport official qouted in news to have said - but we recover the costs of 1 Volvo in 3 years through adverts on the buses. Well! Why then have a differential pricing structure? Why not let everyone use the buses at the price of an ordinary bus fare? The unstated is a the underlying belief that the those who 'have' will take to buses if the 'have nots' or the general scum is filtered - but have the 'haves' left their cars in the garages? I am yet to see the evidence of this. Indeed, the only routes where Volvo riderships are decent are the ones where the routes are planned well and significantly have a sizeable fleet to run decent frequencies. 10. Now the JNNURM funds (National funds) in India for improving public transport are being used to buy these luxury buses. In an utopian world we would all love every bus to a splendid AC Volvo. I am made to understand that ex-tax the Volvo actually is 50 lakhs and not the price of 70 it gets retailed at (happy to be corrected here). Bangalore says the costs of running a Volvo are about Rs 35/ km. Further as we have been informed, advertisement money can pay for the bus in 3 years. Alarmingly, in 21st century India we have rudimentry laws, the Motor Vehicle Act of 1988 which demands every bus has a conductor on board. JNNURM funds come with the condition that services reform. The biggest burden for all bus based public transport systems in India is having to carry a dead weight / overheads of paying salaries to a human ticket vending machine (8-12 staff are employed per bus across all cities in India). BEST in Mumbai would be making profits if it manages to become lean and mean. To make matters worse, these buses pay road tax which could be removed or reduced (this shows how willing the Government is when it comes to improving public transport). All this could translate in to cheaper ticketing and more buses with greater comfort (for all - the haves and the have nots). But no one dare bite this bullet given the power of the unions. 11. Simply put, in Bangalore a 10km long route needs to fetch Rs 350/- to even out. And there could be any number of economic models to help get to this goal. One where we hope we find 35 people who can pay Rs10 / ticket or actually one where we may think - a bus has capacities close to 70, not all passengers travel the distance thus on a 10km route up to 90 people could be served - how much is that if we value the ticket at Rs 5? The question is do we need to run a model where we have functional efficiency of a McDonalds that serves 99p burgers to masses and yet earn profits or my next door pub that pulls small number of people each evening but serves a less tasty burger four times its price. The pub too makes a profit, but who serves more people? 12. In India we say the buses have reformed if they introduce pre-ticketing and smart cards. The myth is that these technologies = faster travel. This is true only if you have buses with no on board conductors thus saving valuable time the driver may spend selling tickets to passengers. In fact if we do not have the courage to say goodbye to the conductors, the only way one may speed up travel is to have buses with wider doors for entry and exit (tickets can be purchased as the driver moves on). The point I am attempting make here again is the rather syllogistic thinking / fuzzy logic which is being used to drive the so called reforms in India. 13. Lastly, I go back to finding out if there is research. Did bus patronage in London go up 40% over 5 years because buses got more comfortable or did this happen because of other factors - congestion charging, the fact that free travel is now allowed to not just under 5s (as was the case) but to all school age kids up to 16 - there are so many confounding variables - is there a multi-variate analysis done to know which factor contributes how much? In summary, theoritically, we could have AC low floor buses (I am sure a decent make other than Volvo will do just as well for a lesser price tag) as the only single type of bus and run the services at tickets priced lower than today, afforded by all, a fleet size large enough to run excellent frequencies with good coverage provided the reforms happen in areas where they ought to happen. But until the right steps are taken, this symbolic buying of small number of posh buses will lead us in to a black hole. Thanks Adhiraj On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:01 AM, wrote: > Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than > "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." > > > ######################################################################## > Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest > > IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in > your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you > are responding to. Many thanks. > > About this mailing list see: > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > ######################################################################## > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? (Brendan Finn) > 2. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > (Todd Alexander Litman) > 3. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? (Brendan Finn) > 4. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > (Sujit Patwardhan) > 5. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > (bruun@seas.upenn.edu) > 6. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? (Brendan Finn) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:01:57 +0100 > From: "Brendan Finn" > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" , > > Message-ID: <59F812C4008449718314B96BA970D432@MicroPro271007> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set > drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly > for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we > balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a > larger number of less-expensive models? > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. > People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break > down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often > the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and > engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them > more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past > decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you > really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable > standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price > to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There > is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and > target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and > bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to > understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, > what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do > we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we > waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, spare > parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 > years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the > later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same > performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where > Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. > How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up > in the cost-quality curve? > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be undertaken? > If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is it > better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance > vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 > year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and > revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality > buses later. > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the many > inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess its > own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be the > best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce > investment money. > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes > compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn > where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share > that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" > To: > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment > needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the > monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in > India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? > I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses > that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any > inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > past 8 years and being a medic I > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine > than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is justified > by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - i.e. > posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of people > leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an aircon > in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are fed > of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see > someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to > get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because it > got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard > elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as > simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/801be39e/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:46:13 -0700 > From: Todd Alexander Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" , > > Message-ID: <20090619184616.7E6172E0A7@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit > service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and > more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as > on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service > performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or > passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service > maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are > encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve > the lower end of the market. > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. > Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If > spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or > attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would > otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > >Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which > >value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of > >money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we > >spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against > >the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive > models? > > > >Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > >expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were > >growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want > >buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) > >engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from > >donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more > >sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That > >said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the > >quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do > >have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > > >In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > > >1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum > >acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a > >big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that > >makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is > >to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so > >obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually > >consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what > >features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what > >would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where > >do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and > >where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost > little? > > > >2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, > >spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value > >after 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of > >reliability in the later years of the vehicle life, so that a > >vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year as in its first? > >Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other > >makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much ground have the > >Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in the cost-quality > curve? > > > >3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > >undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses > >additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side > >issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full > >knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year > >economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > >offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business > >and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of > >better quality buses later. > > > >I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite > >the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city > >needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive > >bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we might find > >we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. > > > >For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > >previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual > >outcomes compared to the original objectives and justifications. We > >need to learn where they vary from our original expectations (for > >good or bad), and share that knowledge among practitioners and > >decision-takers. > > > >With best wishes, > > > > > >Brendan. > > >_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > >Brendan Finn e-mail : > >etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" > ><adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > >To: > >< > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > >Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > >Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more > > investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one > > has to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For > > example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - > > but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in > > Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the > > craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior > > in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats > > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London > > buses for past 8 years and being a medic I > > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's > > spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called > > differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of > > their cars and > > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence > > of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and > > now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who > > are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to > > see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be > > struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral > reasons > > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only > > because it got 'nicer'. > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this > > regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to > > confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Adhiraj > > > > >-------------------------------------------------------- > >To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > >http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > >-------------------------------------------------------- > >If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > >http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the > >real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > >================================================================ > >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > >equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing > >countries (the 'Global South'). > > > Sincerely, > Todd Alexander Litman > Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) > litman@vtpi.org > Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 > 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/a3f91b28/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:23:17 +0100 > From: "Brendan Finn" > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" , > , "Todd Alexander Litman" > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Dear Todd, > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations in > the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area > primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples of > their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour and > fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is often > because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - which would > be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper > maintenance costs. > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are > faced in Global South that are not so important in the developed/high-wage > economies: > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more expensive > maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher > proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare > might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It > takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match the > revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the > spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same payment > terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make the > repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest rates, > with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable collateral > requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go to bus > repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after 5 > years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not possible > to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This forces many > cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of high-quality > buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand or keeping the > bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or (b) going for a > higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and brings in more > revenue immediately. > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of > subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of protection > from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be > disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the longer > your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these aspects > from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be a good > opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their knowledge with > us. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Todd Alexander Litman > To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit service > quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable > service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless > services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such > as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization > rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we > are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the > lower end of the market. > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle > capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a little > more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders > (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a > worthwhile investment. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set > drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly > for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where we > balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a > larger number of less-expensive models? > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. > People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break > down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often > the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and > engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them > more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past > decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you > really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable > standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in price > to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? There > is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and > target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities and > bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to > understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have today, > what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where do > we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do we > waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, > spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after > 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in > the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same > performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where > Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. > How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up > in the cost-quality curve? > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement > buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with > low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these > vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced > relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to > develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the > affordability of better quality buses later. > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the > many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess > its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be > the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce > investment money. > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes > compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn > where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share > that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment > needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if the > monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in > India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent bus'? > I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses > that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any > inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > past 8 years and being a medic I > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's > spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential > pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of > people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an > aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are > fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see > someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to > get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because > it got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard > elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such as > simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/fd0e20af/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:32:32 +0530 > From: Sujit Patwardhan > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: Brendan Finn > Cc: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: > <8fba064c0906191302p274cc000i40d428aa41f4b7b6@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > It depends on ones objectives. Even when the priority is for improvement of > the basic city bus service, one must understand that introduction of better > quality, semi-low floor or low floor buses, AC buses and even BRT are > perfectly valid efforts that deserve to be supported by Citizens/NGOs > involved in sustainable transportation advocacy. It's not enough to say > that > one can buy three ordinary buses for the cost of one high quality AC bus. > > This is because the poor image of bus based public transport needs an > urgent > make-over if it is to win the support and ridership from the elite class of > citizens, who today are strongly pushing for more and more infrastructure > for the automobile dominated transportation model - such as flyovers, > elevated roads, and free/cheap parking facilities - all of which work > against NMT and Public Transport. > > -- > Sujit > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Brendan Finn wrote: > > > Dear Todd, > > > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations > in > > the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area > > primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples > of > > their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour > and > > fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is > > often because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - > which > > would be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are > avoiding > > proper maintenance costs. > > > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are > > faced in Global South that are not so important in the > developed/high-wage > > economies: > > > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more expensive > > maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher > > proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare > > might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It > > takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match > the > > revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the > > spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. > > > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same payment > > terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make the > > repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest rates, > > with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable collateral > > requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go to bus > > repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after 5 > > years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not possible > > to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This forces > many > > cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of high-quality > > buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand or keeping > the > > bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or (b) going > for a > > higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and brings in more > > revenue immediately. > > > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of > > subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of > protection > > from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be > > disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the > longer > > your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. > > > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these > > aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be > a > > good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their > knowledge > > with us. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Brendan. > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > > +353.87.2530286 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:* Todd Alexander Litman > > *To:* Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; > > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > > *Subject:* [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit service > > quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more > reliable > > service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless > > services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators > (such > > as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost > minimization > > rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality > we > > are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the > > lower end of the market. > > > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. Vehicle > > capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a > little > > more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more riders > > (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it is a > > worthwhile investment. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > -Todd Litman > > > > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which value-set > > drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money needlessly > > for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where > we > > balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy and deploy a > > larger number of less-expensive models? > > > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > > expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing > up. > > People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't > break > > down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although > often > > the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and > > engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them > > more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past > > decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you > > really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum acceptable > > standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap in > price > > to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel good? > There > > is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the current and > > target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city authorities > and > > bus operators actually consult their customers? How many truly try to > > understand what features they like and hate about the buses they have > today, > > what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where > do > > we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and where do > we > > waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? > > > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, > spare > > parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after 10-12 > > years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in the > > later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same > > performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is > where > > Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime > benefit. > > How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught > up > > in the cost-quality curve? > > > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > undertaken? > > If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement buses, is > it > > better to solve the supply-side issue now with low-cost/lower-performance > > vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a > 5-7 > > year economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > > offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business and > > revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of better quality > > buses later. > > > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite the > many > > inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to assess > its > > own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn out to be > the > > best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more with scarce > > investment money. > > > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > > previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes > > compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn > > where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and > share > > that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Brendan. > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > > +353.87.2530286 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more investment > > needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to wonder if > the > > monies are being put in the right place. For example, the general push in > > India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define a 'decent > bus'? > > I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses > > that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were > any > > inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned > seats > > with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > > past 8 years and being a medic I > > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to one's spine > > than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > justified > > by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential pricing - > i.e. > > posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of > people > > leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an > aircon > > in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who are > fed > > of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to see > > someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling to > > get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only because > it > > got 'nicer'. > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this regard > > elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders such > as > > simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Adhiraj > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > > (the 'Global South'). > > > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ?..each million we invest into urban motorways is an investment > to destroy the city? > > Mayor Hans Joachim Vogel > Munich 1970 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sujit Patwardhan > patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com > sujitjp@gmail.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India > Tel: +91 20 25537955 > Cell: +91 98220 26627 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Parisar: www.parisar.org > PTTF: www.pttf.net > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090620/fec5d82c/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:16:24 -0400 > From: bruun@seas.upenn.edu > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: Brendan Finn > Cc: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <20090619161624.157811a3qhqciiis@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; > format="flowed" > > > Todd and Brendan: > > You are both right. So it would make sense for the richer countries to > give financial add > in the form of modern buses. Better that they export subsidized buses > than subsidized > weapons, SUVs, etc. > > Eric Bruun > > > Quoting Brendan Finn : > > > Dear Todd, > > > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus > > operations in the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', > > which is the area primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many > > multiples of their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many > > countries labour and fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the > > costs. However, this is often because the companies are operating > > fully depreciated vehicles - which would be considered life-expired > > elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper maintenance costs. > > > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues > > are faced in Global South that are not so important in the > > developed/high-wage economies: > > > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more > > expensive maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a > > much higher proportion of the total costs. From the payback > > viewpoint, a single fare might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less > > in Africa or parts of Asia. It takes the revenue of 10 passengers in > > many African/Asian cities to match the revenue from 1 North American > > or European passenger, but the bus and the spare parts cost the same > > amount in both countries. > > > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same > > payment terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required > > to make the repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at > > higher interest rates, with a significant deposit, and sometimes > > with unreasonable collateral requirements. This means that a lot > > more of the daily earnings go to bus repayment in the early years, > > even if you do fully own the bus after 5 years. However, you might > > have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not > > possible to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. > > This forces many cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller > > number of high-quality buses insufficient to meet the need - leading > > to unmet demand or keeping the bad-quality vehicles in circulation > > for a few more years; or (b) going for a higher number of lower-cost > > buses that meets the need and brings in more revenue immediately. > > > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, > > of subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of > > protection from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases > > there may be disruption of social order and stability. The more you > > spend and the longer your payback period, the more vulnerable you > > become. > > > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these > > aspects from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This > > would be a good opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to > > share their knowledge with us. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Brendan. > > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Todd Alexander Litman > > To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > > > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit > > service quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and > > more reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as > > on-board wireless services. Unfortunately, many transit service > > performance indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer or > > passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization rather than service > > maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we are > > encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve > > the lower end of the market. > > > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. > > Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If > > spending a little more on the vehicle improves service reliability > > or attracts more riders (particularly discretionary travelers who > > would otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > -Todd Litman > > > > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which > > value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of > > money needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we > > spend money wisely where we balance quality and long-life against > > the possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive > > models? > > > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that > > the expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were > > growing up. People do want air-con in hot climates and they want > > buses that don't break down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) > > engines and fuels, although often the pressure for this comes from > > donors. Even at the lower end, buses and engines have become more > > sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them more expensive. That > > said, there has been a huge advance over the past decade in the > > quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you really do > > have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum > > acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a > > big gap in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that > > makes them feel good? There is only one way to find out and that is > > to consult with the current and target future users. It sounds so > > obvious, but how many city authorities and bus operators actually > > consult their customers? How many truly try to understand what > > features they like and hate about the buses they have today, what > > would they like to keep, what are they crying out to change? Where > > do we waste money on features that do not interest the customer and > > where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost > > little? > > > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including > > maintenance, spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its > > residual/resale value after 10-12 years? How important and what is > > the economic value of reliability in the later years of the vehicle > > life, so that a vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th year > > as in its first? Traditionally, this is where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes > > and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much > > ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up in > > the cost-quality curve? > > > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > > undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses > > additional/replacement buses, is it better to solve the supply-side > > issue now with low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full > > knowledge that many of these vehicles may only have a 5-7 year > > economic life and have to be replaced relatively soon? But we can > > offset the shorter life by the opportunity to develop the business > > and revenue streams now that will provide the affordability of > > better quality buses later. > > > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, > > despite the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each > > city needs to assess its own situation. In some cases the more > > expensive bus might turn out to be the best solution, in others we > > might find we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. > > > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following > > up on previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the > > actual outcomes compared to the original objectives and > > justifications. We need to learn where they vary from our original > > expectations (for good or bad), and share that knowledge among > > practitioners and decision-takers. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Brendan. > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > > +353.87.2530286 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more > > investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has > > to wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For > > example, the general push in India is to invest in better buses - > > but how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in > > Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of Volvo buses that seem to be the > > craze for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were any inferior in > > cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport cushioned seats with > > green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on London buses for > > past 8 years and being a medic I > > > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did more justice to > > one's spine than the reclined back rests that are increasingly common. > > > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called > > differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of > > their cars and > > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see > > evidence of people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a > > Volvo and now has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus > > user shifts to > > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai > > who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great > > to see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be > > struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral > > reasons > > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only > > because it got 'nicer'. > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this > > regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to > > confounders such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Adhiraj > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:36:02 +0100 > From: "Brendan Finn" > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: "Sujit Patwardhan" > Cc: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar , > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Dear Sujit, > > I completely agree with you that it depends on the objectives. This is why > I stressed in my first posting the importance of talking to the customers. > We need to understand what is important to them and their relative > priorities. This applies to all of us 'experts' - city authorities, bus > operators, planners, researchers, consultants, and advocacy groups. > > If the customers tell us that air-con, low-floor, modernity and self-image > are the most important things, then we must focus on quality and spend more > on each bus. But if they tell us that what is important is to be able to get > to many different places (i.e. more routes in a well developed network) or > that they want more frequent services, or they want less crowding, or they > want cheap tariffs, then we probably need to focus more on volume. Of > course, we have different groups of customers using the same services, and > they are likely to have different priorities each from the other. > > We have to consider those who already travel with us; those who are eager > to use the public transport if we make it more available to them; and those > who today don't desire to use public transport and it is up to us to make it > attractive to them. How do we balance these interests? > > I believe that there is no single 'right answer' to this. The value of a > forum like Sustrans is that we can share our views and experiences. Ideally > this would give us a broader perspective when we are faced with bus > investment decisions. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sujit Patwardhan > To: Brendan Finn > Cc: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org ; Todd > Alexander Litman > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 9:02 PM > Subject: Re: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > It depends on ones objectives. Even when the priority is for improvement > of the basic city bus service, one must understand that introduction of > better quality, semi-low floor or low floor buses, AC buses and even BRT are > perfectly valid efforts that deserve to be supported by Citizens/NGOs > involved in sustainable transportation advocacy. It's not enough to say that > one can buy three ordinary buses for the cost of one high quality AC bus. > > This is because the poor image of bus based public transport needs an > urgent make-over if it is to win the support and ridership from the elite > class of citizens, who today are strongly pushing for more and more > infrastructure for the automobile dominated transportation model - such as > flyovers, elevated roads, and free/cheap parking facilities - all of which > work against NMT and Public Transport. > > -- > Sujit > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Brendan Finn wrote: > > Dear Todd, > > I think we are facing one of the big differences between bus operations > in the Western economies and in so-called 'Global South', which is the area > primarily under discussion in the Sustran forum. > > In both cases the bus industry is labour-intensive - even more so in > 'Global South' - but labour rates in Western economies are many multiples of > their counterparts in other parts of the world. In many countries labour and > fuel do indeed account for almost 100% of the costs. However, this is often > because the companies are operating fully depreciated vehicles - which would > be considered life-expired elsewhere - and the operators are avoiding proper > maintenance costs. > > In my experience (and I very much welcome other views) four issues are > faced in Global South that are not so important in the developed/high-wage > economies: > > 1) The cost of new and higher quality vehicles, along with more > expensive maintenance requirements and spare parts, represents a much higher > proportion of the total costs. From the payback viewpoint, a single fare > might cost $1.00 in USA and $0.10 or less in Africa or parts of Asia. It > takes the revenue of 10 passengers in many African/Asian cities to match the > revenue from 1 North American or European passenger, but the bus and the > spare parts cost the same amount in both countries. > > 2) Capital for investment is usually not available under the same > payment terms. In 'Global South', bus operators are often required to make > the repayments over a short period (e.g. 3-5 years) at higher interest > rates, with a significant deposit, and sometimes with unreasonable > collateral requirements. This means that a lot more of the daily earnings go > to bus repayment in the early years, even if you do fully own the bus after > 5 years. However, you might have gone bankrupt in the meantime. > > 3) Availability of finance is tougher, and quite often it is not > possible to raise enough finance to meet what you would like to do. This > forces many cities/operators to choose between (a) a smaller number of > high-quality buses insufficient to meet the need - leading to unmet demand > or keeping the bad-quality vehicles in circulation for a few more years; or > (b) going for a higher number of lower-cost buses that meets the need and > brings in more revenue immediately. > > 4) There is less security of tenure, of necessary tariff increases, of > subsidies, of reimbursement for free/reduced rate passengers, of protection > from encroachment and illegal operation. In some cases there may be > disruption of social order and stability. The more you spend and the longer > your payback period, the more vulnerable you become. > > The above are, of course, generalisations. Data on any of these aspects > from our Sustran colleagues would be most welcome. This would be a good > opportunity for some of our 'silent' members to share their knowledge with > us. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Todd Alexander Litman > To: Dr Adhiraj Joglekar ; sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:46 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > I think it is very important to start improving public transit service > quality, including nicer buses, reduced crowding, faster and more reliable > service, nicer waiting areas, and amenities such as on-board wireless > services. Unfortunately, many transit service performance indicators (such > as cost per vehicle-kilometer or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization > rather than service maximization. If we fail to improve service quality we > are encouraging economically successful travelers to purchase a car and > abandon public transit because the system is only intended to serve the > lower end of the market. > > The largest costs of public transit service are labor and fuel. > Vehicle capital costs represent 5-10% of total service costs. If spending a > little more on the vehicle improves service reliability or attracts more > riders (particularly discretionary travelers who would otherwise drive) it > is a worthwhile investment. > > > Best wishes, > -Todd Litman > > > At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: > > Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes down to is which > value-set drives the decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of money > needlessly for the brand name and the fancy stuff? Or do we spend money > wisely where we balance quality and long-life against the possibility to buy > and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? > > Before comparing the merits, I think we have to acknowledge that the > expectations of users has risen a lot compared to when we were growing up. > People do want air-con in hot climates and they want buses that don't break > down. Cities demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, although often > the pressure for this comes from donors. Even at the lower end, buses and > engines have become more sophisticated, and all the extra bits make them > more expensive. That said, there has been a huge advance over the past > decade in the quality of the buses coming from China and India, so you > really do have high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. > > In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: > > 1) What do the people want? What do they demand as a minimum > acceptable standard, what are their aspirations, and is there such a big gap > in price to go from acceptable minimum to something that makes them feel > good? There is only one way to find out and that is to consult with the > current and target future users. It sounds so obvious, but how many city > authorities and bus operators actually consult their customers? How many > truly try to understand what features they like and hate about the buses > they have today, what would they like to keep, what are they crying out to > change? Where do we waste money on features that do not interest the > customer and where do we waste good opportunities that make people happy and > cost little? > > 2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, including maintenance, > spare parts, fuel consumption, offset by its residual/resale value after > 10-12 years? How important and what is the economic value of reliability in > the later years of the vehicle life, so that a vehicle gives the same > performance in its 10th year as in its first? Traditionally, this is where > Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes gave an overall lifetime benefit. > How much ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and other brands caught up > in the cost-quality curve? > > 3) What can we afford compared to the urgency of the task to be > undertaken? If a city desperately needs 1,000 buses additional/replacement > buses, is it better to solve the supply-side issue now with > low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full knowledge that many of these > vehicles may only have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be replaced > relatively soon? But we can offset the shorter life by the opportunity to > develop the business and revenue streams now that will provide the > affordability of better quality buses later. > > I don't think there is a universal right answer for this, despite > the many inflexible "orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city needs to > assess its own situation. In some cases the more expensive bus might turn > out to be the best solution, in others we might find we can do a lot more > with scarce investment money. > > For me, this discussion highlights the importance of following up on > previous bus investment projects. We need to evaluate the actual outcomes > compared to the original objectives and justifications. We need to learn > where they vary from our original expectations (for good or bad), and share > that knowledge among practitioners and decision-takers. > > With best wishes, > > > Brendan. > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : > +353.87.2530286 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> > To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM > Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" > > >I find the comments from Carlos very interesting. Yes, more > investment needs to happen in public transport but sometimes one has to > wonder if the monies are being put in the right place. For example, the > general push in India is to invest in better buses - but how does one define > a 'decent bus'? I grew up using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or so of > Volvo buses that seem to be the craze for now. I never felt the buses in > Mumbai were any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - they used to sport > cushioned seats with green leather like upholstery. Having travelled on > London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I can say the Mumbai buses > had seats that did more justice to one's spine than the reclined back rests > that are increasingly common. > > > > Coming to the point - the whole idea of spending on a Volvo is > justified by authorities on the basis of a policy called differential > pricing - i.e. posh buses will pull posh people out of their cars and > > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. > > > > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have yet to see evidence of > people leaving their cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now has an > aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to > > these buses and pays more or indeed the train users in Mumbai who > are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. > > > > I find public transport a great equaliser of sorts, its great to > see someone in a decent suit sitting next to someone who may be struggling > to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons > > apart, one needs to know for sure if people switch to PT only > because it got 'nicer'. > > > > I would be interested in knowing if there is research in this > regard elsewhere which rules out people switching to PT due to confounders > such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency > > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. > > > > Cheers > > > > Adhiraj > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090619/14700133/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 18 > *********************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090620/74401fc5/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Sun Jun 21 14:24:18 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 07:24:18 +0200 Subject: [sustran] How much money should we spend on nicer buses? Message-ID: <00be01c9f230$88c1e410$9a45ac30$@britton@ecoplan.org> Dear Sustranes and particularly everyone who is chipping in on this great topic, this seashell to the ear and you hear the roar of the ocean. . What I am seeing thus far is so very good, so very germane in many ways for many paces, that I would like to turn it into a small series of pieces for World Streets. I have already contacted several of the authors to see how we might best handle this. All thoughts on this and further discussion here are very welcome indeed. Best/Eric PS. Have you chipped in with your thoughts on World Streets. We are getting some wonderful commentaries and commendations, and these are going to be very valuable for us indeed as we chart a course for the future. Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090621/681ddb34/attachment.html From lutman at globalnet.co.uk Sun Jun 21 23:11:19 2009 From: lutman at globalnet.co.uk (Peter Lutman) Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 15:11:19 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: <00be01c9f230$88c1e410$9a45ac30$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <00be01c9f230$88c1e410$9a45ac30$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: Dear Eric, I was particularly interested by Dr Adhiraj Joglekar's contribution relating to several Indian Cities posted today. Much of what he stated is sound common sense. I have knowledge only of Mumbai and perhaps the following comments relating to that City may have appication elsewhere. 1 I was in a team asked to examine the Mumbai bus network. With many hundreds of routes spread over a huge area and carrying 4.5 million customers daily, this was an impossible task in the project time available. We therefore concentrated on routes feeding the CBD peninsula. 2 Even this had a huge route network with bus services extending to the west coastal communities, the central ones. the eastern ones and Nowe Mumbai. 3 Analysis of the network route by route showed that the nonsense promulgated 50 years ago by the Consultancy arm of the old London Transport (add the two way journey time to the two terminal layovers and divide the total by the number of buses one wished to deploy on the route to determine the frequency) had resulted in various services offering headways of 19, 23, 37 and 52 minutes and the like. Note I have called these headways not frequencies. 4 Clearly the people planning this nonsense either never themselves travel on these services or possibly catch exactly the same bus every day to and from their destination so they know what time it is scheduled. Most people are unable to plan their days with such precision. 5 Bearing in mind the scorching heat / driving monsoon rain depending upon the season, the maximum interval between buses should be 10 minutes or less on every important route. (Dr Joglekar mentions 5 minute intervals but there were very few individual routes reaching this frequency - although some trips where several routes ran in common would offer this level of service) 6 The absolute minimum urban headway in a metropolis like Mumbai should be 30 minutes. No bus service should be planned unless the headway is divisible into 60 minutes - the only acceptable ones are anything up to 6 minutes, 7.5 minutes, 10 minutes, 12 minutes, 15 minutes 20 minutes and 30 minutes. 7 The times should remain as constant as possible throughout the day (allowing for running time variations to cope with peak congestion) so that customers can remember the times past each hour when buses leave a terminal and have these fixed in their minds - e.g. 07,22,37 and 52 minutes past each hour. This is the basic key to successful marketing of any public transport timetable, and is even more vital where, as in Mumbai, the timetables are not published or advertised. 8 The rubbish routes with crazy, non memorable, non recurring headways should be ditched. Most of them probably only exist due to vote-catching political pressure from someone who doesn't understand the basics of public transport. 9 Transfer tickets should be available to enable customers who used the 37 / 52 minute headway routes and the others instead to use two frequent routes and interchange between them realising the benefit of short waiting times, staying cool and dry, getting there more quickly etc without any financial penalty. Season tickets would offer the same convenience but might not be affordable by those living on the financial margin. 10 The resources from the rubbish routes should be used to strengthen the rest of the network, so the 19 minute headways might become 15 minutes (or 20), the 27 minutes become 20 or 30 etc. 11 I could go on about the removal of double deck high capacity buses and the need for two conductors on these and the handful of articulated buses, the impossibility of clambering up (and down) three steps by the elderly or handicapped (who are effectively excluded from public transport as a result) but these are other matters not relating to the route / timetable patterns themselves. 12 The chief planner told me on my second visit that he had listened to my earlier recommendations and had implemented many of them in the last 4-monthly service review. As a result daily boardings had risen to 4.7 million customers (of course a few thousand of these may have been due to a minority of users having to transfer). These solutions will work everywhere in the world and might be worth trying in the other Indian Cities too. Peter Lutman FCILT ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: Eric Britton To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:24 AM Subject: [sustran] How much money should we spend on nicer buses? Dear Sustranes and particularly everyone who is chipping in on this great topic, this seashell to the ear and you hear the roar of the ocean. . What I am seeing thus far is so very good, so very germane in many ways for many paces, that I would like to turn it into a small series of pieces for World Streets. I have already contacted several of the authors to see how we might best handle this. All thoughts on this and further discussion here are very welcome indeed. Best/Eric PS. Have you chipped in with your thoughts on World Streets. We are getting some wonderful commentaries and commendations, and these are going to be very valuable for us indeed as we chart a course for the future. Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss -------------------------------------------------------- If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090621/bd8e6287/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Mon Jun 22 05:19:47 2009 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:19:47 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: <126652.15512.qm@web39508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <126652.15512.qm@web39508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20090621201955.0D2832DE29@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Yes, it is important to maximize public transportation system safety and security. However, even at its worst, public transit tends to be much safer overall than automobile travel. For discussion see: Todd Litman (2005), "Terrorism, Transit and Public Safety: Evaluating the Risks," (www.vtpi.org/transitrisk.pdf ). Todd Litman and Steven Fitzroy (2008), "Safe Travels: Evaluating Mobility Management Traffic Safety Impacts," (www.vtpi.org/safetrav.pdf ). Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 04:50 AM 20/06/2009, jane. wrote: >Bus safety became a--pardon the pun--hot topic >in the Chinese media a few weeks ago, after a >Chengdu city bus caught fire, killing 25 or 26 >and injuring 76 to the point of hospitalization >(seven had burns on over 95% of their bodies). > >Investigators believe that somebody brought a >can of gasoline on board, which then tipped >over, soaking the bus, and finally, the whole >thing somehow ignited. One issue here is that >there are no enforced rules about what can and >cannot be brought aboard buses--so everything >from live animals (pets and farmstock) to large, >unidentified baggage of all sorts (vendors >frequently bus their goods into the city from >the outskirts) to hazardous chemicals. > >But the second issue that media reports focused >on was why so many people fell victim to the >fire. One reason was overcrowding on the bus; >another was that although the bus was reportedly >equipped with safety hammers to break the >windows, the panicked passengers either didn't >know how or didn't think to use them. > >Some links: >Bus fire story: >http://www.gochengdoo.com/en/blog/item/955/bus_fire_on_third_ring_road_leaves_more_than_20_dead >Citywide bus-safety overhaul report: >http://www.cctv.com/program/chinatoday/20090616/102719.shtml >(Note that a reported 1,000 new buses will enter >Chengdu's fleet this September. In the four >years that I've been here I've personally >witnessed three generations of buses already. >Despite the continual improvements made to the >buses themselves, overcrowding remains, from my >vantage point as a passenger, the largest >deterrent from taking the bus. Besides, this is >a very bikeable city, although with the high >incidence of bike theft biking can be a pricey habit.) > >Underlining the urgency of the safety issue, the >week following the Chengdu bus fire, a bus in >Shenzhen apparently exploded. I don't know the >full details on that as many of the reports were blocked within the country. > >Jane > >--- On Sat, 6/20/09, Todd Alexander Litman wrote: > >From: Todd Alexander Litman >Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? >To: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" >, sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org >Date: Saturday, June 20, 2009, 2:46 AM > > >I think it is very important to start improving >public transit service quality, including nicer >buses, reduced crowding, faster and more >reliable service, nicer waiting areas, and >amenities such as on-board wireless services. >Unfortunately, many transit service performance >indicators (such as cost per vehicle-kilometer >or passenger-trip) encourage cost minimization >rather than service maximization. If we fail to >improve service quality we are encouraging >economically successful travelers to purchase a >car and abandon public transit because the >system is only intended to serve the lower end of the market. > >The largest costs of public transit service are >labor and fuel. Vehicle capital costs represent >5-10% of total service costs. If spending a >little more on the vehicle improves service >reliability or attracts more riders >(particularly discretionary travelers who would >otherwise drive) it is a worthwhile investment. > > >Best wishes, >-Todd Litman > > >At 08:01 AM 19/06/2009, Brendan Finn wrote: >>Good points raised by Adhiraj. What it comes >>down to is which value-set drives the >>decision-taking process. Do we spend a lot of >>money needlessly for the brand name and the >>fancy stuff? Or do we spend money wisely where >>we balance quality and long-life against the >>possibility to buy and deploy a larger number of less-expensive models? >> >>Before comparing the merits, I think we have to >>acknowledge that the expectations of users has >>risen a lot compared to when we were growing >>up. People do want air-con in hot climates and >>they want buses that don't break down. Cities >>demand buses with clean(er) engines and fuels, >>although often the pressure for this comes from >>donors. Even at the lower end, buses and >>engines have become more sophisticated, and all >>the extra bits make them more expensive. That >>said, there has been a huge advance over the >>past decade in the quality of the buses coming >>from China and India, so you really do have >>high-cost and low-cost options for most situations. >> >>In my opinion, there are three main factors to consider: >> >>1) What do the people want? What do they demand >>as a minimum acceptable standard, what are >>their aspirations, and is there such a big gap >>in price to go from acceptable minimum to >>something that makes them feel good? There is >>only one way to find out and that is to consult >>with the current and target future users. It >>sounds so obvious, but how many city >>authorities and bus operators actually consult >>their customers? How many truly try to >>understand what features they like and hate >>about the buses they have today, what would >>they like to keep, what are they crying out to >>change? Where do we waste money on features >>that do not interest the customer and where do >>we waste good opportunities that make people happy and cost little? >> >>2) What is the life-time cost of the vehicle, >>including maintenance, spare parts, fuel >>consumption, offset by its residual/resale >>value after 10-12 years? How important and what >>is the economic value of reliability in the >>later years of the vehicle life, so that a >>vehicle gives the same performance in its 10th >>year as in its first? Traditionally, this is >>where Volvo, MAN, Mercedes and some other makes >>gave an overall lifetime benefit. How much >>ground have the Chinese, India, Korean and >>other brands caught up in the cost-quality curve? >> >>3) What can we afford compared to the urgency >>of the task to be undertaken? If a city >>desperately needs 1,000 buses >>additional/replacement buses, is it better to >>solve the supply-side issue now with >>low-cost/lower-performance vehicles, in full >>knowledge that many of these vehicles may only >>have a 5-7 year economic life and have to be >>replaced relatively soon? But we can offset the >>shorter life by the opportunity to develop the >>business and revenue streams now that will >>provide the affordability of better quality buses later. >> >>I don't think there is a universal right answer >>for this, despite the many inflexible >>"orthodoxies" we hear. As always, each city >>needs to assess its own situation. In some >>cases the more expensive bus might turn out to >>be the best solution, in others we might find >>we can do a lot more with scarce investment money. >> >>For me, this discussion highlights the >>importance of following up on previous bus >>investment projects. We need to evaluate the >>actual outcomes compared to the original >>objectives and justifications. We need to learn >>where they vary from our original expectations >>(for good or bad), and share that knowledge >>among practitioners and decision-takers. >> >>With best wishes, >> >> >>Brendan. >>_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >>Brendan Finn e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Dr Adhiraj Joglekar" < adhiraj.joglekar@googlemail.com> >>To: < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> >>Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:12 PM >>Subject: [sustran] Re: Beijing to build "public transport city" >> >> >I find the comments from Carlos very >> interesting. Yes, more investment needs to >> happen in public transport but sometimes one >> has to wonder if the monies are being put in >> the right place. For example, the general push >> in India is to invest in better buses - but >> how does one define a 'decent bus'? I grew up >> using buses in Mumbai, these cost a fifth or >> so of Volvo buses that seem to be the craze >> for now. I never felt the buses in Mumbai were >> any inferior in cleanliness or the comfort - >> they used to sport cushioned seats with green >> leather like upholstery. Having travelled on >> London buses for past 8 years and being a medic I >> > can say the Mumbai buses had seats that did >> more justice to one's spine than the reclined >> back rests that are increasingly common. >> > >> > Coming to the point - the whole idea of >> spending on a Volvo is justified by >> authorities on the basis of a policy called >> differential pricing - i.e. posh buses will >> pull posh people out of their cars and >> > that they will be happy to spend more on the tickets. >> > >> > On paper, this may seem logical, but I have >> yet to see evidence of people leaving their >> cars simply because the bus is a Volvo and now >> has an aircon in it. If anything the regular loyal bus user shifts to >> > these buses and pays more or indeed the >> train users in Mumbai who are fed of super-ultra-crush loads switch to buses. >> > >> > I find public transport a great equaliser of >> sorts, its great to see someone in a decent >> suit sitting next to someone who may be >> struggling to get food to the table each day. But ethical and moral reasons >> > apart, one needs to know for sure if people >> switch to PT only because it got 'nicer'. >> > >> > I would be interested in knowing if there is >> research in this regard elsewhere which rules >> out people switching to PT due to confounders >> such as simultaneous improvement in route and frequency >> > rationalisation or TDM measures like congestion charging. >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Adhiraj >> > >>-------------------------------------------------------- >>To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >>http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------------- >>If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, >>please go to >>http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >>to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. >> >>================================================================ >>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to >>discussion of people-centred, equitable and >>sustainable transport with a focus on >>developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > >Sincerely, >Todd Alexander Litman >Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) >litman@vtpi.org >Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 >1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA >???Efficiency - Equity - Clarity??? > >-----Inline Attachment Follows----- > >-------------------------------------------------------- >To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit >http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > >-------------------------------------------------------- >If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, >please go to >http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion >of people-centred, equitable and sustainable >transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). > Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA ?Efficiency - Equity - Clarity? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090621/96f24bb0/attachment.html From bruun at seas.upenn.edu Tue Jun 23 01:35:54 2009 From: bruun at seas.upenn.edu (bruun at seas.upenn.edu) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:35:54 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? In-Reply-To: References: <00be01c9f230$88c1e410$9a45ac30$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <20090622123554.13682axoaiio5mv4@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> Peter The fact that you even had to explain this to someone shows that there is a lack of professional planning capacity overseeing the network. Eric Buun Quoting Peter Lutman : > Dear Eric, > > I was particularly interested by Dr Adhiraj Joglekar's contribution > relating to several Indian Cities posted today. Much of what he > stated is sound common sense. I have knowledge only of Mumbai and > perhaps the following comments relating to that City may have > appication elsewhere. > 1 I was in a team asked to examine the Mumbai bus network. With > many hundreds of routes spread over a huge area and carrying 4.5 > million customers daily, this was an impossible task in the project > time available. We therefore concentrated on routes feeding the CBD > peninsula. > 2 Even this had a huge route network with bus services extending > to the west coastal communities, the central ones. the eastern ones > and Nowe Mumbai. > 3 Analysis of the network route by route showed that the nonsense > promulgated 50 years ago by the Consultancy arm of the old London > Transport (add the two way journey time to the two terminal layovers > and divide the total by the number of buses one wished to deploy on > the route to determine the frequency) had resulted in various > services offering headways of 19, 23, 37 and 52 minutes and the > like. Note I have called these headways not frequencies. > 4 Clearly the people planning this nonsense either never > themselves travel on these services or possibly catch exactly the > same bus every day to and from their destination so they know what > time it is scheduled. Most people are unable to plan their days with > such precision. > 5 Bearing in mind the scorching heat / driving monsoon rain > depending upon the season, the maximum interval between buses should > be 10 minutes or less on every important route. (Dr Joglekar > mentions 5 minute intervals but there were very few individual > routes reaching this frequency - although some trips where several > routes ran in common would offer this level of service) > 6 The absolute minimum urban headway in a metropolis like Mumbai > should be 30 minutes. No bus service should be planned unless the > headway is divisible into 60 minutes - the only acceptable ones are > anything up to 6 minutes, 7.5 minutes, 10 minutes, 12 minutes, 15 > minutes 20 minutes and 30 minutes. > 7 The times should remain as constant as possible throughout the > day (allowing for running time variations to cope with peak > congestion) so that customers can remember the times past each hour > when buses leave a terminal and have these fixed in their minds - > e.g. 07,22,37 and 52 minutes past each hour. This is the basic key > to successful marketing of any public transport timetable, and is > even more vital where, as in Mumbai, the timetables are not > published or advertised. > 8 The rubbish routes with crazy, non memorable, non recurring > headways should be ditched. Most of them probably only exist due to > vote-catching political pressure from someone who doesn't understand > the basics of public transport. > 9 Transfer tickets should be available to enable customers who > used the 37 / 52 minute headway routes and the others instead to use > two frequent routes and interchange between them realising the > benefit of short waiting times, staying cool and dry, getting there > more quickly etc without any financial penalty. Season tickets would > offer the same convenience but might not be affordable by those > living on the financial margin. > 10 The resources from the rubbish routes should be used to > strengthen the rest of the network, so the 19 minute headways might > become 15 minutes (or 20), the 27 minutes become 20 or 30 etc. > 11 I could go on about the removal of double deck high capacity > buses and the need for two conductors on these and the handful of > articulated buses, the impossibility of clambering up (and down) > three steps by the elderly or handicapped (who are effectively > excluded from public transport as a result) but these are other > matters not relating to the route / timetable patterns themselves. > 12 The chief planner told me on my second visit that he had > listened to my earlier recommendations and had implemented many of > them in the last 4-monthly service review. As a result daily > boardings had risen to 4.7 million customers (of course a few > thousand of these may have been due to a minority of users having to > transfer). These solutions will work everywhere in the world and > might be worth trying in the other Indian Cities too. > > Peter Lutman FCILT > > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eric Britton > To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:24 AM > Subject: [sustran] How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > Dear Sustranes and particularly everyone who is chipping in on > this great topic, this seashell to the ear and you hear the roar of > the ocean. . > > > > What I am seeing thus far is so very good, so very germane in many > ways for many paces, that I would like to turn it into a small > series of pieces for World Streets. I have already contacted several > of the authors to see how we might best handle this. > > > > All thoughts on this and further discussion here are very welcome indeed. > > > > Best/Eric > > > > PS. Have you chipped in with your thoughts on World Streets. We > are getting some wonderful commentaries and commendations, and these > are going to be very valuable for us indeed as we chart a course for > the future. > > > > Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | > +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the > real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on > developing countries (the 'Global South'). From paulbarter at nus.edu.sg Tue Jun 23 19:49:01 2009 From: paulbarter at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:49:01 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Sustainable Transport Award Online Nomination Process is Open Message-ID: From: Sustainable Transport Award [mailto:sta@itdp.org] Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2009 12:04 AM To: Paul Barter Subject: Sustainable Transport Award Online Nomination Process is Open STA logo The 6th Annual Sustainable Transport Award Nomination Process Is Now Open honoring visionary achievements in sustainable transportation and urban livability Do you know a city that has done innovative work on transportation and livability this year? Nominate a city for the 2010 Sustainable Transport Award! The Award recognizes a city that has made the most significant progress during the year in: * improving public transportation, * improving non-motorized travel and public space, * implementing travel demand management programs to reduce private car use, * reducing urban sprawl by linking transportation to development, and/ or * reducing transport-related air pollution. New York City New York City reclaimed over 49 acres of street space for cyclsits and pedestrians. Previous winners include: * New York City, USA in 2009 for taking street space from cars and giving it back to pedestrians and cyclists * Paris, France in 2008 for revolutionizing bike sharing and London, United Kingdom for expanding its congestion charging program * Guayaquil, Ecuador in 2007 for revitalizing its downtown * Seoul, Korea in 2006 for tearing down an elevated highway to revitalize the Cheongyecheon River * Bogota, Colombia in 2005 for its TransMilenio BRT system and comprehensive strategy to increase public space and transportation options. Help us identify cities that deserve to be recognized for their work in the past year. Go to www.st-award.org for more information. The deadline for submissions is September 15, 2009. Sustainable Transport Award 2010 Sponsored by: For more information, please write sta@itdp.org Address postal inquiries to: Institute for Transportation & Development Policy 127 West 26th Street Suite 1002 New York, NY 10001 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090623/dcb15af4/attachment.html From adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com Tue Jun 23 22:05:01 2009 From: adhiraj.joglekar at googlemail.com (Dr Adhiraj Joglekar) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:05:01 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: route and frequency rationalisation Message-ID: This really is a continuation of the previus theme - How much money should we spend on nicer buses? Peter is correct in highlighting that when it comes to thinking in terms of headways, perhaps bus routes in Mumbai could do with some re-thinking. He is also right in pointing out that when I refer to buses in Mumbai running at good frequencies of 5 minutes - its more due to overlapping routes. As an end user, frequency makes more sense while for the route planner headways may make more sense. But if I travel from Hounslow to Chiswick, I have two options - 235 and 237 at 10-12 minute headways that use the same road - practically speaking, I stand a chance of getting a bus in 5-6 minutes. Mumbai generally manages to do the above, but I am sure Peter is right that there are more than a handful token routes with poor headways and those buses could make up the crucial difference between using the bus fleet sub-optimally Vs optimally. Much of my interest in queue management and thinking about demand and capacity / waiting times comes from my work in NHS. I thus can't be an expert but, it may help to have more views generated on this topicc to help improve some these issues in India. Fundamentally Mumbai has got it right to an extent. I would not say so of the other Indian cities. Typically if one route averages 20km and buses move at average (including stoppage time at bus stops) of 20KPH, one needs a fleet of 10-12 buses. London has 8K buses and about 700 routes. Mumbai has 3300 odd buses and 300 odd routes. The only other city in India known to have a decent bus based public transport is Chennai - they too manage this sort of a ratio. Now lets look at Pune - more details in the links at the end but a summary is as under 1. At the time of me doing this analysis last year, Pune had 1000 buses with over 200 routes. 2. Based on data on 180 routes, I found out that - The averagefrequency is one bus every 57 minutes!!! 3. Average km per route is 17 km but over 50 routes are 10 km or under and up to 77 12km or under. 4. There are routes where buses run every 2, even 3 hours. Two routes are run thrice a day and one 4 times a day. 5. The immediate problem one may see from above is that on paper, Pune has a bus stop within 500 meters from where one lives/works, they have on paper a vast network coverage - but who will wait for the bus to turn up (reliability is notoriously poor, cancellations rife) an hour or so later? 6. Further, by having politically driven excess of routes, simple maths shows that Pune manages to set aside 4 - 5 buses per route. As some major trunk routes have more demand, fleet sizes for certain routes are higher. While this makes sense to an extent, recently shared information shows that 700 of these buses run on 10% of Pune roads, some 470 are linked with the current 17km pilot BRT stretch. 7. Effectively, this starves the rest of Pune of buses. How many people live within walking distance of these trunk roads? My guess is no more than 1/3 of Pune's 4 million. 8. I did a little exercise to demonstrate how 30 routes if reformed to 9 or 10 could provide same coverage at better frequencies (available here with a link to an antecedent document inside it http://better.pune.googlepages.com/Rationalising_PMT_bus_routes_case_ex.pdf) Coming back to Mumbai, the bottleneck lies in matters already discussed recently - 1. Financially a weak model with huge overheads by way of employing conductors when 21st century alternatives exsist. 2. 1990s saw a massive investment in to flyovers - over 60 of them. BEST ridership has since remained more or less the same 3. The soon to be started Bandra-Worli sea link at cost of 1.5k crores which will serve an expected 75000 vehicles per day (Mumbai has 1 million vehicles - it should not be too difficult to compute what % of Mumbai is served through this investment). 4. Thus we have 2 decades of prioritising everything else but the buses. 5. The poor speed of the buses - its high time Mumbai takes steps to implement bus priority measures. For too long there is the love affair with the Gold standard scheme of median grade separated busways, last few years there is a committee of experts racking their brains to find out how this will operate on two express highways with dozens of flyovers in the middle of the roads - end result - no progress of any kind on bus priority. 6. That kerb side bus priority can work is evident from recent and ongoing pilot bus lane at Haji-Ali in Mumbai where throughput of buses has improved 30%. 7. Some issues around headways which Peter rightly points out could have been sorted easily if there were more buses. There are 8K buses in London, Mumbai has 3.3K despite a population twice the size of London, just doubling the fleet size and clever route management stands to provide massive benefits which may compund several fold with bus priority schemes. Of course, all this is utopian for authorities in India. For them a lip service provision of 200 AC buses will suffice until the next elections. Cheers Adhiraj On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:00 AM, wrote: > Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to > sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than > "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." > > > ######################################################################## > Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest > > IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in > your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you > are responding to. Many thanks. > > About this mailing list see: > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss > ######################################################################## > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > (bruun@seas.upenn.edu) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:35:54 -0400 > From: bruun@seas.upenn.edu > Subject: [sustran] Re: How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > To: Peter Lutman > Cc: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > Message-ID: <20090622123554.13682axoaiio5mv4@webmail.seas.upenn.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; > format="flowed" > > > Peter > > The fact that you even had to explain this to someone shows that there > is a lack of professional > planning capacity overseeing the network. > > Eric Buun > > Quoting Peter Lutman : > > > Dear Eric, > > > > I was particularly interested by Dr Adhiraj Joglekar's contribution > > relating to several Indian Cities posted today. Much of what he > > stated is sound common sense. I have knowledge only of Mumbai and > > perhaps the following comments relating to that City may have > > appication elsewhere. > > 1 I was in a team asked to examine the Mumbai bus network. With > > many hundreds of routes spread over a huge area and carrying 4.5 > > million customers daily, this was an impossible task in the project > > time available. We therefore concentrated on routes feeding the CBD > > peninsula. > > 2 Even this had a huge route network with bus services extending > > to the west coastal communities, the central ones. the eastern ones > > and Nowe Mumbai. > > 3 Analysis of the network route by route showed that the nonsense > > promulgated 50 years ago by the Consultancy arm of the old London > > Transport (add the two way journey time to the two terminal layovers > > and divide the total by the number of buses one wished to deploy on > > the route to determine the frequency) had resulted in various > > services offering headways of 19, 23, 37 and 52 minutes and the > > like. Note I have called these headways not frequencies. > > 4 Clearly the people planning this nonsense either never > > themselves travel on these services or possibly catch exactly the > > same bus every day to and from their destination so they know what > > time it is scheduled. Most people are unable to plan their days with > > such precision. > > 5 Bearing in mind the scorching heat / driving monsoon rain > > depending upon the season, the maximum interval between buses should > > be 10 minutes or less on every important route. (Dr Joglekar > > mentions 5 minute intervals but there were very few individual > > routes reaching this frequency - although some trips where several > > routes ran in common would offer this level of service) > > 6 The absolute minimum urban headway in a metropolis like Mumbai > > should be 30 minutes. No bus service should be planned unless the > > headway is divisible into 60 minutes - the only acceptable ones are > > anything up to 6 minutes, 7.5 minutes, 10 minutes, 12 minutes, 15 > > minutes 20 minutes and 30 minutes. > > 7 The times should remain as constant as possible throughout the > > day (allowing for running time variations to cope with peak > > congestion) so that customers can remember the times past each hour > > when buses leave a terminal and have these fixed in their minds - > > e.g. 07,22,37 and 52 minutes past each hour. This is the basic key > > to successful marketing of any public transport timetable, and is > > even more vital where, as in Mumbai, the timetables are not > > published or advertised. > > 8 The rubbish routes with crazy, non memorable, non recurring > > headways should be ditched. Most of them probably only exist due to > > vote-catching political pressure from someone who doesn't understand > > the basics of public transport. > > 9 Transfer tickets should be available to enable customers who > > used the 37 / 52 minute headway routes and the others instead to use > > two frequent routes and interchange between them realising the > > benefit of short waiting times, staying cool and dry, getting there > > more quickly etc without any financial penalty. Season tickets would > > offer the same convenience but might not be affordable by those > > living on the financial margin. > > 10 The resources from the rubbish routes should be used to > > strengthen the rest of the network, so the 19 minute headways might > > become 15 minutes (or 20), the 27 minutes become 20 or 30 etc. > > 11 I could go on about the removal of double deck high capacity > > buses and the need for two conductors on these and the handful of > > articulated buses, the impossibility of clambering up (and down) > > three steps by the elderly or handicapped (who are effectively > > excluded from public transport as a result) but these are other > > matters not relating to the route / timetable patterns themselves. > > 12 The chief planner told me on my second visit that he had > > listened to my earlier recommendations and had implemented many of > > them in the last 4-monthly service review. As a result daily > > boardings had risen to 4.7 million customers (of course a few > > thousand of these may have been due to a minority of users having to > > transfer). These solutions will work everywhere in the world and > > might be worth trying in the other Indian Cities too. > > > > Peter Lutman FCILT > > > > ******************************************************************** > > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > > distribute its contents to any other person. > > ******************************************************************** > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eric Britton > > To: Sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:24 AM > > Subject: [sustran] How much money should we spend on nicer buses? > > > > > > Dear Sustranes and particularly everyone who is chipping in on > > this great topic, this seashell to the ear and you hear the roar of > > the ocean. . > > > > > > > > What I am seeing thus far is so very good, so very germane in many > > ways for many paces, that I would like to turn it into a small > > series of pieces for World Streets. I have already contacted several > > of the authors to see how we might best handle this. > > > > > > > > All thoughts on this and further discussion here are very welcome > indeed. > > > > > > > > Best/Eric > > > > > > > > PS. Have you chipped in with your thoughts on World Streets. We > > are getting some wonderful commentaries and commendations, and these > > are going to be very valuable for us indeed as we chart a course for > > the future. > > > > > > > > Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | > > +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the > > real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of > > people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on > > developing countries (the 'Global South'). > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 70, Issue 21 > *********************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090623/1d9f7698/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Wed Jun 24 15:56:14 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:56:14 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Barter on The Battle for Street Space - Part I Message-ID: <017001c9f498$dfd69c40$9f83d4c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> If you go to World Streets today you will be able to read the first of two thoughtful pieces by Paul Barter - The Battle for Street Space - Part I - www.worldstreets.org Eric Britton | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype ericbritton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090624/d5466306/attachment.html From Lize at sustainable.org.za Wed Jun 24 21:24:57 2009 From: Lize at sustainable.org.za (Lize Jennings) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:24:57 +0200 Subject: [sustran] South African News - Taxi industry wants to own the BRT system In-Reply-To: <017001c9f498$dfd69c40$9f83d4c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> References: <017001c9f498$dfd69c40$9f83d4c0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Message-ID: <002101c9f4c6$d24ca4b0$76e5ee10$@org.za> As you may be aware, a number of South African cities are trying to implement BRT systems as part of the general upgrade of public transport services (many to have implemented Phase 1 of their projects in time for the 2010 Soccer World Cup). The big debate has been around the minibus taxi industry's role in the implementation of BRT and we have experienced a number of protests and threats of violence from the minibus taxi industry if the BRT systems are to go ahead. The consultation with the minibus taxi industry has been tricky, but as we head closer to the World Cup (next year), those in the transport sector are very concerned about a way forward to ensure that SA gets the appropriate transport system for the country that can meet the needs of all the citizens. Article By: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:36 The minibus taxi industry on Tuesday called for full ownership of the Bus Rapid Transit system. "Government must allow the taxi industry to own BRT in its entirety," National Taxi Alliance Secretary-General Alpheus Mlalazi said at a press briefing in Johannesburg. The taxi industry had developed the routes the BRT system was targeting, he claimed. "The taxi industry is therefore justifiable (sic) in claiming intellectual property or goodwill on the taxi routes and taxi ranks." Mlalazi said if the government did not begin negotiating with the NTA on these terms, there would be protests. "In July if we fail to meet with the minister [Transport Minister Sibusiso Ndebele], we will embark on a protest march to deliver a memorandum of grievances. "After seven days if there is no response we will hold a stayaway... if that [negotiations] doesn't happen, it will escalate." Earlier this month Ndebele announced the formation of a joint working group on public transport to deal with the industry's concerns over the BRT system and other issues affecting the sector. At the time, the government said negotiations on how the industry would become involved in the business side of the BRT system would take place mainly at local level, focusing on the taxi workers affected by the system. The BRT system raised the ire of taxi bosses, who felt it threatened their livelihood. The industry also expressed concerns that the government had asked it to register its routes and then proceeded to place the new bus system on those same routes without consulting it. http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1528025.htm Sapa Lize Jennings Project Manager GreenStaySA Tel: 021 702 3622 Fax: 021 702 3625 Cell : 083 414 7384 E-mail: Lize@sustainable.org.za Website: www.greenstaysa.org.za -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090624/61fa6413/attachment.html From phaizan at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 15:15:24 2009 From: phaizan at gmail.com (Faizan Jawed) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:45:24 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Mumbai government plans to ease traffic chaos Message-ID: Another beating around the bush by the Mumbai government. Transport Restraint Scheme deemed 'impractical'. I think this shows the basic lack of will to reclaim public space from cars and control their use. Even though the government is talking about BRT, I remain skeptical of the way and the time in which it will (if at all) be implemented. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Govt-plans-to-ease-traffic-chaos/articleshow/4698959.cms * Govt plans to ease traffic chaos* MUMBAI: The Maharashtra government on Wednesday indicated to the Bombay high court that it has no immediate interest in experimenting with the traffic restraint scheme (TRS), but at the same time came up with four significant suggestions to ease the chaotic traffic on Mumbai roads, including a proposal to phase out 20-year-old private cars. A high-level meeting was convened by the transport commissioner on Wednesday at which BEST officials were also present. Among the proposals that emerged from the meeting was barring all those who do not own off-street parking space from buying a car. State government lawyer S K Nair argued that the TRS scheme, which envisaged restricting the number of cars on a given route, appeared "impractical,'' and informed the Bombay high court on Wednesday that it had come up with other proposals to control peak hour traffic and vehicular pollution. "We can also have dedicated bus lanes and Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS), with BEST expected to put 200 more AC buses on the road by December 2009,'' he said. "All these are only suggestions. You only talk and don't act. When are you going to act on it?'' said a division bench of justiced Bilal Nazki and Vijaya Kapse-Tahilramani. Nair pointed out that the proposal was stil in a very nascent stage. But the judges directed the state government to place its suggestions in an affidavit within two weeks, with a specific timeframe for its implementation and warned that "if the state doesn't do it, we shall direct it to act.'' The court was hearing a PIL filed in 1999 by the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) seeking measures to curb vehicular pollution. At the last hearing the court had asked the state to inform whether it would try out the TRS on certain roads for a month. The state's reluctance to even try out TRS in the city which has over 4 lakh cars was partially offset by its other proposals which "appear to be reasonably positive initiatives'' said Shiraz Rustomjee, counsel for BEAG. The court accepted his submission that the state must be asked to fix a time frame for its latest suggestions. Some of the suggestions such as phasing out of old private vehicles are however not new and were made by the Lal committee eight years back. "The 20-year-old cars can initially be permitted to run on weekends with at least three passengers, that too on the last lane,'' the state government said. It also suggested a congestion tax as is prevalent in some countries abroad. Rustomjee had earlier pointed out that Mumbai gets nearly 350 new cars daily and the figure was only likely to go up dramatically once the Nano hits the city. The HC will now hear the matter on July 8. -- Faizan Jawed Architect 2008 RIBA Norman Foster Traveling Scholar Berkeley Prize 2008 Finalist +91-9820981298 phaizan@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/c589cb09/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 26 15:21:14 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:21:14 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Technical Virtuosity and the New Mobility Agenda Message-ID: <014101c9f626$53da10c0$fb8e3240$@britton@ecoplan.org> We are gathering materials and views on this important topic for World Streets piece, and would be very glad to have your comments and suggestions. We also would be interested to discuss additional articles on this topic if you have any thoughts for us. Thanks so much and I do hope you find some use in this, Eric Britton ---- Technical Virtuosity and the New Mobility Agenda We have long believed that there can be no giant steps in the New Mobility Agenda and all that it entails unless we find a way to engage and enter into new partnerships with a new generation of thinking and practice by our technical transportation colleagues: the engineers, planners, modelers and technicians who hold the key to the transformation process. Without them we cannot sufficiently envisage the future, the different futures that this or that new policy or service might bring about. And we have also seen that people will not vote for or go along with a future that they cannot envisage. In many cases over the last years there has been a tendency of the greenest of our sustainability contemporaries to lambast the technicians almost systematically for "not doing their job", and in the process emerging as impediments rather than facilitators of the transition process. Now there is often something to that on a case by case basis, but the past is not the mirror of the future . . . fortunately. Stories abound about how this or that technical or regulatory unit refused to consider any variants from the older standards and practices, thus scuttling innovations from the outset. Often even for demo or pilot projects, the goals of which include in fact experimenting with different rations and practices as a stepping stone to broader reforms. A typical oft-cites example has been the rigorous upholding of long established parking ratios, despite the fact that the underlying conditions are now clearly different from the past. And there have been many others like this. So we need their help to be credible, and to succeed. And fortunately there is a huge new toolkit which they have been developing in universities, consulting practices and government agencies at the leading edge over the last decade which are now ready for prime time. Some of these tools are very complex and costly to make work (much of the cost being in the development of the necessary technical databases), but many of them can be of great use even though they have modest data and processing requirements. A final thought concerning the new generation of our technical colleagues who are now coming into full maturity, and that has to do with their own transportation practices in their daily lives. There are far more of them who are personally addicted (the word is not too strong) to walking, biking, ridesharing, carsharing, slugging, public transit and other forms of non-solo driver transport for getting to work and in other parts of their lives as well. It is of course far easier to work with such people than someone whose only source of daily transport is their car, and was also often the case for their bosses . . . and their bosses' bosses. So to the extent we are already seeing a cultural change well in process, this makes the new partnership that much easier to achieve. So with this in view, World Streets welcomes articles on tools and practices at the leading edge of the technical fraternity for publication and discussion in these pages. If you have any ideas, all you have to do is get in touch with our editor, as follows: Eric Britton | Editor | editor@worldstreets.org |World Streets | | +331 4326 1323 | Skype newmobility # # # -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/d3aa1995/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jun 26 17:14:33 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:14:33 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Happy Birthday Velib (Oh dear, what's wrong with you?) Message-ID: <01ab01c9f636$25527e80$6ff77b80$@britton@ecoplan.org> Next month, on July 15th Paris will celebrate the second anniversary of the path-showing Velib project. You have seen many different views from many corners of the planet about what is going on here: its perfection, its foibles, its extensions, and more recently news reports that it is about to go into the tank since there are no bikes left. With this in view, we thought we would celebrate this important anniversary with you on Streets, with a series of visits and conversations in order to give you a State of the Velib report as it gets ready to move into Year III. To set the stage, here you have our first Happy Birthday message. Paris, 15 July 2008 Today is the first anniversary of the city of Paris's highly innovative, much sung public bicycle project Velib , which as pretty much everyone by now knows is a contraction of the French words for bicycle (v?lo) and liberty (libert?). Over this first year hundreds of thousands of Parisians and visitors have hopped on a Velib and made something on the order of 26 million trips on the streets of this fair city, most of them paying nothing more than a modest subscription fee for what is otherwise a free trip. There has been a great deal of media coverage and a large number of visitors - and visiting critics. As you can well imagine in a situation where all those people coming from so many places, with such different competences and with so many points of view, there are a wide range of views and opinions about the project, including its high points and shortcomings. These as you will see range wildly from the legitimate to the fanciful. The purpose of this piece then is to provide you with a sort of Velib FAQ, in which I have attempted to take note of the critical observations passed on through personal contacts, press articles, visiting delegations from a number of countries, newsgroups, blogs, e-mail commentaries, woman on the street interviews, etc., as well as daily use of the system myself. Basically then this is a kvetch or complaint list. In the commentaries that follow I do not pretend to provide ?scientific answers?, although in a number of cases the feedback you will find here does draw on polls, surveys and other more or less scientific compilations. But basically my specialty is pattern recognition -- and so what you see here is my attempt to spot the overall patterns and give you what I hope is a measure reaction to these complaints, questions and claims. Finally, I want you to know that while I think Velib is a very important project for many reasons, I do not wish to give the impression of defending any aspect of it. This is a new venture and one that is unique and highly innovational. It has many strong points, and things where further work and fine tuning is needed. This kind of open criticism openly discussed, a public critique, is what is needed both here in Paris. And possibly even more so back home if you are thinking about doing a Velib of your own. Now on with the show. Eric Britton Happy Birthday Velib video http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SkRtzIGhqvI/AAAAAAAAA_c/vJyBgxiTGlQ/s400/velib-hurry-up.jpgBefore you dig in here let me invite you to have a look at a second Happy Birthday Velib piece -- a video by the talented Elisabeth Press of StreetFilms in New York. Elisabeth spent a week in Paris researching her film, and spent enough time riding it to have a good understand of what works, and what works maybe a bit less well. Click here to view her video. Thirty things that are terribly terribly wrong with Velib 1. The bikes are too heavy They weigh 22 kg, roughly a third more than maybe your own bicycle. And sure! if your intention is to put it on your shoulder and carry it up five flights of stairs to your apartment, you?re absolutely right -- it's real heavy. But the fact is that this cycle has been carefully designed in order to do the job that it needs to do. That extra weight turns out to be necessary to provide the full range of support and components necessary for it to do its job. And the necessary robustness -- bear in mind that little bike is going to be ridden by thousands of people of different weights, sizes, cycling skills, etc. over the year. And by and large when you are on the street and peddling away that weight is really no problem (though it can be a drag if you have a steep hill to climb, but you are there for the exercise anyway). In addition the weight and the careful balancing of the bicycle provides good stability, including on the cobblestone Streets which can be a little challenging (see below). 2. Paris is not doing enough to make the city safe for cycling Let's start by bearing in mind that until now there are very few cities in the world which are "safe enough". Paris has doubled the number of safe cycling lanes and protection over the last five years, and is adding on the order or 40-50 km. of additional protection each year. In addition, there are the growing number of "slow speed" projects which are reducing traffic speeds to 30 km/h, and in places, 15 km/h in an extended number of streets and zones. In addition, the city is pushing for a "Street Code" (as opposed to the national "road code" which is oriented to highways and high speed areas, which will among other things require that in the case of an incident the drivers of the heavier vehicles are required to prove their innocence? as opposed to the present practice which requires a proof of guilt (far harder to do). Bottom line: Paris is today a safe city for informed and prudent city cyclists. And it is getting safer all the time. 3. Bike lanes are inconsistent There are two ways of looking at this. Starting from the pure Paris perspective: the streets and sidewalks widths and surfaces here vary enormously from place to place, meaning that it is out of the question to have the sort of unified cycle paths or lanes as will be seen, for example, in the better North American or other out of town leisure cycling projects. This means that there must be a wide variety of strategies for dealing with the opportunities and problems that arise when it comes to protecting cyclists in such radically different environments. So as you cycle Paris you will see a varied network consisting of painted lanes (which they do extremely well , I might add), longitudinal barriers separating bikes from motorized traffic, provision for one way cycling, a variety of ways of separating bikes from pedestrian traffic on sidewalks, careful signage, bike boxes, and more. There are also places in which you have to rough it out, share the road with the traffic. All of which is to say that this is above all a real world environment for ?city cycling? and to do it well knowledge and experience helps.(Just like when you drive your Ferrari.) If by contrast to Paris your city has been laid out with a uniform grid with wide streets and ample space for making a uniform sets of engineered cycle lanes, well go for it. But that will rarely be the case. So you will almost inevitably have to do as they have in Paris and use your noggin. Sorry. 4. Only for young healthy males In Paris, something like 40% of all cyclists are female. And you will see plenty of older people on the streets, on Velibs or their own bikes. Moreover there is a strong trend ? the more cyclists there are on the streets, the safer they become for cyclists. And as this happens, more women and older people will join the happy fray every day. 5. Paris drivers are aggressive and dangerous More folklore than truth to this. This is a fairly common complaint of visitors who have myths in their mind about the French but who have not spent enough time in a bike on the road even in their own city. It is right to the extent that most people who are in temporary control of a couple of tons of hurtling steel and rubber, and in a hurry (and what driver is not?), such drivers and inevitably is going to constitute a menace to smaller, less visible vehicles, such as you or me on a bike. So, as long as drivers can speed, cycling is going to be a slightly risky venture. But here in Paris if you spend enough time on the streets you will observe that drivers are being tamed. And the key to this is the greatly increased number of cyclists out on the streets today. The cyclists are de facto following the tried and true strategy: "occuper le terrain", which can be loosely translated as "safety in numbers". The more cyclists on the street, the safer it becomes. And that already is a strategy. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SkRyVpSkzoI/AAAAAAAAA_8/b4KpPWqwnOw/s400/velib-station2.jpg 6. Can't find a bike/parking slot: This can be a problem, especially for people who are not accustomed to "working the system". The odds are that if you try it enough there are going to be occasions when you can't find a bike in the first (or second) station you go to. Or that if you are in a hurry and show up at your intended destination you may find it full. There are three strategic responses to this two-headed dilemma. The first is to wait. The second is to learn the system, in which event you just head like an arrow to the station you by experience know is more likely to offer what you are looking for (remember with 1451 stations in this small city (105 sq. km) you are unlikely to have to walk or peddle more than five minutes to get to the next station. Simplest of all, you can click button 4 on the Velib station monitor, and then you can with one more click (5) check out the status of all nearby stations for free bikes and parking slots. There are thousands of practiced users of Velib , and that's what they do every day. (All while waiting for better times to come). 7: Can?t even get good information about bike/parking availability. Yes you can, even if it is not yet perfect. You can if before your trip you check out the couple of web sites that provide you with this information with a single click. The one that I use daily is http://www.parisavelo.net/ (I never leave home without it.). There is also an ?official? one from the city of Paris at http://www.en.velib.paris.fr/trouver_une_station, and another excellent one is at http://www.unvelovite.com/Velib/ Of course you are not always at your computer, so what can I tell you to help you avoid bike angst. Well, you will see that the map on each Velib station does indeed show the nearest stations, but they do not (yet) provide information on their status. (This already exists in Lyons and there is every reason to think we will be seeing it in Paris.) There is also a still-clunky WAP 1 gizmo that you can use with your mobile phone for which you can find instructions at http://www.velib.paris.fr/actualites/decouvrez_velib/les_stations_velib_sur_votre_mobile. (I for one have never had the patience, but that?s just me.) The final word on this is that the city and the operators are working on it and we are sure to see continuing improvements, both in Paris and in the other leading city projects. In the meantime, develop your knowledge by using it, and you will see that you will use it every day. 8. Many broken bikes at stations By my own rough calculation, on average I encounter one bike with a problem per ten or so. In most cases the problem is immediately apparent: a loose chain, flat tire, problem with the steering alignment, maybe something with the seat, and more rarely other less visible problems. For a while there has been a fad to cut off the bike baskets but on the basis of daily visual inspection this fad seems to have calmed. If there is something wrong with your bike the etiquette is that when you leave it off or discover the problem, you crank the seat down and turn it in the opposite direction. Then the next person (and the staff) will know immediately. Mechanical problems come with the terrain, and once again point up why managements and maintenance are the keys to the success of any of these systems. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kbTo-M_pSuw/SkR0wzqzcfI/AAAAAAAABAM/5sW1At6UY48/s200/velib-no-brainer.jpg 9. My bike doesn?t work! That probably because you failed to apply the 100% no-brainer start-up test of the regular user. You start by visually inspecting the bike for damage or malfunction. Then you pinch or kick both tires to verify air pressure, pick up the bike and spin the rear wheel, squeeze both brakes, and then adjust the seat to your size ? all before flashing your smart card and checking it out. Now this does not guarantee 100% glitch free cycling, but it does 98% or better. 10. Velib is not "tourist friendly". Some tourists credit cards cannot access bikes Hey. Reality 1: The system is intended as daily transport for Parisians and not tourists (see below). All bank cards with smart chips work just fine, and Amex too. Otherwise no problem, you should most probably be renting a bike anyway. 11. Bikes are too expensive for tourists who want to use them to stroll through Paris That's quite right. If you keep it for an uninterrupted four hour stretch, for example, your bill will quickly run up to 19 Euros. That's more than it would cast you for a full day if you rent it from a bike shop. 12. They are killing the bike retail business Wrong. More cyclists on the street attract yet more cyclists. The number of people riding their own bikes has roughly doubled over this first year of Velib . And while some of these bikes have come out of the attic, others are coming new from the shops. The bike hire, purchase, and maintenance business is doing well in Paris. (But this did not happen by accident.) 13. The stations are not sufficiently visible to cyclists on the move This is true. In other cities the stations are more visibly marked, but the Paris authorities decided to protect their built environment and not have aggressive signing or lighting of the stations. There is doubtless room for doing better, but the protection of the beauty of the city has to be a high priority. 14. Bus drivers are aggressive and threatening I don?t observe this in my own cycling here. First of all the drivers are professionally trained, and those in particular who operate on the reserved lanes where cyclists share the right of way with buses and taxis proceed with great caution. I would offer that the onus by and large is on the cyclists (though the taxis drivers could do with better prepping) One nice touch you will see when you get into a bus lane here is that when the bus pulls up behind you to signal its presence, the drivers will ring a bicycle bell. Nice symbol and an agreeable way to share public space. 15 V?lib? cyclists undisciplined and dangerous. Performance is uneven here. While I observe that the Parisians by and large are safe cyclists (after all they know the terrain and are not just kidding around), the same is not always true of visitors who may, for lack of prudence or experience on the road, put themselves in the way of trouble. Both the city and the operator of the system are aware that increased efforts and information and education are called for. But it will be up to the tourists to do their part. 16. Velib cyclists should be obliged to wear helmets On the several occasions in which there have been accidents the media and some of the public suggest that helmets should be mandatory. Now, an ample amount of observation and work have been done on this subject such that it has been concluded by a majority of experts with knowledge of city cycling that this is something that should be vigorously encouraged but not mandated by law. Compulsory helmets would mean an end to city cycling as it is widely practiced today in the leading cycling cities and countries (See www.ecoplan.org/library/helmets.pdf for more on this). 17. No bikes at the top of hills They do tend to accumulate at the base of the hills since many folks apparently don't want to pedal or walk their Velib up a mountain (of which there are none in Paris of course but there are inclines that can raise a sweat.) So if you are looking for a bike and unless a nice lot of fresh Velibs has just been delivered to your favorite hilltop station, you may want to walk to the base of the hill to find your steed. (That said, the operator and the city have recently come up with a scheme which provides some incentive for getting your bike up to the top f the hill 18. No rear view mirror on bikes Right. And in my view there really should be, but this is not an easy call. In any event, part of being a good cyclist is to profit from your unhindered full field of vision, which also requires the ability to look behind both right and left. But then again, not all or tourists or all our new Velib users may have that level of skill. (Moreover we have to bear in mind that one more piece of equipment may not be without its fair share of maintenance challenges.) 19. Velib is not reducing car traffic and pollution. It is, but the calculation is a subtle one and can be carried out really only at a basic conceptual level. As a rough rule of thumb, one survey showed that more than 10% of all trips were reported as substituting for car trips. Thus if there were 26 million Velib trips performed over the year, for an average trip of 4-5 kms. I..e, more than 100 million (polluting cold start, center city) vehicle kms of which 10% or so are substituting for car trips. Ten million vehicle kms-plus is a number, after all. Beyond that what we are seeing here is a process: as people start to cross over to non-car solutions for their local transport requirements, the car itself slowly begins to become redundant for many city dwellers. Public bicycles are an important part of this conversion process. More use of bikes, of public transportation, of taxis, rental cars. And finally you go over to carsharing and sell that old banger once and for all. Or hang on to it for as long as it makes sense for your out of town trips. 20. They only steal passengers from public transport carriers This is interesting, and not entirely baseless. However the synergies are not altogether negative . In Paris a bit more than half of all Velib trips might otherwise have been taken by bus or metro . There are however two, and at time quite considerable advantages of this dynamic trade-off. First of all if the Velib user voluntarily takes a bike, it's because she thinks it is quicker and often more agreeable. And since the transit services of Paris, like may other cities, are often pushed to capacity and beyond, so in good weather at least the Velib option provide better conditions of transit for all those hoping to find a seat on the bus, train or subway. Win-win, as some insist on saying. 21. Bikes take away parking spaces for cars They sure do, but given that most of those cars carry only one person most of the time, this modal shift is a good thing not only for the city but also for local commerce. People who come into stores by bike or on foot, come more often and, studies show, tend to spend more money for higher quality produce. Not only that, the Velib trip can in most cases in the city be quicker and bring the customer closer to the point of purchase. 22. Bikes steal street space from cars. Yes, that's right, and so they should. Public bikes need a bit of road space, and if they get what they need it has to be taken from somewhere ? that being namely the chaotic street space that is most often used to poor efficiency by high carbon, un-sustainable, high cost (to all concerned), threatening, often dangerous and space-hungry car transport. This needs to be accomplished carefully and with respect to those who up to now have depended on their cars for much or all of the transportation needs. So this needs to be managed as a subtle, strategic process. 23. Bus lanes are too wide This point has been made on repeated occasions by the adversaries to Velib , and more generally to the new mobility innovations in Paris. The shared lanes are 4.5 metres wide, which is the size required for safe overtaking and worked out through careful negotiations between all the concerned parties. 24. Paris buses not equipped to carry cycles No they are not. And most probably given the size of the service area, the availability of public bikes and the density of the public transportation network, this is not a significant option for Paris. (But this does not mean that this is something that your city should not at the very least be looking into). 25. Velibs do not like cobblestone streets and intersections They do not at all. And if your city has a lot of them you will do well to consider how to work around this problem. In such cases maintenance costs zoom up, and when it rains so too do the accidents. Cobblestones and public bikes are not friends. 26. Too ugly and numerous to position near to historic monuments and plazas This is weird, but it is a point that has been made by several groups concerned with the protection of the built patrimony environment in Paris. The irony is that while there is plentiful provision for car parking near to these monuments and public spaces, yet for now the Velib stands are required to hide on side streets. This is a situation which surely will not last. 27. Theft and vandalism are threatening the project The reported figure is on the order of three thousand bikes stolen or completely trashed in the first year. That's a lot, but think of it as on the order of 300 per month or ten per day. And that out of 15,000-plus bikes on the road every day. Difficult but surely workable. (This should not be taken as encouraging laxity on your part I you are thinking about a PBS in your city. The vandalism and theft challenge is a real one and an indicator among other things of the level of social peace and inclusiveness in your city. From this respect it is every bit as important as climate and topographic considerations, and of course the quality and extent of safe cycling infrastructure. 28. It's a "left wing"project Oh dear. This does seem to crop up in certain media from time to time. It's a pure blue herring. Public bicycle systems are social and environmental systems that correspond to our 21st century need for low carbon, resource-efficient, high amenity life styles. And that?s all there is to it. 29. It is wrong to have street advertising This is essentially a pure demagogic position. Each city will have its own policy about outdoor advertising. If a public bicycle project makes use of a partnership of this kind, what is important is to get it right. And the mechanics of that can be quite delicate. That?s for sure. 30. The whole project is just a gadget This is a very mature challenge actually. The fact is that the Velib project in Paris, and indeed in all the other high impact cities with such systems, until now accounts for only a sliver of the total number of trips needed to ensure a healthy economy. But they signal and support an important change to a new way of getting around in cities. And that is at the end of the day probably their major contribution. And BTW, they also work. Including in Paris. Happy birthday Velib. Great going Paris! -- Posted By Eric Britton to World Streets at 6/26/2009 09:24:00 AM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/840b00b1/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 31827 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/840b00b1/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 10277 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/840b00b1/attachment-0001.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 23716 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090626/840b00b1/attachment-0002.jpe From sudhir at cai-asia.org Sun Jun 28 17:18:29 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:18:29 +0800 Subject: [sustran] =?windows-1252?Q?Sustainable_Urban_Mobility_in_Asia_=28?= =?windows-1252?Q?SUMA=29_News_Digest_Vol=2E_6_Issue_5_=96_28_June_?= =?windows-1252?Q?2009?= Message-ID: *Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) News Digest Vol. 6 Issue 5 ? 28 June 2009 * SUMA News Digest is a free monthly e-mail publication that features news, information, and events related to sustainable urban transportation in Asia. **** VISIT THE SUMA PAGES: http://www.cleanairnet.org/suma *** * *SUMA PARTNERS ON THE MOVE! * *Bellagio Declaration* - Twenty one representatives from eighteen different organizations working on transport and climate change in developing countries met 12 -16 May, 2009 in Bellagio, in a meeting to build a consensus on the required policy response to the growing CO2 emissions from transport in the developing world. The meeting resulted in the Bellagio Declaration on Transportation and Climate Change. Read more @ http://www.sutp.org/bellagio-declaration/ *DART team visits Ahmedabad*, India - ITDP and the city of Ahmedabad recently hosted representatives from the city of Dar es Salaam who came to learn more about the Ahmedabad?s Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS). Ahmedabad?s initial 12.5 km BRTS corridor is in the final stages of construction. On a site visit to the corridor, the delegates had an opportunity to tour new stations and take a ride in a BRTS bus. Read more @ http://www.itdp.org/index.php/projects/update/dart_team_visits_ahmedabad/ *ADB Clean Energy forum & SAFE Annual Convention 2009* -CAI-Asia center participated in 4th Asia Clean Energy Forum 2009 and SAFE Annual Convention 2009(organized by Society for Automotive Fitness and Environment). The presentations on E-Bikes and Inspection and Maintenance in Asian countries can be accessed @ http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/articles-73435_ebike.pdf & http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/articles-73436_safe.pdf *GTZ Sourcebook on urban transport for the South Asian Audience* - GTZ SUTP?s flagship publication ?Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Countries? has been adapted for the South Asian audience and is available for purchase in its print version. Read more @ http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1568&Itemid=1&lang=uk *NEWSREPORTS * * HEADLINES * *Malaysia :* Planning a better city with the people http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73448.html *Malaysia :* Time to stop the reckless bus drivers http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73449.html *ASIA:* Regional Railway Links Aim to Boost Trade, Cooperation http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73442.html *Global: *Commentary: "Smart" and "green" right direction for future urban public transport http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73446.html *India: *Delhi plans ?exclusive? fund for future transport projects http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73443.html *India: *WB to provide $5 bn loan for urban development http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73444.html *Bangladesh:* Level crossings unsafe http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73447.html *Vietnam: *Transport department wants single agency on traffic lights http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73450.html *Vietnam: *Measures urged to curb traffic pollution http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73451.html *Philippines :* Public transportation routes up for review to curb emissions http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73452.html *Pakistan : * Air of big cities unhealthy http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73453.html *Pakistan : *500 CNG buses project ?ready to kick off? http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73454.html *China: *Survey: four-fifths urban Chinese say traffic jam haunts their cities http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73455.html *Indonesia : *Motorcyclists face high risks http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73456.html *Indonesia :* Chaotic public transportation is here to stay: Expert http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73457.html * * * * * * *INTERESTING FINDS/SEMINARS * *Global status report on road safety -* * ?Pedestrians, cyclists among main road traffic crash victims?* The first global assessment of road safety finds that almost half of the estimated 1.27 million people who die in road traffic crashes every year are pedestrians, motorcyclists and cyclists. While progress has been made towards protecting people in cars, the needs of these vulnerable groups of road users are not being met. It uses a standardized method that allows comparisons between countries to be made. While road traffic death rates in many high-income countries have stabilized or declined in recent decades, research suggests road deaths are increasing in most regions of the world and that if trends continue unabated, they will rise to an estimated 2.4 million a year by 2030. Clearly, developing nations have a huge challenge ahead !! read more @ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2009/road_safety_report_20090615/en/index.html *Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chains* This excellent study tries to evaluate the emissions generated for different modes from life cycle perspective.Most current decision-making relies on analysis at the tailpipe, ignoring vehicle production, infrastructure provision, and fuel production required for support.The authors conclude that to appropriately mitigate environmental impacts from transportation, it is necessary for decision makers to consider the life-cycle energy use and emissions. The authors present results of a comprehensive life-cycle energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and selected criteria air pollutant emissions inventory for automobiles, buses, trains, and airplanes in the US, including vehicles, infrastructure, fuel production, and supply chains. Read More @ http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1748-9326/4/2/024008/ * Policy for better Air Quality in Asia: Proposal for a Policy Evaluation Method for four ASEAN Countries* In this interesting research, policy issues from four ASEAN countries- Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand are analyzed and its impact on air quality estimated. The author has estimated the 2015 car stock by emission regulation levels from past trends. Considering these car stock results, this paper emphasizes monitoring problems such as vehicle registration systems, inspection and maintenance (I/M) systems and fuel quality monitoring systems for vehicles in use. Monitoring problems in developing countries share similar characteristics such as a weakness in government initiatives and inadequate operation of government agencies, which results from a lack of human resources and analysis of facilities. Read more @ http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/15081/1/MPRA_paper_15081.pdf *Sustainable Automobile Society in East Asia (SASEA) project* Concerned with the increasing levels of air pollution caused by motor vehicles in Asia?s major cities, a group of researchers brought together by Japan Automobile Research Institute (JARI) and Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) initiated the Sustainable Automobile Society in East Asia (SASEA) project. It aims to contribute to the application of sustainable development from a viewpoint of air pollution reduction and the growing economies of East Asia. Read more @ . http://www.eria.org/research/y2008-no7.html *Walkability* Walk the Talk: CAI-Asia Center's Walkability Experiment - Two British School Manila (BSM) students volunteer to conduct a modified version of the World Bank's walkability survey in selected Metro Manila areas ? Read more @ http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73429.html and http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73432.html Access Prof Madhav Badami?s presentation in ADB Manila @ http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-73426.html Centre for Science and Environment has released its report on Walkability in New Delhi titled ?how walkable is our cities?? . The survey exposed many startling facts read more @ http://www.cseindia.org/campaign/apc/pdf/Walkability.pdf * * * * * * *MARK YOUR CALENDARS * Citynet Congress 2009, 11 September, Yokohama, http://www.citynet2009yokohama.jp/index_en.html 5th International Marketing Conference - Successfully marketing public transport, 7-9 October 2009, Lisbon, Portugal http://www.uitp.org/events/2009/lisbon/en/ 8th International Conference of EASTS, 19-October, 2009, Surabaya http://www.easts2009.org/ Accident Prevention: Road Safety Measures 4th IRF Regional Conference on Road Safety, 23 October 2009 , New Delhi, India http://www.irfnet.org/eventdetail.php?catid=1&id=100&title=4th%20Regional%20IRF%20Conference%20on%20Road%20Safety 2nd MENA Public Transport Congress and Showcase , 25-27 October 2009, Doha, Qatar http://www.uitp.org/events/2009/qatar/en/index.cfm TRAINING PROGRAMME, 8th Training Programme for Public Transport Managers , 16-18 November 2009, Belfast, http://www.uitp.org/events/2009/8Training/en/index.cfm Urban Mobility India ? 2009, 3-December 2009, New Delhi, http://www.iutindia.org/urban2009.html TRB 89th Annual Meeting, 10 January, 2010, Washington DC http://www.trb.org/AnnualMeeting/default.asp ** * * CONTRIBUTE * * * * To contribute articles, news items, or event announcements for the next issue, send an email with the complete details and URL source to suma-news-owner@googlegroups.com with subject "FOR SUMA NEWS". Past issues from March and April 2008 are found at http://groups.google.com/group/suma-news ** * * ABOUT SUMA * * * * The Sustainable Urban Mobility in Asia (SUMA) program is supported by the Asian Development Bank through a grant from Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. SUMA is implemented by the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities Center (www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia), in partnership with EMBARQ - the World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport (http://embarq.wri.org), GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project ( www.sutp.org), Interface for Cycling Expertise ( www.cycling.nl), Institute for Transportation and Development Policy ( www.itdp.org), and United Nations Center for Regional Development ( www.uncrd.or.jp/est) -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090628/089a56e7/attachment.html From sudhir at cai-asia.org Sun Jun 28 20:38:58 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 19:38:58 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Indonesia's traffic nightmare Message-ID: *"lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won't run them down as they cross the street.*" http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/SE%2BAsia/Story/STIStory_396512.html JAKARTA - NEW laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people. The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said. Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with barely moving, pollution-spewing cars. That's too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and won't be operational until 2016 at the earliest. 'Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city's mobility will die,' University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh Prasidha said. Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, l*awmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won't run them down as they cross the street. * Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning. 'It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra burdens and obligations,' Institute of Transportation Studies (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said. 'The law is a triumph for the automotive industry. It's completely useless for alleviating the traffic problem.' The number of motor vehicles including motorcycles in greater Jakarta has almost tripled in the past eight years to 9.52 million. Meanwhile road space has grown less than one percent annually since 2004, according to the Indonesian Transport Society. 'Traffic congestion is like cancer,' Institute for Transportation and Development Policy specialist Harya Setyaka said. 'This cancer has developed over 30 years as Jakarta begins to develop haphazardly beyond its carrying capacity.' A 2004 study by the Japan International Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel consumption, lost productivity and health impact. -- AFP -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090628/d767fd03/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Sun Jun 28 21:42:01 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:42:01 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A476519.5070602@greenidea.eu> Hi Sudhir, This caught my eye: "...The law is a triumph for the automotive industry.." Which automobile makers are among the most active in Indonesia? Or with the highest sales? Thanks, T Sudhir wrote: > *"lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people > wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won't run them down > as they cross the street.*" > > http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/SE%2BAsia/Story/STIStory_396512.html > > JAKARTA - NEW laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic > signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in > the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people. > > The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic > that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million > people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said. > > Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will > reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with > barely moving, pollution-spewing cars. > > That's too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass > Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and > won't be operational until 2016 at the earliest. > > 'Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city's > mobility will die,' University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh > Prasidha said. > > Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, l/awmakers voted > unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing > their condition so motorists won't run them down as they cross the street. > / > Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which > for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to > run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning. > > 'It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra > burdens and obligations,' Institute of Transportation Studies > (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said. > > 'The law is a triumph for the automotive industry. It's completely > useless for alleviating the traffic problem.' The number of motor > vehicles including motorcycles in greater Jakarta has almost tripled > in the past eight years to 9.52 million. Meanwhile road space has > grown less than one percent annually since 2004, according to the > Indonesian Transport Society. > > 'Traffic congestion is like cancer,' Institute for Transportation and > Development Policy specialist Harya Setyaka said. 'This cancer has > developed over 30 years as Jakarta begins to develop haphazardly > beyond its carrying capacity.' A 2004 study by the Japan International > Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 > trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel > consumption, lost productivity and health impact. -- AFP > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090628/7f0c1984/attachment.html From johnitdp at gmail.com Mon Jun 29 13:03:31 2009 From: johnitdp at gmail.com (John Ernst) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:03:31 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: <4A476519.5070602@greenidea.eu> References: <4A476519.5070602@greenidea.eu> Message-ID: <4a483d1a.15528c0a.2e5d.6b5f@mx.google.com> Toyota has long led the automobile market in Indonesia with the locally manufactured 'Kijang' utility vehicle. Yamaha dominates the more rapidly growing motorcycle market, with Honda catching up from a later (local manufacturing) start. (So, yes, it is not coincidental that most of the plans for Indonesian highway expansion are developed with assistance from JICA.) Several Indonesian NGOs lobbied for an improvement in the transportation bill as it was reauthorized this year, and the article posted represents the general disappointment at lack of progress -- and regress concerning requirements for the physically challenged. Note that the 'expert' calculation of total gridlock for Jakarta in 5-years is based simply on projecting vehicle registrations against square meters of road space and noting that Jakarta will be able to fill up every square meter of road space by having every car owner come out at once and park on the street. Not exactly an 'expert' analysis, but it was successful in giving the media a handle on the problem. The figure was probably initially developed to lobby for more road construction, but has been equally effective at pointing out the hopelessness of trying to build enough roads to keep up with motor vehicle growth. What is not noted in the article is that the current, sub-optimally implemented, BRT in Jakarta uses road space about 8 times more efficiently than car traffic (roughly 4000 vs 500 passengers per hour per direction at peak hour) . There is potential to double the BRT efficiency fairly easily, meaning adding 1 lane of BRT equates to adding 16 lanes for cars. Although Jakarta has over 100km of BRT operating, its poor quality implementation has kept it from catching the imagination of the press. A good lesson for other cities. Best, John Ernst Vice Director, SE Asia ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide www.itdp.org At 07:42 PM 6/28/2009, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: >Which automobile makers are among the most active in Indonesia? Or >with the highest sales? From sudhir at cai-asia.org Mon Jun 29 13:46:32 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:46:32 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: <4a483d1a.15528c0a.2e5d.6b5f@mx.google.com> References: <4A476519.5070602@greenidea.eu> <4a483d1a.15528c0a.2e5d.6b5f@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Thanks John, definitely a bad news from a country which is planning to have EST strategy.. If this is true than this looks like worst kind of discrimination .... anybody has seen the transportation bill to find what is the exact language used? can somebody share this? thanks Sudhir 2009/6/29 John Ernst > > Toyota has long led the automobile market in Indonesia with the > locally manufactured 'Kijang' utility vehicle. Yamaha dominates the > more rapidly growing motorcycle market, with Honda catching up from a > later (local manufacturing) start. (So, yes, it is not coincidental > that most of the plans for Indonesian highway expansion are developed > with assistance from JICA.) > > Several Indonesian NGOs lobbied for an improvement in the > transportation bill as it was reauthorized this year, and the article > posted represents the general disappointment at lack of progress -- > and regress concerning requirements for the physically challenged. > > Note that the 'expert' calculation of total gridlock for Jakarta in > 5-years is based simply on projecting vehicle registrations against > square meters of road space and noting that Jakarta will be able to > fill up every square meter of road space by having every car owner > come out at once and park on the street. Not exactly an 'expert' > analysis, but it was successful in giving the media a handle on the > problem. > > The figure was probably initially developed to lobby for more road > construction, but has been equally effective at pointing out the > hopelessness of trying to build enough roads to keep up with motor > vehicle growth. > > What is not noted in the article is that the current, sub-optimally > implemented, BRT in Jakarta uses road space about 8 times more > efficiently than car traffic (roughly 4000 vs 500 passengers per hour > per direction at peak hour) . There is potential to double the BRT > efficiency fairly easily, meaning adding 1 lane of BRT equates to > adding 16 lanes for cars. Although Jakarta has over 100km of BRT > operating, its poor quality implementation has kept it from catching > the imagination of the press. A good lesson for other cities. > > Best, > > John Ernst > Vice Director, SE Asia > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation > worldwide > www.itdp.org > > > At 07:42 PM 6/28/2009, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > > >Which automobile makers are among the most active in Indonesia? Or > >with the highest sales? > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090629/194330c9/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.eu Mon Jun 29 21:28:13 2009 From: edelman at greenidea.eu (Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:28:13 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: <4a483d1a.15528c0a.2e5d.6b5f@mx.google.com> References: <4A476519.5070602@greenidea.eu> <4a483d1a.15528c0a.2e5d.6b5f@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <4A48B35D.8010105@greenidea.eu> Well, then.... it seems quite appropriate to shame these companies. Especially Toyota with all its Priuspromises and Vision Zero stuff (related to road deaths) oriented towards (at least) Western consumers. At least the environmental organisations which have a symbiotic relationship with Toyota need to get a "another reason you are jerks" letter. - T John Ernst wrote: > > Toyota has long led the automobile market in Indonesia with the > locally manufactured 'Kijang' utility vehicle. Yamaha dominates the > more rapidly growing motorcycle market, with Honda catching up from a > later (local manufacturing) start. (So, yes, it is not coincidental > that most of the plans for Indonesian highway expansion are developed > with assistance from JICA.) > > Several Indonesian NGOs lobbied for an improvement in the > transportation bill as it was reauthorized this year, and the article > posted represents the general disappointment at lack of progress -- > and regress concerning requirements for the physically challenged. > > Note that the 'expert' calculation of total gridlock for Jakarta in > 5-years is based simply on projecting vehicle registrations against > square meters of road space and noting that Jakarta will be able to > fill up every square meter of road space by having every car owner > come out at once and park on the street. Not exactly an 'expert' > analysis, but it was successful in giving the media a handle on the > problem. > > The figure was probably initially developed to lobby for more road > construction, but has been equally effective at pointing out the > hopelessness of trying to build enough roads to keep up with motor > vehicle growth. > > What is not noted in the article is that the current, sub-optimally > implemented, BRT in Jakarta uses road space about 8 times more > efficiently than car traffic (roughly 4000 vs 500 passengers per hour > per direction at peak hour) . There is potential to double the BRT > efficiency fairly easily, meaning adding 1 lane of BRT equates to > adding 16 lanes for cars. Although Jakarta has over 100km of BRT > operating, its poor quality implementation has kept it from catching > the imagination of the press. A good lesson for other cities. > > Best, > > John Ernst > Vice Director, SE Asia > ITDP - The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy > Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation > worldwide > www.itdp.org > > > At 07:42 PM 6/28/2009, Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote: > >> Which automobile makers are among the most active in Indonesia? Or >> with the highest sales? > > -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Green Idea Factory Urbanstr. 45 D-10967 Berlin Germany Skype: toddedelman Mobile: ++49 0162 814 4081 Home/Office: ++49 030 7554 0001 edelman@greenidea.eu www.greenidea.eu www.facebook.com/toddedelman www.flickr.com/photos/edelman CAR is over. If you want it. "Fort mit der Autostadt und was Neues hingebaut!" - B. Brecht (with slight modification) From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jun 29 22:07:48 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:07:48 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare Message-ID: <01f601c9f8ba$9bb5acb0$d3210610$@britton@ecoplan.org> This is the kind of item in which I believe it is very very important to be 100% sure that one has all the facts straight. Eric Britton | Editor | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype newmobility -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090629/f6c40e52/attachment.html From carlosfpardo at gmail.com Tue Jun 30 10:23:19 2009 From: carlosfpardo at gmail.com (Carlosfelipe Pardo) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:23:19 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A496907.6050908@gmail.com> Hi, Just a short comment on this issue of the sign that disabled people should wear: this just seems like Hawthorne's book The Scarlett Letter (and we could find more recent and true examples of similar situations...) Is there a way for an Indonesian organization to make this law un-enforceable because it violates human rights? I find it extremely discriminatory and excluding. Why don't they use a hot iron to put a sign on car-drivers' foreheads as well? It sounds just as logical... At least the press gave some space to Tyas and others to give their views... Best regards, Carlos. Sudhir wrote: > *"lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people > wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won't run them down > as they cross the street.*" > > http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/SE%2BAsia/Story/STIStory_396512.html > > JAKARTA - NEW laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic > signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in > the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people. > > The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic > that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million > people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said. > > Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will > reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with > barely moving, pollution-spewing cars. > > That's too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass > Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and > won't be operational until 2016 at the earliest. > > 'Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city's > mobility will die,' University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh > Prasidha said. > > Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, l/awmakers voted > unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing > their condition so motorists won't run them down as they cross the street. > / > Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which > for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to > run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning. > > 'It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra > burdens and obligations,' Institute of Transportation Studies > (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said. > > 'The law is a triumph for the automotive industry. It's completely > useless for alleviating the traffic problem.' The number of motor > vehicles including motorcycles in greater Jakarta has almost tripled > in the past eight years to 9.52 million. Meanwhile road space has > grown less than one percent annually since 2004, according to the > Indonesian Transport Society. > > 'Traffic congestion is like cancer,' Institute for Transportation and > Development Policy specialist Harya Setyaka said. 'This cancer has > developed over 30 years as Jakarta begins to develop haphazardly > beyond its carrying capacity.' A 2004 study by the Japan International > Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 > trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel > consumption, lost productivity and health impact. -- AFP > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Sudhir Gota > Transport Specialist > CAI-Asia Center > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > Skype : sudhirgota > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From sudhir at cai-asia.org Tue Jun 30 10:29:42 2009 From: sudhir at cai-asia.org (Sudhir) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:29:42 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Indonesia's traffic nightmare In-Reply-To: <4A496907.6050908@gmail.com> References: <4A496907.6050908@gmail.com> Message-ID: It looks surprising and still cannot believe it. Hope somebody would get us the bill. we have emailed few friends. Carlos - look at this http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/06/24/people-can-sue-govt-poor-public-services.html *If public service providers fail to perform their duty, and if because of their negligence members of the public are injured or die as a result, they are liable to criminal punishment*?. amazing !! cheers Sudhir 2009/6/30 Carlosfelipe Pardo > Hi, > > Just a short comment on this issue of the sign that disabled people > should wear: this just seems like Hawthorne's book The Scarlett Letter > (and we could find more recent and true examples of similar > situations...) Is there a way for an Indonesian organization to make > this law un-enforceable because it violates human rights? I find it > extremely discriminatory and excluding. Why don't they use a hot iron to > put a sign on car-drivers' foreheads as well? It sounds just as > logical... At least the press gave some space to Tyas and others to give > their views... > > Best regards, > > Carlos. > > Sudhir wrote: > > *"lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people > > wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won't run them down > > as they cross the street.*" > > > > > http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/SE%2BAsia/Story/STIStory_396512.html > > > > JAKARTA - NEW laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic > > signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in > > the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people. > > > > The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic > > that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million > > people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said. > > > > Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will > > reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with > > barely moving, pollution-spewing cars. > > > > That's too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass > > Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and > > won't be operational until 2016 at the earliest. > > > > 'Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city's > > mobility will die,' University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh > > Prasidha said. > > > > Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, l/awmakers voted > > unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing > > their condition so motorists won't run them down as they cross the > street. > > / > > Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which > > for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to > > run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning. > > > > 'It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra > > burdens and obligations,' Institute of Transportation Studies > > (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said. > > > > 'The law is a triumph for the automotive industry. It's completely > > useless for alleviating the traffic problem.' The number of motor > > vehicles including motorcycles in greater Jakarta has almost tripled > > in the past eight years to 9.52 million. Meanwhile road space has > > grown less than one percent annually since 2004, according to the > > Indonesian Transport Society. > > > > 'Traffic congestion is like cancer,' Institute for Transportation and > > Development Policy specialist Harya Setyaka said. 'This cancer has > > developed over 30 years as Jakarta begins to develop haphazardly > > beyond its carrying capacity.' A 2004 study by the Japan International > > Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 > > trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel > > consumption, lost productivity and health impact. -- AFP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sudhir Gota > > Transport Specialist > > CAI-Asia Center > > Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, > > ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City > > Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 > > Tel: +63-2-395-2843 > > Fax: +63-2-395-2846 > > http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia > > Skype : sudhirgota > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > > > ================================================================ > > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------------------------------------------------- > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss > > -------------------------------------------------------- > If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to > http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real > sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -- Sudhir Gota Transport Specialist CAI-Asia Center Unit 3510, 35th Floor, Robinsons-Equitable Tower, ADB Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City Metro Manila, Philippines 1605 Tel: +63-2-395-2843 Fax: +63-2-395-2846 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia Skype : sudhirgota -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090630/e3c45130/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jun 30 16:31:05 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:31:05 +0200 Subject: [sustran] [World Streets] Heads-up: Keeping up with World Streets Message-ID: <012501c9f954$bcc0f0a0$3642d1e0$@britton@ecoplan.org> Using LinkedIn to keep up with World Streets - Paul Minett, Trip Convergence Ltd, New Zealand This is a practical post with a suggestion. I found that I was not keeping up with World Streets because I do not use the RSS feeds. And I wanted a weekly summary rather than daily emails or the monthly summary. Some people are hard to please! Using LinkedIn to keep up with World Streets What I found is that if you join the World Streets Working Group on LinkedIn - a free social/professional networking site -- you can get a daily or weekly (your choice) summary of the World Streets posts sent directly to your email. I use the weekly version to keep up myself. Here is how you do it: 1. Sign in to LinkedIn at http://www.linkedin.com (or click on the link in item 2) 2. Go to Groups and click on the World Streets Working Group (alternatively just click this link: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=668837 3. Click the 'Join Group' button. 4. You will see that you get options for how often you would like to receive summaries of activity in the group. The way it is set up, all World Streets posts go to this group, and then are summarised for you at whatever frequency you would like. Like something you see there, a single click takes it to you on the World Streets site. An additional benefit of joining the LinkedIn group is that you can see who else is there, and communicate directly with others in the group who share this interest. -- Posted to World Streets at 6/30/2009 07:42:00 AM __._,_.___ . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090630/b0ecc557/attachment.html From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jun 30 22:17:09 2009 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:17:09 +0200 Subject: [sustran] World Streets needs to do better Message-ID: <025f01c9f985$150622a0$3f1267e0$@britton@ecoplan.org> John Ernst, a long time sustainable transport colleague and ITDP Vice Director, Southeast Asia, writes today that he finds World Streets pretty good value, but he regrets that most of our content thus far seems to be focusing on what is going on within the advanced edge of the OECD region. What can I say in response but yes indeed -- so what if we now put our heads together to bring in content from other parts of the world . . . after all, that?s where most of the people are and where the future is going to play out in the mega-numbers. So let me share this with you as a challenge. And what do we need from all these places? Well, news on trials and innovations to support more sustainable transport where they are actually up and working, honest reporting on everything, and even from time to time when it is exemplary, information for our Bad News Department. But we are at least getting read in other parts of the world. Take a look at the map showing the origin of people coming in to Streets this morning , and we note visitors from Brazil, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Korea, Republic Of, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, South Africa, Thailand, and Turkey. That has to mean something. And in this spirit if you can help us bring in readers from these other places, it is surely a step in the right direction. Readers can become sources and writers rather quickly we have seen. One idea that comes to mind immediately is to see if we can get your support for doing some Profiles ? see http://tinyurl.com/ws-profiles for latest background on that -- on outstanding organizations and programs in these parts of the world. Again, it is true that we tend to now most about what is going on in the OECD region, but profiles telling us what lading programs and groups are trying to do in China, India, Indonesia and all the rest will be very important and of high interest to us all. And am I hearing someone saying Africa and the Middle East too? Yes, please. Finally we are not exactly sitting on our hands and here is something that is still cooking, but may provide us with a key for John?s good challenge for the future. We are working with our Italian friend and Eyes on the Street Sentinel in Bergamo in the north of Italy, Enrico Bonfatti, to develop an Italian language site ? Nuova Mobilit? -- which takes World Streets as part of its content but then builds on it in several interesting and powerful ways to make it into a good and useful read to advance the sustainable transport agenda in Italy. You can check it out at http://nuovamobilita.blogspot.com, but please understand it is still work in progress and not yet ready for show time. There are two main streams of content for a partner journal like this. The first is selected World Streets articles which Enrico and eventually others are adapting not only in terms of putting them into Italian, but also interpreting and adapting them so as to have meaning in the Italian context. The second stream is Italian content per se. (And of course we at Streets profit because some of this becomes material for publication here.) Perhaps that is an example for yet other countries and language groups. It is too early to say if we can get the right model for this, but it is to let you know that we are working on it and trying to develop it as a template for relatively easy adaptation. If you wish to talk about this in the case of your country or language group, it would be great to hear from you. So kindly get in touch with your ideas and suggestions. You can do this either publically here, or if you think it better to me directly. Thanks for thinking about it. And of yes, keep your eyes on the street. Eric Britton | Editor | World Streets | The New Mobility Agenda | Paris | +331 4326 1323 | Skype newmobility -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090630/85feeb55/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 102013 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20090630/85feeb55/attachment.png