Due to the increasing interest around the world on BRT projects and the different projects that have been developed in many developing cities, SUTP has developed a BRT subpage with training material, documents, presentations and web links about this topic. In the near future, pictures of BRT sytsems around the world will be readily available for download as well. The subpage can be accessed at the following link:

http://www.sutp.org/newweb/brt/brtress.htm

Best regards,

Carlos F. Pardo

Project Coordinator

GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP)

Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP

ESCAP UN Building

Rajadamnern Nok Rd.

Bangkok 10200, Thailand

Tel:  +66 (0) 2 - 288  2576

Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280  6042

Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727

e-mail: carlos.pardo@...

Website: www.sutp.org

The New Mobility/World Transport Agenda
Consult at: http://NewMobiity.org
To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe:  WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com 
To unsubscribe:  WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Can anyone help Steve out in this?  If you want to see more on his work plan, there’s an article at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK0504/S00064.htm the text of which I reproduce for you below.

If you don’t mind my mentioning it, it’s just this kind of smiling international peer support that the New Mobility Agenda is supposed to be all about.  So I remain optimistic that even at this very last minute one or two of us will have some suggestions for him

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Abley [mailto:steve@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 1:03 AM

__________________________________________________________
Partnership for Sustainable Urban Transport in Asia (PSUTA)
Weekly News Digest        

Vol.2 Issue 11        
22 April 2005

Please send articles or news items for inclusion in PSUTA news Digest to aables@...
___________________________________________________________

These new reads at CAI-Asia website are related to sustainable transport.

1.        BRT page now available
CAI-Asia has started to put up a page on bus rapid transit that will contain documents, presentations, news and brt links. Please direct your inputs and comments to Au Ables (aables@...).
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59592.html

3.        Bus Systems for the Future: Achieving Sustainable Transport Worldwide
The International Energy Agency released this book in 2002 to "explore how the provision of better bus services can bring concrete solutions." It discusses BRT and includes case studies. It looks into alternative sources of energy for transportation and clean conventional fuels.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59837.html

UPCOMING EVENTS

14th International Symposium Transport and Air Pollution Graz, Austria June 1 - 3, 2005
URL http://vkm-thd.tugraz.at/
http://www.cleanairnet.org/cai/1403/article-59641.html


HEADLINES

Delhi rates most unsafe metro on women’s survey
Single women have trouble finding safe places to stay in Capital; husbands score high on support.
Kavita Chowdhury, ExpressIndia.com (20 April 2005) New Delhi, India: FOR working women in the Capital, the results of a study of the five metros conducted by the FICCI Ladies Organisation (FLO) are mixed. While women in Delhi enjoy some of the highest income levels, the city ranks the lowest as far as personal safety is concerned. Hyderabad was found the safest city.
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=125763

Rail system to link Delta
Jane Chen, Shanghai Daily news (20 April 2005) SHANGHAI, CHINA: An 815 kilometer rail network will be built by 2020 to connect cities in the Yangtze River Delta area, it was revealed at "the Third China Urban Rail Transport International Summit" held in Shanghai on April 19.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59843.html

Benefits of good transport plan
Penang, The Star(20 April 2005) KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA: An effective public transportation system in the Klang Valley will go a long way in alleviating the squatter problem in Selangor, said Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/4/20/nation/10732910&sec=nation

Urban transport may go Bangalore style
TIMES NEWS NETWORK (19 APRIL 2005) LUCKNOW, INDIA: City residents who wrestle daily with commuting woes may get ready for a pleasant surprise, if a state government plan to adopt the Bangalore pattern of urban transport system materialises. The green signal was given to the proposal at a recent meeting of the Urban Transport Authority here. At the meeting — which private operators attended — it was decided in principle to introduce the system by constituting a separate urban city bus corporation.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1081561.cms

Chongqing road accident kills 27
Xinhuanet (19 April 2005) CHONGQING,CHINA: Twenty-seven people were killed and four seriously injured when a coach bus fell off a bridge in southwest China's Chongqing Municipality in the small hours Tuesday.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59841.html

State to act fast on bus terminal woes
Penang, The Star (18 April 2005) MALAYSIA: Any problem arising from the opening of the new RM5.8mil express bus terminal in Sungai Nibong will be looked into immediately.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59840.html

Koizumi has funds key to skybus plan
ARYA RUDRA, TIMES NEWS NETWORK (16 APRIL 2005) KOLKATA: The city has much to hope for when Japanese premier Junichiro Koizumi comes to India later this month. He may have the key to solving Kolkata's traffic chaos that is fast spiralling out of control.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59839.html

Traffic Police Gear Up to Control Kathmandu's Streets
Nepal Samacharpatra, 16 April 2005 (Translated and Summarized by CE News) The intensive efforts of the Traffic Police over the last two months to enforce traffic rules are beginning to show results. In the past two months (Falgun and Chaitra, 2061), the Kathmandu Valley Traffic Police has fined 43,855 vehicle drivers for breaking traffic rules and collected Rs. 52,46,975 in revenue. This is almost 50 percent higher than the previous two months. The rate of traffic accidents has also reduced by about half during this period.
http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59809.html

Aurora Ables
Consultant
Asian Development Bank
Tel (632) 632-4444
www.adb.org

Dear friends,

SUTP has launched the contest for best video on urban transport trip documentary in an Asian city as a part of the project's intention to diffuse information and knowledge about sustainable transport. The basic idea behind the video is to show a typical transport itinerary of a working person in a large size city in Asia, from the moment he/she leaves his/her house to the moment he/she arrives at work. More details on the contest can be read in www.sutp.org/newweb/videoterms.htm

Please forward this to anyone you think could be interested. Any comments are welcome replying to this email or writing to sutp@...

Best regards,

Carlos F. Pardo

Project Coordinator

GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP)

Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP

ESCAP UN Building

Rajadamnern Nok Rd.

Bangkok 10200, Thailand

Tel:  +66 (0) 2 - 288  2576

Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280  6042

Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727

e-mail: carlos.pardo@...

Website: www.sutp.org

Hi Carlos,

Super initiative. It could be very useful indeed. I hope very much that this gets some good results.  

One small idea comes to mind: the possibility if the quality is there of making some kind of montage.  It could be very powerful (or alternatively quite a yawner.. but hey! that’s what art is all about.)

Also, I hope that you will consider streaming, possibly even the whole lot.  For our part, we will be pleased to provide direct high profile links from the New Mobility Agenda.  (And most like the Kyoto World Cities 20/20 Challenge as well since it is right on target for our interests.)

It would be great if we could find someone who might be willing to help in beefing up those prizes.

We need a lot more of this.

As always,

Eric

PS. Here’s a profile that I think it was Dinesh who mentioned it to me some time back.  Little girl takes the bus to go to school in, say, Delhi.  Sound’s good, eh?  Wow. Terribly dangerous, especially as she walks in an unprotected environment to make it to the bus stop.  And even worse when she tries to make it hoe at the end of the day.  The point here of course is that things are not quite as simple as one might think.  Which is where we, all of us who deeply care about all this, all come in.

In democratic countries knowledge of how to combine is the mother of all other

forms of knowledge; on its progress depends that of all the others.

A. de Tocqueville, 1835

Dear Challenge Friends and Partners,

We are moving ahead smartly in our organization on the vital communications side of our international cooperative effort under the Challenge, and are now ready to split our supporting eFora/newsgroups into two separate operational units.  This GoogleGroup list will from here on be used strictly  for occasional announcements and exception information as originally indicted.

Starting this week, all the discussions and exchanges in support of the various working groups that are gradually beginning to take shape as we move from theory to action - will take place via our new Kyoto 20/20 Working Groups forum at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Kyoto2020/.  Incidentally the best way to access this group will be via the main Bridge section then the 20/20 Working Groups link.  In addition all announcements concerning new Kyoto Blog entries will automatically be transferred to this list, where discussion and comment on them is likewise invited.  This should prove a lively and useful forum, and for your further invitation I attach below the short note inviting participation.

In addition, you may chose to have a look under the Feedback link, the manner in which the other content is accessed.  In addition to the latest on this Google forum, you will also see a convenient link to the Kyoto Challenge Blog where you will today see a terrific article by our long time friend, colleague and member of our Council Professor John Whitelegg on The global transport challenge (“The world’s transport system wastes lives, health, and money – and is choking the planet. Citizens need to take control”)

Finally under that Feedback link you will see and to you perhaps a bit strange new discussion and brainstorming space in the form of a Wiki (The name is based on the Hawaiian term wiki wiki, meaning "quick" or "super-fast").  If we are to create “other forms of progress in support of democracy” then we must in this global 21st century  world of ours learn “other ways to combine”.  Which of course is what the Kyoto World Cities 20/20 Challenge is all about.

There you have it for today.  If you have any questions, or suggestions for that matter, here as always is how to get in touch.

Eric Britton

The Kyoto World Cities Challenge is at http://kyotocities.org 

The Commons is at http://www.ecoplan.org

Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara          75006 Paris, France

T: +331 4326 1323   Via Skype.com  Click here (callto://ericbritton)

E: secretariat@...    Backup: fekbritton@...

Note to invite participation in 20/20 Working Groups forum.

Dear 20/20 Working Group Colleagues,

This is to invite you to this new e-forum set up under Google to help us all keep track of our exchanges as this part of the program advances. The idea is that those of us who are showing up here are ready to communicate, listen and learn from each other as we try to move ahead in our own work. The Google group serves as our collective memory of our exchanges in this process.

Please take note that the forum is organized in (a) regional groupings and (b) cross-cutting themes.  To see how it works, I invite you to go to the http://kyotocities.org site and click Working Groups on the left menu.  These categories have been created to make sure that all communications are channeled into these groups, which I hope are reasonably clearly indicated and self-explanatory.  And if you are not sure there is an Admin/General section that will be your best bet.

I would also urge you to PLEASE THINK TWICE BEFOR POSTING TO THE GROUP AS A WHOLE.  Often we tend with a single click to share things with the whole group -- busy people let's not forget -- when they are perhaps better aimed at a single person.  Thanks for keeping this in mind.

I hope that this forum will prove useful and easy for you to use.  If you have any questions, you know where to turn.

Regards and welcome,

Eric

PS. If this turns out to be more email than you can bear, you will see that you have a No Email option, which you can call into service with a single click.  But if that’s not clear, just get in touch and we will do the necessary.

[http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-6-129-2454.jsp#]

Editor’s note: Our old friend and long time defender of sustainable transport and social justice, Professor John Whitelegg, also a member of our International Advisory Council and Founder and Editor of the important independent Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice, has for some years been busy mining the interface between the more technical aspects of our subject, and the politics of change. This article appeared in today’s openDemocracy’s online debate.
*****************************************

The global transport challenge

John Whitelegg, 26 - 4 – 2005, openDemocracy’s online debate

The world’s transport system wastes lives, health, and money – and is choking the planet. Citizens need to take control, says John Whitelegg

There is a world transport crisis. 3,000 people are killed every day in road-traffic accidents, air pollution from vehicles is bathing most if not all cities in a chemical soup and deaths from respiratory diseases exceed deaths in traffic accidents.

This would be a high price to pay for a perfectly functioning transport system that delivers people and goods speedily and efficiently but this is not the case. All countries and cities spend a lot of money for a transport “solution” that has failed. In a rare example of global unity and shared experience car commuters in Los Angeles are stuck in traffic jams in the same way as they are in Bangkok, Delhi, Beijing and Rio.

Our highway-based transport systems purchased at huge expense are failing miserably to deliver anything. We have created a very expensive way of organising transport in cities, one that is grossly inefficient and one that exacts a terrible penalty in deaths, injuries and lifetime disability.

This penalty is an affront to human rights. Traffic conditions make it very difficult indeed for children and the elderly to cross roads. Women with childcare duties find public transport difficult to use and the poor who rely on walking and cycling are exposed to more danger than the car occupant. Large sums of money are spent in Delhi and Kolkata on expanding roads, highways and flyovers that can only benefit the richer members of the urban elite. The poor are left to suffer with inadequate pedestrian pavements and polluted air.

Donald Appleyard, in his famous book Livable Streets (1981), described how people living on streets with light traffic had more friends and acquaintances than people in cities with heavy traffic. They lived in more sociable, friendly and community-based environments.

Citizens know this instinctively and seek out high-quality environments away from the noise, dirt and danger of cars and lorries. The problem is that this privilege is usually only available to the rich, which is why 90% of the people killed in road-traffic accidents are likely to be poor, cyclists, pedestrians or bus users in developing countries. Transport has become a socially polarised experience with poor people living in poor-quality environments whilst richer people drive past them, cocooned in their cars on the way to a rich variety of destinations inaccessible to the poor.

The need to lead

Meanwhile, cars and lorries account for about 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions and are amongst the fastest growing sources of these gases. This presents politicians with problems. Most politicians would accept that climate change and all its attendant dangers are at or near the top of the list of things that they think are important – but they dare not “touch” transport.

Most cities, regions and countries want more roads. Beijing would like another five-ring road to add to its existing five-ring roads. Most cities would dearly like an international airport, or a bigger one if they already have one. The World Bank funds new roads in India and China. This locks all cities into higher levels of fossil-fuel dependency and higher levels of greenhouse gas production at the same time as prime ministers make speeches about reducing greenhouse gases. No wonder ordinary citizens are confused about what they should do.

It need not be like this. The former mayor of Bogotá in Colombia, Enrique Penelosa, showed the world that a relatively poor city in a relatively poor country can set the highest standards for transport. He declared car-free days, established a highly reliable and cheap to use bus system (TransMillenio) and built a 17-kilometre bike and pedestrian route to connect poor parts of the city with the downtown area. This stands in stark contrast to most African, Indian and Chinese cities that are investing heavily in new roads and doing nothing for the poor and those who live in polluted conditions.

The Bogotá experience is not an isolated one. Curitiba, Brazil has pioneered an outstandingly successful bus “rapid transit system” and done this, like Bogotá, at much lower cost than a metro rail system and with much wider geographical benefits to the region. London has reduced congestion by 30% with its congestion pricing and Copenhagen has achieved some of the highest bicycle use of any city in the world.

The message in global transport patterns is clear. There are no technical, economic or organisational problems in finding solutions but there is an enormous difficulty in achieving political will. Where real progress has been made this has occurred because of strong leadership by key politicians. This presents us all with good news and bad news.

The good news is that there are very few, if any, barriers to innovative and successful transport projects aimed at creating liveable and sustainable cities. They are not expensive to achieve and they present few, if any, technological problems. The significant barrier everywhere is political will. The London congestion charge would not have gone ahead were it not for the unusual drive, ambition and single-mindedness of the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone.

Werner Broeg in Munich has carried out research around the world on politicians and he has found that in most cases politicians have established views about traffic and transport characterised by a belief that everyone wants to drive, that the car is the most desirable mode of transport and that anything perceived of as anti-car will result in loss of political office.

Another road is possible

Broeg’s work shows that politicians routinely underestimate the appetite of the electorate for radical change. Citizens would like to see more public transport, walking and cycling and would like to see more convivial and sociable use of public space. Citizens are willing to reduce car trips given the right information, incentives and support. In York, England a project aimed at reducing car trips produced a 16% reduction in these trips in a six-month period in its target group.

All this points to the need for a change in worldview underwritten by citizen action. It is possible to create highly desirable city living spaces, to eliminate deaths and injuries on the roads and to reduce obesity and greenhouse gases – and to do this at much lower cost than building roads, which makes the problems worse. The way forward is citizen action and the generation of enlightened politicians. We are still in the foothills of understanding how to move in this direction.

This article appears as part of openDemocracy’s online debate on the politics of climate change. The debate was developed in partnership with the British Council as part of their ZeroCarbonCity initiative - a two year global campaign to raise awareness and stimulate debate around the challenges of climate change.

Copyright ©John Whitelegg 2005. Published by openDemocracy Ltd. You may download and print extracts from this article for your own personal and non-commercial use only. If you are a library, university, teaching institution, business or media organisation, you must acquire an Academic License or Organisational License from openDemocracy, or seek permission directly from the author, before making copies, circulating or reproducing this article for teaching or commercial.

Editor’s note: Part of all this is staying power: Fred Kent has spent three decades developing a common-sense approach to streets, buildings and human sociability.

From Governing, City & State, April 2005 issue, By ROB GURWITT

Source: http://www.governing.com/articles/4spaces.htm

Pride of Place

In a city accustomed to money, glitz and bold statements, the new Time Warner Center strives to impress. Fronting on Columbus Circle in midtown Manhattan, the immense development houses not only the headquarters and broadcast facilities of the conglomerate for which it is named, but dozens of stores, almost 200 condominiums, seven restaurants catering to people who spend hundreds of dollars on a meal, and a high-end supermarket. It has 73 elevators and six separate postal addresses.

Not surprisingly, le tout New York swooned when it opened last year. “It’s a real asset to the city,” declared the well-known architect and building maven Robert A.M. Stern. “Aesthetic reservations pale into insignificance,” gushed the New York Sun’s architecture critic, “before the immense urban success of the structure as a whole.”

Oh please, grumbles Fred Kent. “This is a dead building. This is a bunch of advertising panels behind glass ... There’s no life here, no public gathering spaces, no cafes, no street activity.” The “street life” engendered by the Time Warner building, Kent points out, is actually inside and down an escalator — at the Whole Foods Market, where there’s a crowd of people shopping and gabbing. “The building’s designers hate it when you say this, but all this is, is a shopping mall.”

Kent is not an architect, but he does pay close attention to buildings — and above all, to the way they affect the street. As the president of the Project for Public Spaces, which is based in Manhattan’s West Village, he has for the past 30 years been a buoyant and unremitting advocate for creating outdoor spaces in which people like to linger. “It’s just basic human common sense,” he says. “We need places that people feel comfortable in and connect to, that they can be affectionate in, smile, laugh, engage, tell stories. It’s about bliss, really.” The Time Warner Center may be about a lot of things, but bliss is not among them.

It is unlikely that Fred Kent’s poor estimation of their work is causing any of those responsible for the Time Warner building to toss and turn at night. Elsewhere, on the other hand, Kent’s opinions carry great sway these days with a surprising number of people who shape the places where we spend our time. The transit agency in San Mateo County, California — SamTrans — has engaged Kent to help it figure out how to remake El Camino Real, the soulless paved spine running through the communities of the Bay Area’s Peninsula. In New Jersey, the state department of transportation has so embraced Kent’s beliefs about public space that it offers the unheard-of spectacle of a cadre of traffic engineers bent on transforming the way the state thinks about its roads. In Seattle, Corpus Christi and Philadelphia, a plethora of organizations ranging from the federal General Services Administration to municipal agencies to neighborhood groups to civic institutions are working with Kent to create or retrofit the spaces for which they are responsible so that people will want to spend time there.

They have come to Kent in part because he and his compatriots at PPS — especially his partner, Kathy Madden, and his longtime colleague, Steve Davies — have a track record of making some of the most appealing urban spots in the nation. They did the redesign of Manhattan’s hugely popular Bryant Park, which sits next to the New York Public Library and which, before they got hold of it, had become a no-man’s-land of drug dealers and muggers. They helped make the area around Rockefeller Center’s skating rink the people-watching Mecca it has become.

More recently, they helped create the template for Campus Martius, the astoundingly successful new park that opened last November in the heart of downtown Detroit. “A lot of suburbanites will take pride in telling you exactly how long it’s been since they crossed into Detroit,” says Neal Rubin, a columnist for the Detroit News. “Campus Martius, even in the dead of winter, has become a magnet. It’s a gathering place and a rallying point in a city that’s been low on both.”

Over the years, Kent and Madden have amassed a large, diverse collection of the little details that add up to public spaces people are drawn to or repelled by. They have spent years in minute study of how people use space — time-lapse films of parking spaces and traffic patterns; sketches of how people gather and move around a park; measurements of benches and stairs and why people choose to use some and pass others by; close observation of waste receptacles and public rest rooms and storefronts.

When civic groups and public officials hire PPS, they are in part hiring this storehouse of experience. But they are also drawn to it because of Kent himself, and in particular his ardor in insisting that the seemingly abstruse arts of architecture, engineering, design and planning pay close attention to the untutored citizen and the ways people actually use the spaces around them. “I think Fred is the Mozart of place,” says David Burwell, the founder of the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy and the Surface Transportation Policy Project, and now a senior staff member at PPS. “When he goes into a space, he hears it — it speaks to him in a way it does for very few other people.”

CONVERGING IDEAS

This is an interesting moment for someone with that sensibility. Over the past few years, a set of tendencies in American urban policy have been converging around the ideas that Kent, Madden and their colleagues have been pushing since the 1970s. The rebellion against sprawl and over-reliance on the automobile; the New Urbanist critique of suburbs and the suburbanization of cities; the debate sparked by Carnegie Mellon economist Richard Florida over the qualities that make cities attractive; the growing tendency within the environmental movement to see urban density as a key to preserving undeveloped spaces; the blunt calculation by public officials that if they can’t make their downtowns and neighborhoods appealing, they can’t compete for residents or businesses — all of these hinge on the deceptively simple challenge of creating places, especially within cities, that people intuitively like.

So this is a time flush with promise for Kent and PPS. Yet it is also filled with reminders, such as the Time Warner Center, that decades of design habits are so ingrained in American communities that making a place “human,” as Kent puts it, is often not even on the agenda. “Everyone recognizes it when something really good happens, like Bryant Park or Campus Martius,” says Kathy Madden, “so why aren’t we getting more places like that? Why can’t we build places we like to go?” The answer, says Kent, is that American communities — and in particular the professionals they turn to for design — have not only forgotten how to do it, they’ve forgotten they even care about it. His job, as he sees it, is to remind them that they do.

Kent, 62, is tall and disarmingly bear-like. Walking through the streets of Manhattan, he manages somehow to shamble and stride briskly at the same time. One moment he is unhurriedly drawing attention to street minutiae — how a mix of shops and restaurants energizes one block, how a hotel’s black-gray facade deadens another — and then all of a sudden he’s moving along so fast it’s hard to keep up.

He’s a bit like that in a public meeting, too, lingering over a slide of people relaxing in Paris’s Luxembourg Gardens, then shifting so forcefully to unfamiliar ground that his listeners have to scurry to stay in his wake. “He understands how traditional thinking has created more problems than it has solved,” says Mark Simon, special assistant to the CEO of SamTrans in northern California. “So his first task is to attack the traditional thinking. He’ll tell you that this ballpark you’ve got is designed all wrong; then he’ll tell you shouldn’t have built it in the first place, you should have built a playground. Or he’ll tell you that the places where a road is six lanes, it’s got to be four lanes. And your first thought is, ’I don’t want to be the one to tell the driving public we’re reducing it by a lane in each direction.’ But if you hang around after your first ’No, no, no!’ you get to that place. He’s very good at getting you to think anew about fundamental things.”

This is in no small part because Kent himself is steeped in those things. After knocking around in graduate school at Columbia in the 1960s, starting a street academy for high-school dropouts and organizing New York City’s first Earth Day in 1970, he went to work for William H. Whyte, the urban sociologist who pioneered the close study of city spaces. Whyte put his findings about why some spaces draw people while others remain lifeless into a classic book, “The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces,” which was part manifesto, part social science treatise and part self-help manual for cities.

Kent jumped feet-first into Whyte’s world. “He didn’t teach so much as set things up for you to discover,” Kent recalls. “So he gave me a camera and said, ’Go look at Lexington Avenue between 57th and 59th streets.’ ” Kent spent days there, hanging around with a detective to watch how pickpockets worked; counting pedestrians; passing an entire day watching a wastebasket, figuring out how its shape made it easy for passers-by to miss as they tried to toss litter in, and noting how people used it as street furniture. Some 35,000 people a day would pass one particular storefront located next to a bank, so Kent went in to talk to the shopkeeper. “I said, ’You must like your location,’ ” he remembers. “And he said, ’No. People walk faster by a bank, and it takes them two or three storefronts to get back to a window-shopping pace.’ ”

POSITIVE CLUTTER

If there was a single lesson Kent took away from the experience, other than that he loved being on a busy street, it was that people intuitively understand the spaces they use, and that how they feel informs what they do. At a level that just nudges perception, they don’t like the blank institutional face of a bank, so they speed up as they walk by. And in doing so, they may fail to notice the displays in the shop next door.

Kent, Madden and their colleagues have spent the years since they formed the Project for Public Spaces in 1975 elaborating on this basic notion. They have plenty of suggestions for creating the sort of clutter on a street that people like, for the way buildings ought to behave — don’t create blank walls, don’t confront pedestrians with the heating and air conditioning infrastructure, don’t lard a block with curb cuts — and for layering attractions that gather people in. “If you have a children’s reading room inside and a playground outside,” says Kent, “then you put a coffee shop, a Laundromat and a bus stop right there, you will create the busiest spot in your community.”

Kent rarely ventures outside without a camera hanging around his neck, and he figures he now has about 750,000 photographs of people using public spaces. Some of them adorn the walls of the PPS office, large framed color photographs of a child holding hands with a bronze statue; a couple kissing on a street; a knot of older men jovially hanging out in front of a barbershop; people on park benches watching passersby.

What they have in common is that the people in them seem relaxed and happy — “You don’t see affection in bad places,” Kent says; “it’s an amazing indicator of the quality of a place.” All this is in marked contrast, say, to the picture he likes to show of a group of frustrated elderly women standing on the yellow line in the middle of an intimidatingly huge street in Sydney, Australia, peering at oncoming traffic as they wait to get across. “That’s an 800-foot block,” Kent remarks, “and of course the traffic engineers weren’t thinking that people might like to cross in the middle of it.” If you know how to pay attention, in other words, people will tell you by their behavior what they like, what they don’t like and what they want.

”Jumble and chaos on the street are great,” he insists, “and we’re not allowed to have it. We’ve narrowed the experiences people can have. It’s an atrocity, and the design professions don’t even know they do it.” Even worse, he argues, the people who hire the design professionals often seem powerless to stop them. “I think there are a lot of mayors who are real humanists,” Kent says, “but they come up against the disciplines that control a city.”

Not surprisingly, sentiments like this have gotten a cool reception among architects and landscape architects, but there is one surprising group of people that is starting to change, thanks in part to PPS’s work. For years, Kent reserved his greatest scorn for traffic engineers. “Whatever a traffic engineer tells you to do,” he liked to say, “do the opposite and you’ll improve your community.”

That was until he and PPS began to work with the New Jersey Department of Transportation, and in particular with its director of project development, Gary Toth. As was true in a number of states, NJDOT began in the 1980s and ’90s to encounter furious community opposition to its road-building plans. Toth, along with a few of his colleagues, began to realize, as he himself puts it, “that maybe what we were trained to do — that is, jam cars down people’s throats — wasn’t going to fly.” He began casting about for new ways of thinking about road-building, and in the late 1990s his search led him to PPS and Kent.

PLACE GAMES

By the time Toth hooked up with them, PPS had developed what it calls “the place game,” in which it sends a group of people interested in a particular spot — from shopkeepers to residents to city officials — out to study it. That’s what Kent and his colleagues did with Toth’s highway engineers. They trooped them out to a major street in New Brunswick, a street that had been widened over the years to the point where it moved traffic well, but was a nightmare for anyone who wasn’t in a car. Then they asked the engineers to put themselves in other people’s shoes: Imagine being the parent of a child who has to cross the road to get to school; or a shopkeeper trying to make a living from passersby; or a resident for whom the street was essentially a front yard. “I had some trepidation about how the engineers would react,” Toth says, dryly.

What happened stunned him. The engineers bubbled over with changes they wanted to see: The road needed narrowing, some new crosswalks, slower traffic. “They started looking at it as a place,” he says, “and understanding that a street has more than one use: It’s not just to get cars through, but people live there.” It was the beginning of a cultural change. “What struck me,” Toth says, “was how there were a lot of people in this organization who were behaving a certain way not because it was how they should behave, but because they believed that was expected. When we showed the engineers a different way of looking at it — ’Hey, we should be thinking about pedestrians and the life of these neighborhoods’ — most of them instantly got it. Yet they’d never tried to push for that in 30 years, because the organization didn’t expect it.”

PPS is about to start working with regional planning agencies and highway engineers in New Hampshire, where the state’s commissioner of transportation, Carol Murray, has come to the same conclusions as Toth about how roads can enhance livability and community development. It is heavily involved with San Mateo County because Mike Scanlon, SamTrans’ general manager, got tired of what the El Camino Real highway strip has become. “We’re sitting in the center of what I believe is one of the most beautiful places on earth,” explains Scanlon, “and we’ve got this butt-ugly road that goes right through it, with hodgepodge development and sleazy types of things — it’s a major disconnect, an elephant in the room.”

Even when the design profession can be made to see a need for places that build community life, citizens can be slow to catch on. In Bergen County, New Jersey, for instance, the state DOT has enlisted PPS’s help in convincing communities that sit along a gridlocked stretch of road called Route 17 that improving land use in the corridor lining the road is a better approach than widening it. So far, the towns are not buying the idea. “The state is making me laugh,” says Bergen County Planning Director Farouk Ahmad. “Because you know and I know and they know that you are not going to put aBand-Aid on it by dealing only with land use. Widening Route 17 has to be their number one alternative.” To which Kent responds, “We’ve become a nation of traffic engineers.”

Yet one of the strengths of PPS’s approach is that once it can enlist a broad range of people in picturing what they’d like to see, there is a chance to build a constituency that — sometimes with great effort — can withstand pressure to go the more traditional route. In Detroit, for instance, Kent and his colleagues took a core group of citizens through months of conversations about what the two-acre parcel of land that would become Campus Martius park ought to look like.

”We looked at thousands of slides,” says Bob Gregory, who runs the organization that was charged with developing the park, “and talked about here’s what’s pretty, here’s what functions well, we do want this, we don’t like that. And ultimately we created a vision.” They decided the park needed to be beautiful, green, actively used, hold water that people could touch, provide something for people to do every day throughout the year, contain spaces flexible enough to allow entertainment or just quiet sitting — a long list of qualities.

So when everyone from the mayor at the time, Dennis Archer, to major corporate funders of the project started weighing in, Gregory and his group held firm. They resisted the elegant, upscale restaurant that Archer wanted — “fine for Central Park,” says Gregory, “but it would have taken up too much square footage” — and the huge pillars, laser lights, and other spectacular ideas that Detroit’s corporate community thought would put an iconic stamp on the park. Instead, they wound up with a casual cafe, a skating rink that has proven an irresistible draw even on the coldest winter days, a fountain that Gregory is certain will be equally popular in the spring, summer and fall, a large lawn, and stages that can become walkways when not in use.

After three decades of trying to improve the built environment bit by bit, Fred Kent is ready to barge off in a more political direction. “At 62, I figure I have five years to change the world,” he says. “After that, I’ll go into a different mode, maybe comment on buildings or aggressively attack some designer. But I won’t give up an inch.”

-------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2005, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are registered trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.

Dearest readers: Twenty bulletins later, World Carfree Network is still trying to save the world. With your support of course. Help us out. Become a member and get a subscription to Car Busters magazine and a choice of books: <www.worldcarfree.net/support/>.

Standing on the virtual hill of information looking out into the carfree future, we give you the...

________________________

WORLD CARFREE NEWS >>>

____________________________________

Edition no. 20 - May 2005 - English version

...........................................................

Contents:

QUOTATION OF THE MONTH

IN BRIEF

WORLD NEWS

- THE DETROIT OF THE EAST

- INCREASING YOUR CAR USE

ANNOUNCEMENTS

- REGISTRATION FOR TOWARDS CARFREE CITIES V: JULY 18-21

- TRAIL LINK 2005: JULY 27-30, MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, USA

- CAR BUSTERS CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

- GREEN CITY VISIONS: MAY 31, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, USA

DISCLAIMER

__________________

QUOTATION OF THE MONTH >>

__________________________

"I absolutely loved the Discovery [an SUV] but the fuel was killing me - $60 bucks to fill the tank. I found myself not driving as much. What's the point of having something you love if you can't drive it?"

   - Peter Dailey, an advertising executive, California

__________________

IN BRIEF >>

__________________________

- The Middle East's first carfree destination, called "The World," is under construction on a series of islands off the coast of Dubai. It is the world's "first fully master-planned elite island retreat." Travel on and between the islands will be by ferry or through a network of walkways.

- A Florida man was arrested and jailed after shooting five rounds from his semi-automatic pistol into the hood of his Chrysler to put it "out of its misery." Even though he said the shooting was dumb, he thinks that "every guy in the universe has wanted to do it."

- ITDG Practical Action has built a bicycle ambulance, complete with a two-wheeled metal trailer, to reach remote rural areas in Nepal. The "bed" section is padded with cushions, while the "seat" section allows someone to attend to the patient during transit. A waterproof cover protects the patient and attendant in poor weather. The ambulance takes patients to the nearest health care centres in adjoining towns.

- Austrian Railways, OBB, has decided to cut one-third of its rail network - mostly smaller, less frequently used train lines, in the interests of increasing organisational efficiency. One likely result is that villagers who previously relied on the train to get around will end up turning to motorised transportation.

- The bicycle is the most significant invention since 1800, according to a BBC poll.

- Armoured car sales are shooting through the roof, reports the New York Times. The market is booming in Iraq, Afghanistan and Saudia Arabia, but also attracting customers who although in not in any danger, like the magician David Copperfield, see an armoured car as a status symbol. Referring to the difficulty of gettting out of the caged-in driver's seat, armoured car maker J.P. Ackermann says, "it's better to have a bump on your head than a bullet in your head."

- Organic, carfree weddings are on the rise in North America says The Telegraph, a New Hampshire newspaper.

- On May 3, Green Action activists in Zagreb made a 20-metre long human chain securing the passage to trams and other public transportation vehicles, keeping the lane free of cars. The activists carried banners with messages "300 people in the tram and 1 person in a car - who gets the priority?" They were warmly received by the tram drivers.

- Despite high gasoline prices, falling demand and general disdain for SUVs, General Motors, Ford and DaimlerChrysler are continuing to spit them out of North American assembly lines. America's roads will soon see a seven-passenger SUV and more than a dozen redesigned SUVs from GM.   

_______________

WORLD NEWS >>

__________________

THE DETROIT OF THE EAST

As the European Union continues its eastward expansion, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) is increasingly popular with foreign investors. Car manufacturers are leading the pack, gathering up their factories and dropping them here, trumpeting a new era where aggressive marketing and intense production burden the already car-dominated streets of Prague, Bratislava and Budapest.

   Slovakia is expected to produce the most cars per capita of any country in the world. Kia, the Korean company, has cited cheap labour costs as their reason for setting up a one billion euro factory in Slovakia.

   One and a half million vehicles are produced in CEE countries, says a report on European enlargement by the French Ministry of Economy. CEE production rose by 12% in 2004, and the report promises that 2005 will be a "vintage year" as the first cars leave the PSA-Toyota assembly line in Kolin, Czech Republic.

   Car manufacturing makes up 15% of total industrial production in CEE (Czech Republic and Slovakia account for half of that).

   The industry hopes that both demand and supply will settle at four million cars per year in the future; however people need to buy a lot of cars to climb from the current annual level of one million. The manufacturers' expectations, says the report on enlargement, justifies their "commercial aggressiveness."

  Manufacturers believe that low car ownership in CEE countries and the scores of old and ageing Skodas and Trabands will bring about the necessary demand.

   Although car sales fell in Poland, Slovakia and Czech Republic last year, they increased dramatically in Romania and Bulgaria. In Romania, Renault is successfully marketing its "low-income" 5,000-euro car, affectionately named the Logan. (It is also set to be launched in Iran, Russia, Columbia, Morocco, India.)

   Many of these countries' inhabitants still get around w

without a car, suggesting that there is still time to strengthen the alternatives to personal automobile travel. The Czech Republic, for example, has the densest rail network in Europe. Finding ways to put a hold on the car's progress in CEE is a key issue for the carfree movement.

INCREASING YOUR CAR USE

[Road Block e-bulletin, May 6]

The UK Department for Transport has just released the 2005 Focus on Personal Travel statistics, which includes little gems such as:

-         the proportion of households with access to one or more cars increased from 59% in 1980 to 74% in 2002;

-         the average annual distance travelled by people as car drivers rose by 15% during the 1990s;

-         the average distance walked fell by 20% during the 1990s;

-         the distance travelled by bus declined by 11%;

-         bus and rail fares rose by a third in real terms between 1980 and 2003;

-         the lowest levels of household car ownership were among single elderly people (two thirds of whom do not have access to a car), and single parents (half of whom are without a car); and

-         about 20% of households without a car have difficulty accessing supermarkets or their doctor.

Check out the statistics at <http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_transstats/documents/page/dft_tr>.

___________________

ANNOUNCEMENTS >>

______________________________

REGISTRATION FOR TOWARDS CARFREE CITIES V: JULY 18-21

Registration is open for the Towards Carfree Cities V conference, which will take place July 18-21 in Budapest, Hungary. The World Carfree Network annual meeting will take place afterward on July 22. You can register on-line or download a registration form at <www.worldcarfree.net/conference/>. The conference programme and accommodation information can be found there as well.

TRAIL LINK 2005: JULY 27-30, MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, USA

If you are in North America feeling down about not being able to make the trip across the pond for the Budapest conference, think about the Rail-to-Trails Conservancy's international trails and greenways conference.

   "TrailLink 2005 will examine new trends in trail design and management; explore the public health impact of trails; provide the latest policy and legal updates; and examine other core issues affecting national and international trails, all with a focus on improving communities through expanding trail networks."

   For more information see <www.railtrails.org>.

CAR BUSTERS CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

The next issue of Car Busters magazine (issue #24) will cover carfree holiday destinations. We will be writing about places that don't allow cars (completely, or other than peripheral parking), some of which explicitly promote themselves as carfree.

   If anyone has ever visited such a place, we would like to hear from you. Rather than promoting specific places or programmes, the coverage will be focused on how the carfree aspect functions in the various cases. We of course also welcome any other submissions you have for the magazine, including news items, photos, artwork, and articles.

   All submissions should be sent to info@... by May 30.

GREEN CITY VISIONS, MAY 31, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, USA

Green City Visions addresses the critical relationship between the health of the environment and how we build the largest things humans create - cities. Attendees will be introduced to the best ideas and proposed responses for all sizes of cities and towns based on ecological principles and scientific assessments of what needs to be done in the face of the peak oil/climate change/biodiversity collapse/health crisis, in order to rebuild our human habitat in balance with living systems.

   For more info, see <www.ecocitybuilders.org/greencity>.

___________________

     DISCLAIMER >>

     __________________

The author of this month's bulletin explicitly denies any links to Renault's successful low-income car. For further proof, he is the editor of Car Busters, a popular magazine known for its anti-car views. He wishes they called the car something else.

- Steven Logan

[end]

This kind offer just in from Carlos Pardo, which he and his colleagues kindly extend to any of the members of this fine list.  The images are attached. To work out next steps, please contact Carlos directly.

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos F. Pardo V. [mailto:cpardo@...]
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 11:56 PM
To: eric.britton@...
Cc: 'Giselle Xavier'
Subject: Three Logos- just in case

Eric,

Since Sustran will be changing its logo this week, the previous ones have been left unused. I am attaching three of the proposals (all have original COREL files), just in case you were thinking about giving a logo to the Kyoto Cities or something similar. It would be a shame to waste them, and I don’t think of a better organization to use them than yours (if you’re at all interested). They don’t have a copyright since they were developed by a designer here in Colombia and me, and the rest of us are ok about it.

Let me know what you think. Best regards,

Carlos F. Pardo

Project Coordinator

GTZ Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP)

Room 0942, Transport Division, UN-ESCAP

ESCAP UN Building

Rajadamnern Nok Rd.

Bangkok 10200, Thailand

Tel:  +66 (0) 2 - 288  2576

Fax: +66 (0) 2 - 280  6042

Mobile: +66 (0) 1 - 772 4727

e-mail: carlos.pardo@...

Website: www.sutp.org

   Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 15:01:01 +0100

   From: "Richard Evans" <richard.m.evans@...>

EMW Press ReleaseGlasgow has won the best in UK European Mobility Week

award.  The following is extracted from a Eurocities press release which

will shortly be published in full at www.22september.org

An independent panel of experts assessed all applications received and this

activity resulted with the selection of 11 cities, which performed

outstandingly during the Mobility Week 2004. The award winners will be

presented at a European Conference, to be held in London in September 2005

and organised by the UK presidency of the EU in close collaboration with DG

Environment.

Best per country  awards  went to the following towns and cities: Bulgaria:

VARNA, Croatia: KOPRIVNICA, Czech Republic: KROMERIZ, France: NANTES,

Germany: KIEL, Hungary: BUDAPEST, Poland: KRAKOW, Portugal: LEIRIA, Spain:

DONOSTIA SAN SEBASTIAN, Switzerland: GENEVA, UK: GLASGOW

Glasgow – Rated Best UK participant

The panel of experts was impressed by the performance of Glasgow City

Council. Outstanding permanent measures were elaborated, as the ‘Great

School Travel Tally’ used to obtain baseline information on how children

travel to school. 71% of schools in Glasgow participated in this survey that

will be carried out once a year. The results provided valuable citywide

information about travel habits to school and helped taking

transport-related decisions. Another exceptional project elaborated by

Glasgow is the ‘Twenty Limits Around Schools’ that introduces part-time

mandatory 20 miles per hour speed limits in the vicinity of schools. This

scheme not only improves the safety around schools but also raises awareness

of the road dangers.

Glasgow also organised an Eco-Day Science Fair held on 17 and 18 September

aiming at informing parents and schoolchildren on the necessity of adopting

a coherent School Travel Plan. The team produced an eye-catching display

including display boards, sustainable travel word games and puzzles. Several

schools expressed an interest and follow-up meetings have been arranged.

Glasgow also promoted the Scotland’s largest charity bike ride with 1200

riders. The experts welcomed the elaboration of a new “Safety on the Web’

website that is targeted at primary teachers and pupils. The site provides

information to help keep children safe from dangers in the home, at school

and on their way to and from school.

On 22 September, Glasgow successfully closed a street during a normal

working weekday. The event was widely promoted within the Council and to all

major employers. The different permanent measures and activities promoted

received a wide support of the City Council.

The Award winner and nominees will be presented at the end of the year

during a European Conference in London. Further information on this event

will be communicated at a later stage.

The third edition of the EMW was organised from 16 to 22 September 2004.

‘Safe Streets for Children’ was the central theme for this campaign, linking

different aspects of urban policy together, targeting not only children but

also parents and everyone that encounters young people in traffic. The

overriding aim of the 2004 Mobility Week was to create safe and pleasant

cities, and to reduce road safety risks for children. Participating local

authorities were encouraged to elaborate initiatives to raise awareness of

children’s needs for safe and independent mobility and to break down the

barriers they are facing in urban areas. EMW 2004 enjoyed a high

participation with 849 cities and towns involved.

Richard Evans

In Town Without My Car! & European Mobility Week UK Co-ordinator

richard.m.evans@...

http://www.itwmc.gov.uk

http://www.22september.org

We are pleased to share with this forum a lively discussion that has gotten started on the Kyoto Cities Working Group forum a few days back, and which we are now switching over to the New Mobility Cafe since it is rather more general than the specific concerns of the Kyoto Forum which targets a single question: “What can you do in your city to reduce traffic and its negative impacts dramatically (say on the order of 20%) in a very short period (we propose 20 months), and within your existing transportation budget.”  That’s it. Nothing else!

These comments are laid out here in the order they originally came in and were, for the record, kicked off by the Alan Meyer piece from openDemocracy that was originally reproduced in the Kyoto Blog on 30 April precisely for information and comment.  I hope that these more general considerations which are of course critical to the details of what concern us primarily at Kyoto Cities will continue to be vetted usefully in the Café.

From Kyoto Blog of 30/04/05. – link to http://kyoto-compliance.blogspot.com/2005/04/300405-united-states-and-global.html

The United States and global warming: a tale of two countries

 Alden Meyer, 29 - 4 - 2005

 Source: http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-6-129-2469.jsp

The challenge of global climate change forces the world to ask: what to do about the United States? Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists says: ignore the Bush administration and get on with business.

To have a fighting chance to keep global warming within safe levels, industrialized countries must reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases by 80% below 2000 levels by 2050 – and we must begin to make those reductions right away. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Europe, Japan, and other industrialized countries have committed to start making modest cuts in their emissions, and have acknowledged the need for much deeper cuts in the years ahead.

In stark contrast, US emissions are projected to increase 14% over the next decade, and the administration of President George W Bush has made it crystal clear that it will not engage in negotiations – or even informal discussions – about mandatory emissions limits.

President Bush has proposed no meaningful alternative to Kyoto. His voluntary, business-as-usual approach is heavy on long-term technology research, but ignores the tremendous potential of currently available clean energy technologies to cut global warming pollution right now. His administration has consistently opposed serious policies to accelerate deployment of these technologies, such as the proposal supported by 58 senators – including 10 Republicans – to require electric utilities to increase the share of their electricity generated from renewable energy resources from the current two percent up to 10% by 2020. And when California responds to the federal leadership vacuum by putting sensible limits on global warming pollution from new vehicles, the Bush administration joins the auto companies in challenging the state’s right to take such action.

Fifty years from now, the Bush presidency will likely be remembered for two things: the war in Iraq, and the utter irresponsibility of the president’s climate policy.

And while 43 senators voted for the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act, which would establish mandatory economy-wide emissions caps, 55 senators, including most Republicans, opposed it. One of them, who by luck would have it chairs the Senate’s Environment Committee, called global warming the “greatest hoax every perpetrated on the American people”.

Beyond the Beltway

Fortunately, all is not doom and gloom in America. In addition to California’s path-breaking emissions limits on new vehicles, a number of states are pursuing mandatory caps on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, and eighteen states have adopted renewable electricity generation standards. Over 150 cities and counties have signed on to the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, setting specific emissions reduction targets and developing action plans to meet the target.

Many business leaders are also stepping up to the plate, setting emissions reduction goals for their companies. DuPont, for example, set out to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 65% from 1990 levels by 2010; by 2002, the company had exceeded this goal, achieving actual reductions of 67 percent. Others are speaking out on the need for mandatory national emissions limits. John Rowe, chairman of Exelon Corporation, one of the nation’s largest electric utilities, recently endorsed a call to regulate global warming emissions, saying “the science on climate change has become overwhelming.”

Another major utility, Cinergy Corporation, has stated that a “well-constructed policy that gradually and predictably” reduces global warming emissions can be managed “without undue disruption to the company or the economy.” Many other corporate leaders share these views, but are reluctant to speak out, afraid of retaliation if they publicly disagree with the Bush administration on this issue.

Meanwhile, other voices are joining the debate, such as evangelical Christian leaders motivated by the likely severe impact of global warming on the world’s poor and the Bible’s call for stewardship of God’s creation. As the Rev. Rich Cizik, vice-president of governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals, recently put it: “I don’t think God is going to ask us how he created the Earth, but he will ask us what we did with what he created.” As evangelical Christians are widely seen as a core component of the Republican Party’s political base, their engagement on this issue is quite significant.

While these are all hopeful signs, there is little chance they will produce a change of heart in President Bush in his remaining years in office. It is more likely that this mounting pressure will cause the next president, whether Republican or Democrat, to reverse course and restore American leadership in the fight against global warming.

The world’s choice

With negotiations due to start later this year on emissions reductions beyond the end of Kyoto’s first commitment period in 2012, the rest of the world has three options in responding to current US intransigence.

First, try to engage the Bush administration on post-2012 climate policy. Given the administration’s posture, this would be like talking to a brick wall.

Second, wait for the next administration to take office in January 2009 to start negotiations on what comes next. Given the urgent need to minimise the impacts of climate change, the world can’t afford such a delay. Moreover, this would create uncertainty amongst the world’s businesses, just now starting to adjust to the reality of binding emissions limits under the Kyoto Protocol, as to whether those limits will in fact continue and deepen post-2012.

Third, enter into these negotiations without any expectation of meaningful participation by the United States. This can and should be done in a way that makes US re-entry into the process possible after President Bush leaves office. One suggestion is to informally consult the growing number of US governors, mayors, and business CEOs who are taking progressive action on global warming as to the shape of the future climate treaty regime. This would ensure that constructive US views are taken into account in the negotiating process, while building support within the United States for the post-2012 agreement that results from the negotiations.

This last option is far from ideal, but is the only one that holds out any prospect for progress.

The European Union must take the lead in these negotiations, by engaging major developing countries such as Brazil, China, and India, and by declaring that it will move forward with further emissions reductions post-2012 even in the face of US inaction. Implementation of its existing Kyoto commitments will also show how seriously the EU takes this issue, and will demonstrate the fallacy of President Bush’s claim that meeting the Kyoto targets can only come at the costs of the economy and jobs.

In fact, it’s the United States’s non-participation in the emerging global climate regime that poses the real long-term threat to the US economy. Companies in Europe, Japan, and other countries that are moving ahead to cut global warming emissions are grabbing market share from US companies in renewable energy systems, fuel-efficient vehicles, and other clean technologies, not only in their own markets but also in explosively growing new markets in China, India, and other developing countries.

It may seem a paradox that the best way to ultimately draw the United States back into the international climate treaty regime is by not wasting time trying to engage the current US administration. But that is the reality the world now faces. Only by demonstrating the political will to move forward on the deeper emissions reductions needed beyond 2012 can other countries add to the mounting domestic pressure for the United States to get serious about global warming.

-----Original Message-----
From: <schipper@...> Lee Schipper

Date: Sun May 1, 2005  9:10 am

It must be added to Alden Meyer's note that on Valentine’s day 2003 the
Bush Administration assembled a group of manufacturing representatives
who pledged to reduce carbon emissions per unit of out put by 1%/year,
about the rate of the previous 5 years and way under the rate 1973-1990,
i.e., when fuel prices were higher. IN other words, they pledged
nothing.

Some of us called this the St Valentine's Day Massacre.

It is worth noting that the Clinton Administration had proposed
tightening the efficiency standards on new central air conditioners by
30%. After ranting and raving from the Bush Administration, court action
etc, four years later the Administration agreed to 26%.

A Nat. Acad. of Sciences Panel suggested fuel economy improvements to
cars of roughly 20% could be required by standards. That report appeared
in 2001. Four years later the President tells us there is little he can
do about high oil prices (and demand). What he could have done was much,
a few years ago.

And so it goes on.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Plowden [mailto:stephenplowden@...]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 12:45 PM
To: kyoto-challenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: The United States and global warming: Schipper commentary

Reductions in fuel consumption of cars of much greater than 20% are
possible without any loss of transport function. See Amory Lovins's
work. Moreover, there is no need to accept the constraint that he
accepts that cars should have the same powers of acceleration and the
same top speeds as at present. Also, he wants his hypercar to succeed
without any compulsion, simply in virtue of its superior attraction to
motorists. But compulsion, probably in the form of construction and use
regulations, is not only legitimate but obligatory of governments are to do
their job of ensuring that manufacturers can compete for custom only in ways that
respect the environment and the rights of third
parties. No one has the right to impose unnecessary danger and pollution.

From: Eric Bruun <ericbruun@...>
Date: Mon May 2, 2005  11:16 am

I notice nothing in Meyer's essay about the consequences of sprawl and nothing about stopping it. It is roughly half of the fuel consumption issue together with technology. Furthermore, sprawl housing is less energy efficient and agricultural supply lines are being lengthened, so that the role of sprawl is far understated when just looking at the amount of driving it causes.

From: Simon Norton <S.Norton@...>
Date: Mon May 2, 2005  10:25 pm

1. In reply to the post of 21 April, is it asserted that increased motorization

is a cause (rather than an effect) of increased economic output ? That seems the

only hypothesis under which it would be legitimate to cast doubt on the validity

of the WHO findings that traffic pollution was reducing life expectancy in

Europe.

I find it easier to believe that the effect of higher motorization is actually

to fritter away the advantages of increased economic output, which might

otherwise have gone on better healthcare etc.

Motorization will also reduce people's propensity to cycle and walk, which

reduces the health gains from exercise.

2. Like Lee Schipper I am puzzled by the idea that fuel economy and road safety

are inversely correlated -- unless this is merely an expression of the tendency

for people to drive more when the fuel cost of doing so is reduced (which is

mentioned in one of Todd Litman's papers), or just the fact that in a collision

between a large SUV and a small car the former tends to win.

3. One of Todd Litman's papers says it's wrong to try to hold fuel prices by

reducing taxes when the price of crude goes up. I would go further and say that

taxes should be increased in such situations. This is because the price of crude

is set to bring demand and supply into balance, so if one wants to reduce the

price of crude the best way is to reduce demand by increasing consumer prices.

Of course, I'm not a politician.

From: Gabriel Roth <roths@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  4:44 am

Lee -

Nice to hear from you again!

To meet more rigorous CAFE standards, manufacturers make their cars smaller. That smaller vehicles are less safe than larger ones is agreed by all who have studied the issue. For example, a US study (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 'Where is Safety in the Fuel Economy Debate? Status Report, Vol. 25, No. 8, September 8, Arlington, Virginia. 1990), reported that

Overall, the death rate in the smallest cars on the road is more than double the rate in the largest cars. For every 10,000 registered cars one to three years old in 1989, 3.0 deaths occurred in the smallest cars on the road, compared with 1.3 on the largest cars. The death rate is at least twice as high in small cars, compared with large cars, in both single- and multiple vehicle crashes. ... According to a regression equation estimated by Institute researchers from the death rates and EPA fuel ratings of 47 four door cars, on average every one mile-per-gallon improvement in fuel economy translates into a 3.9 percent increase in the death rate.

And the Administrator of the US Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated that the        1,000-lb reduction in average vehicle weight, and/or the associated reduction in size, that occurred in the US in the 1970s and 1980s, resulted in 2,000 more deaths and 20,000 more serious injuries per year (Jerry Ralph Curry, Testimony before the US House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy and Power, April 16, 1991.)

Note that the higher safety record of large cars is found not only in collisions between large and small vehicles, but also in one-car accidents (e.g. when cars leave the road and hit obstacles) and even when accidents involving only small cars are compared with those involving only large ones.

If you drive a car, I hope you use a large one!

Gabriel

From: Lloyd Wright <LFWright@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  2:52 pm

Dear all,

I do not think the safety issue based on vehicle weight is nearly as clear-cut
as the previous message asserts. The heaviest vehicles, in fact, do not have
the lowest fatality rates. Although weight is certainly one factor, so are
dimensions, materials, and design, as indicated by the Honda study. The high
roll-over rate of SUVs, due to their high ground clearance, has certainly
negated much of their weight advantages (although newer models have to an
extent mitigated this problem). Further, driver behaviour is also a major
factor. SUV owners, as well as sports car owners, tend to display higher risk
behaviour. It is possible that driving a larger vehicle can create a moral
hazard in the sense that the drivers feel safer and thus take on additional
risk.

Below are related excerpts from two articles.

Best regards,

Lloyd Wright
Gakushin Fellow
Osaka University

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/05/business/05weight.html?th

Average U.S. Car Is Tipping Scales at 4,000 Pounds
By DANNY HAKIM

But Honda, which makes some of the most fuel-efficient vehicles, said
its own research found that dimensions, design and materials often made
more difference than weight. Honda cited government statistics showing
that midsize cars have lower death rates than sport utilities, and that
smaller S.U.V.'s do better than midsize S.U.V.'s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/17/business/17auto.html?hp

New York Times
August 17, 2004

Safety Gap Grows Wider Between S.U.V.'s and Cars

By DANNY HAKIM

DETROIT, Aug. 16 - The gap in safety between sport utility vehicles and
passenger cars last year was the widest yet recorded, according to new
federal traffic data.

People driving or riding in a sport utility vehicle in 2003 were nearly 11
percent more likely to die in an accident than people in cars, the figures
show. The government began keeping detailed statistics on the safety of
vehicle categories in 1994.

S.U.V.'s continue to gain in popularity, despite safety concerns and the
vehicles' lagging fuel economy at a time when gasoline prices are high. For
the first seven months of 2004, S.U.V.'s accounted for 27.2 percent of all
light-duty vehicle sales, up from 26 percent in the period a year earlier,
according to Ward's AutoInfoBank. However, sales growth for the largest sport
utility vehicles has stalled lately, while small and medium-size S.U.V.'s,
engineered more like cars than pickup trucks, continue to make rapid gains.

New figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration shed light
on how wide the differences in safety can be from one vehicle to another in
the S.U.V. category, which now encompasses scores of models. For example, a
few newer S.U.V. models appear to have a sharply lower risk of rolling over

From: Dave Brook <dbrook@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  4:57 pm

Gabriel Roth appears to be overlooking other ways to make vehicles more
fuel efficient than making them smaller (didn't you mean lighter?) -
hybrid technology is one, diesels are another; more aerodynamic is a
third. Of course, Amory Lovin's Hypercar idea, if it performs anywhere
close to what he claims, would be the lightest and safest vehicle on
the road - and the occupants would come out ahead in a crash with a
Hummer.

- Dave Brook

From: "Anna Cronin (PCT North West)" Anna.Cronin@...

Date: Tue May 3, 2005  11:10 am

Or to think outside of the metal box..  larger vehicles pose much more risk of serious injury or death to pedestrians, cyclists and passengers of smaller cars they hit. With the majority of the world's 1.2 million road traffic injury deaths each year being pedestrians, car design for pedestrian safety always seems to get less attention than safety for passengers..

Anna

Anna Cronin de Chavez
Health Promotion Specialist (Injury Prevention)
City-wide based at Leeds North West PCT
North West House, West Park Ring Road, Leeds, LS16 6QG, UK.
Tel 0113 3057532 anna.cronin@...

From: Sujit Patwardhan <sujit@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  9:41 pm

I'm glad to see Anna's comments because they steer the discussion back to the basic question of  "from whose perspective should one see the landscape?"

In the imaginary ideal scenario in my mind I see (the need for) less cars (of any kind), more  possibilities for walking and cycling (made possible by good public transport system coupled with car-free kind of development) and a healthier, less poisoned environment.

From this perspective, more fuel efficient cars, safer cars, less polluting cars etc. all fall in the same category .... "undesirables" (even if unavoidable from the present dominant point of view), because the above adjectives deal with only a small part of the problem. The larger and more important part of the picture is I think:-  car-dependence, auto dominated urban growth, mechanization of the human spirit and continuing along the unsustainable path.

Even zero polluting vehicles contribute to congestion, do nothing to prevent sprawl, accidents etc. and make excessive demands on land and open spaces that could be used to better purpose than to satisfying the appetite of cars/autos;

Instead of devoting greater efforts to "improving" the acceptability of cars it may be more appropriate to think about the possibilities of a lifestyle that relies less and less on this "wonderful" invention whose time is now up.

I know that I've not filled in all the details, and there are a lot of loose ends that can be seized upon but I think the general direction of my argument should be clear enough as food for thought or even some degree of introspection.
--
Sujit

From: Eric Bruun <ericbruun@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  8:35 pm

Also, car design has changed in the last two decades. All cars subject to the
Motor Vehicle Code in the US absorb energy better than old cars, and for many,
the engine drops out the bottom in a severe crash. Meanwhile, SUVs are exempt.
They are very rigid and unforgiving in a collision-- but they survive against
small cars because of much more momentum and, on occasion, they climb over the
top of them, crushing the people in the smaller car. This brings up another way
in which SUVs have eroded safety -- they don't have to comply with matching
bumper height requirements either.

In a nutshell, the car manufacturers are selling safety in SUVs through an arms
race type of argument. You better
get an SUV to protect yourself from the momentum and high bumpers of an SUV.

Eric Bruun

From: Stephen Plowden <stephenplowden@...>
Date: Tue May 3, 2005  11:09 am Hi all

Here is a recent analysis of GB data which does not seem to support
Gabriel. We are about to embark on a more detailed analysis of what
happens when a crash occurs. Because of inadequate data, it is much
harder to estimate how the likelihood that a crash will occur varies
with type of car. Class of road is a very important variable. Heavy cars
probably drive a larger proportion of their travel on motorways than
light cars do and motorways of course have much lower crash rates.

Stephen

SEVERITY RATIOS

This analysis refers to crashes occurring in Great Britain in the
three-year period 2001-3. It is based on the car models in the TRL’s
crash data bank, other than those classified by the TRL as sports cars,
that also appear in the New Car Data section of the March 2005 edition
of the magazine Test Drive. The TRL’s data bank gives information on all
the cars, new or old, that become involved in crashes. The model of the
car is given in the great majority of cases, but cars’ weights are not
recorded. The New Car Data section of Test Drive is concerned only with
models still on the new-car market. It gives the kerb weight, and other
items of information, for each sub-model of all the models listed. Each
model can have a number of sub-models, whose kerb weight and other
characteristics can vary considerably.

We have grouped the models into classes as follows:

Class A consists of models all the sub-models of which weigh less than
1108 kg plus the Renault Clio. The Renault Clio has thirty sub-models.
Twenty of them weigh less than a tonne and all the others, with one
exception, weighing 1400 kg, weigh less than 1100 kg.

Class B consists of models all the sub-models of which weigh more than
1500 kg but less than two tonnes.

Class C consists of models all the sub-models of which weigh more than
two tonnes plus the Chrysler Voyager. The Chrysler Voyager has ten
sub-models. One weighs 1925 kg, another 1955 kg, and the rest all weigh
more than two tonnes.

Class D consists of models all the sub-models of which weigh more than
1500kg. It is made up of all the models in classes B and C plus the Land
Rover Defender. The kerb weights of the sub-models of the Land Rover
Defender range from 1600kg to 2300kg.

*MODEL CRASHES * *SEVERITY INDICES*

*CLASS Fatal Serious All Fatal/All (Fatal+Serious)/All*

* *

*A *862 9,071 83,902 0.010 0.118**

* *

*B *149 1,195 9,595 0.016 0.140* *

* *

*C *132 817 6,045 0.022 0.157

*D *311 2,181 16,820 0.0184 0.148

* RATIOS OF SEVERITY INDICES *

* Fatal Fatal+Serious*

* *

*B/A * 1.51 1.18

*C/A *2.13 1.33

*D/A *1.80 1.25

*C/B* 1.41 1.12

*Weight or 4x4?*

* *

The following analysis suggests that the current campaign against 4x4s
would be better directed against heavy cars. Bentleys and Rolls Royces
each weigh about 2.5 tonnes. Three 4x4s, the Daihatsu Terios, the Honda
HR-V and the Suzuki Jimny weigh between one tonne and 1200 kg. The crash
data for these cars in the three years 2001 to 2003 were as follows

* MODEL CRASHES * *SEVERITY INDICES*

*Fatal Serious All Fatal/All (Fatal+Serious)/All*

*RR & Bentley *5 26 146 0.034 0.212

*Three light 4x4s * 6 71 583 0.010 0.132* *

Campaigners are concerned about pollution as well as safety, but here
too weight seems to be more important.

*MPG (combined test) *

* *

*RR & Bentley *13.7 to 17.8

*Three light 4x4s * 32.8 to 37.7

-----Original Message-----
From: Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of Stephen Plowden
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 10:43 AM
To: Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Mayer Hillman
Subject: Re: [Kyoto2020] Pay-As-You-Drive Benefits

-----Original Message-----
 On Behalf Of Gladwyn d'Souza
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 10:03 PM
 Subject: [Kyoto2020] Subject: replies to Gabriel Roth and Todd Litman

I want to agree with Simon Norton that the effect of
increased motorization is to fritter away the
advantages of increased economic output. But increased
economic output for example from a small arms
manufacturer, a single family home or business park
construction firm, gasoline and chemical manufacturing
and distribution, walkman production, etc., which
benefit a tiny few, and fill a lot of dumps with
disposable toxic material, are not always in the
general public interest. The defense industry here in
the US is a good case in point.

Serving the interests of distracted consumers will
exist in any system. For example in
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/03/business/media/03adco.html?
the latest throw away device with food supply
polluting mercury components has this quote-

“Mr. Crecente said yesterday that he still had not
watched the movie but was hoping to find an excuse.
"If I'm in a car on a road trip, I can pull it out and
watch," he said, "or if I'm stuck at an airport."”
Thus the social cost of distraction should guide
policy.

There are many more advantages in small pedestrian
scale cities like Hong Kong and San Francisco than the
efficient mobility of goods and services. Small
business thrive and education, health care, transit
revenue sources are widely available. Both
accessibility and quality are improved. More such
places improve the potential for quality open space.

Increased motorization or the densification of 12 foot
lanes marginalizes economies of scale.

Gladwyn d'Souza

From: Stephen Plowden <stephenplowden@...>
Date: Wed May 4, 2005  9:36 pm

My (limited) understanding of the physics is that the mass of the car is
unlikely to make much difference to the damage done to a pedestrian or a
cyclist hit by a car, because the difference between their masses and
that of the car is so huge. The speed at impact is crucial, and at low
speeds the shape and materials of the front of the car are also
important. But in a crash between two cars, the occupants of the
heavier one transfer a lot of their risk to the occupants of the lighter
one. Should not governments intervene to stop such behaviour?

Stephen

From: Gabriel Roth roths@...

Mon May 9, 2005  2:59 am

 
Anna/Stephen

Agreed that much more needs to be done to protect pedestrians from
road accidents, and enforcement of low speed limits might be helpful.

But occupants of light cars suffer from accidents more than occupants
of heavy cars, even in accidents that do not involve a mix of
light/heavy cars. The problem is obvious in poor countries where many
families can be seen sharing two-wheeled vehicles. Should governments
in those countries require that all motorized travel be on two-wheel
scooters?

Would not government intervention to prohibit the use of heavier
cars, which are safer for the occupants than light cars, be akin to
prohibiting the use of safety belts and air bags? Joseph Pechman
supported that approach, and suggested that there would be fewer
accidents if cars were required to have spears fixed to the steering
columns, pointing at drivers' chests.

I am not trying to trivialize a major societal problem but to suggest
that mandatory requirements for fuel-saving cars could save fuel but
cost lives. What are our priorities?

Gabriel

‘From: Eric Bruun <ericbruun@...>

Date: Mon May 9, 2005  9:43 pm

Gabriel

I think that it used to be true that large cars were safer, even when no other
car is involved. It is not true today. Someone else posted some recent research

findings about this recently, but I don't have the message handy.

Today, in the USA, even small cars are built to a high safety standard, with
absorbing frames and bodies, airbags and the like. Almost no SUV has an energy
absorbing frame, as they sit on rigid light truck chasses that are exempt from
the Motor Vehicle Code. That is one of the reasons that car makers love them so
much. They are of old-fashioned design, but sell for a lot of money.

For the developing world, I think it would be more to the point to ban the sale
of obsolete small car designs ( and obsolete motorcycle designs, for that
matter.) It is not only the safety that is substandard, it is the pollution and
reliability as well.

Eric Bruun

 -----Original Message-----
From: Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Plowden
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 6:12 PM
To: Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [Kyoto2020] Re: Kyoto Cities Challenge The United States and global warming: a tale of two countries

Gabriel

You say

"But occupants of light cars suffer from accidents more than occupants of heavy cars, even in accidents that do not involve a mix of light/heavy cars."

I doubt this remark,  but hope to have some better evidence from GB fairly soon.

Suppose it to be true, and suppose also that it is genuinely a function of mass and not just a phenomenon related to, or curable by, car design, I wd still quarrel with your conclusion. We shd be more concerned about the risks that people impose on others than about the ones they choose to bear themselves. When a heavy car is involved in a crash with a light one, the light one comes off worse. The occupants of the heavy car have (not wholly but to a large degree) transferred their share of the risk to the occupants of the light one. Should that be allowed?

Isn't "fuel versus lives" in any case rather simplistic? Global warming will cost many lives. Pollution from car exhausts costs lives even now.

Good to hear from you, even so,

Stephen   

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Plowden [mailto:stephenplowden@...]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:41 AM
To: Kyoto2020@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Kyoto2020] small versus big car

The following article outlines a possible vision of cars and car

ownership policy for developing countries.

If anyone in this email group would be interested in discussing it, or

knows someone in the World Bank or similar institution who might be, I

would be very interested tohear.

*GETTING TO GRIPS WITH CAR OWNERSHIP*

* *

*How developing countries can avoid the problems which the west has

created and failed to solve *

Transport problems become insoluble once car ownership has got out of

hand. Developed countries have allowed that to happen and are now

struggling, with only limited success, to rectify the problems they have

brought on themselves. At present, developing countries seem determined

to follow the western model, with consequences that are likely to be

even more disastrous. The key to avoiding this is a discriminating

policy on car design and ownership.

At present almost all cars are designed to be able to perform journeys

of any length, from a short trip to the shops to a long journey across a

country. But most car journeys are short, and to encourage people to

make long car journeys creates more problems than it solves. Two kinds

of car are necessary, a local car and an all-distance car.

The local car would have a top speed of some 30 to 40 km/h,

corresponding to the standard speed limit in built-up areas. It would be

built to be as economical in fuel and as environmentally friendly as

possible. It would not necessarily be small, since some people would

need a car with a large carrying capacity for their local purposes.

There would be a van version for tradesmen such as plumbers,

electricians or painters who need to carry the tools of their trade.

All-distance cars would be built to be much less thirsty, dangerous and

polluting than cars are at present. They would have a top speed of some

90 km/h, which would also be a national and ideally a worldwide speed

limit. They would have modest powers of acceleration and would be fitted

with variable speed limiters to ensure compliance with the speed limit

on roads where it was lower than the national limit. They would be built

to be as light as possible.

The recognition of these two types of car makes possible rules for car

ownership that would allow the benefits that cars have brought while

eliminating most of the costs. The suggestion is that only some

professional drivers (taxi drivers, the police, emergency services), and

perhaps some private people with special problems limiting their ability

to walk, cycle or use public transport, would be allowed to own and

drive all-distance cars. The driver-licensing regime for all-distance

cars would be very strict. Licences would be hard to obtain and easily

forfeited by bad behaviour.

These rules on car ownership would not eliminate the need for traffic

avoidance through land-use planning, but they would make it easier to

achieve. Towns should be as compact as possible, subject to the need to

avoid high-rise dwellings and to provide good public open space and a

certain amount of private open space. Development control should ensure

that convenience shops and other facilities needed for daily life are

available in each neighbourhood, and that more specialised facilities,

of a kind that cannot be provided in every neighbourhood, are located in

town centres or on other sites with easy access to public transport.

Such an urban form maximises the possibilities of satisfying journey

purposes by short journeys on foot, or by somewhat longer journeys by

bicycle or public transport. When it is still necessary, or highly

convenient, to use a car, car journeys are shorter than in a town with a

more dispersed urban form. Consequently, all the costs and nuisances of

motorised travel are reduced.

These rules on car ownership would also have profound consequences for

traffic calming and traffic restraint. Traffic calming is the limitation

of the adverse impacts of any given volume of traffic by means such as

speed cameras, humps, chicanes and so on. The need for such measures

would be virtually eliminated. Traffic restraint is the limitation of

traffic volumes by imposing selective limitations on the use of cars

(and sometimes also on the use of lorries). One purpose is to stop cars

getting in the way of other road users. Another is to ensure that cars

can be driven in reasonable conditions when their use would be

especially convenient to the user and not a significant nuisance to

others. There would be little need for traffic restraint outside towns,

since there would be very few long car journeys, but it would still be

necessary inside towns.

The subject of urban traffic restraint deserves a paper, if not a book,

to itself, but to summarise drastically, three things are required. The

first is adherence to the principle that journeys to the town centre are

not made by car. Very few journeys to town centres need to be made by

car, since there are always good alternatives. Cars are a great nuisance

both in the centre itself, where the pedestrian should be king, and on

the main roads to and from the centre, which are usually also important

bus routes. There is no need to provide even for residents to have cars

in town centres. There are many people who would like to live in a

car-free environment; it is in society’s interest to cater for people

with such harmless tastes; the town centre is the obvious place for

them. Secondly, there should be a strictly enforced speed limit of no

more than 20 mph throughout the town, with perhaps a few exceptions such

as main bus routes. Thirdly, segregated facilities should be provided

for pedestrians, cyclists and buses.

Given the right policies on car ownership, these measures of traffic

restraint might be all that would be required in most towns. In very

large towns, say with over a million population, there might be a need

for further policies affecting either car ownership, parking or use.

This approach to car design and ownership would enable developing

countries to achieve what developed countries have failed to achieve: an

efficient, economical, safe and environmentally friendly transport

system. It would help their economies in other ways too. Imports of

vehicles, parts and fuel impose a heavy burden on the economies of many

developing countries. This burden would be eased. In addition,

developing countries would often be able to build local cars for

themselves, which would create a new source of employment and a further

means of import substitution.

* *

Here is something that I hope you will chose to give a bit of thought to, for two rather different sets of reasons: (1) content and (2) technology of communication. Briefly then:

1. The content of this Transportation Research Board (TRB) session of two weeks ago in Houston Texas, during which a number of our US colleagues report on the present state of the art in the States in the area of “Improving Mobility and Accessibility with Managed Lanes, Pricing, and BRT” is directly relevant to the thrust and content of both our work under the New Mobility Agenda – and even more to what we are trying to advance in the Kyoto World Cities 20/20 Challenge project: measures that allow us to get more throughput through schemes which make increased use of space-efficient high occupancy vehicles (HOV).   
   
   
2. The decision of the TRB organizers to make use of this format for sharing and extending the outreach of their meeting.

This is right up the main line of our thinking on both scores. If you have any reactions or comments on this, it would be much appreciated if you might share them.