WorldTransport : Messages : 1789-1818 of 1906

#1789

From: Ganga Nirosha <ganganlk@...>
Date: Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:00 pm
Subject: Re: WorldTransport Forum Parking vs. ped/bike. What if the other guy actually has a point?

ganganlk

Send Email

Dear all,

We, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, and University of Ruhuna are undertaking a research to develop a Walkability Evaluation tool to evaluate walkability in streets of developing countries.We expect to develop this tool based on the opinions and evaluation of the professionals.

I would kindly expect your help to distribute this information to relevant people whose work involves (has involved) road planning/design/construction/maintenance and management .

The research consists of three questionnaires to be filled in three stages. Each questionnaire consists of several questions in which you are expected to state
your opinion by selecting a suitable answer or stating the degree of importance by way or a numerical value.Your response is of utmost importance to us.
Questionnaire of this research is available on the following website: www.walkabilitysurvey.tk

If you are willing to assist us for this work, please visit this website and kindly complete questionnaire. We would greatly appreciate if you can fill this by 2nd July
2012. Please be kind enough to enter your name and other requested details on the questionnaire. We guarantee that your information will only be used for this research and will be kept confidential.

Should you have any queries or comments regarding this survey, you are welcome to contact us via telephone at 091-2245765/ 091-2245767 or e-mail
samarasekara@...

Yours sincerely,
Dr. G.N. Samarasekara,
Senior Lecturer Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
University of Ruhuna.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#1790

From: Zvi Leve <zvi.leve@...>
Date: Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:22 pm
Subject: Re: [sustran] Local Economic Development Impacts of Pedestrian and Cycling Improvements

zvileve

Send Email

I would like to expand a bit on a few points which Todd has already made:�

On 24 June 2012 19:23, Todd Alexander Litman <litman@...> wrote:

� � � Pedestrian areas require a critical mass of users. They should be both a destination and a thoroughfare that connects diverse attractions (housing, shops, offices, etc.). Encourage development that attracts a broad range of customers and clients, including retail, housing, education and employment. Apartments and offices can often be located over shops.

I think that there are two fundamentally different types of development here: specific places such as a square or even and individual street, or along entire corridors which are crucial for providing continuity (car drivers do not like stop and go traffic, why should this be the norm for pedestrians?). Many European cities have entire networks of contiguous pedestrian areas which permit people to move about the city without being exposed to vehicular traffic at every intersection. These are truly separate networks, not just individual streets....

Concerning mixed uses, it is hugely important to bring more than just commercial and housing to the area! Office space, services (health and even educational), and cultural uses can all animate the area at different times of day.�

�

� � � Allow motor vehicles as required for access, with appropriate restrictions based on need, time and vehicle type. This may include unrestricted motor vehicle traffic during morning hours, transit vehicles, resident and hotel pickup, service and emergency vehicles, or other appropriate categories.

�

It is very important to provide some flexibility in access and to recognize that there are different needs at different times of day.

�

"Merchants on a particular street often object to parking-to-bike-lane conversions out of fear that they will lose customers who use on-street parking. This is often untrue or inappropriate. In many cases, on-street parking serves only a small portion of their total customers, alternative parking is available nearby, and some of their customers who currently drive will shift to cycling if suitable facilities are available (Sztabinski 2009). This is actually a debate between very local costs (the merchants who lose a few parking spaces) versus widely distributed benefits (businesses throughout the area who will benefit from reduced automobile parking demand, travelers who benefit from financial savings and health benefits, and all residents who benefit from reduced traffic congestion, accident risk and pollution emissions)."

In Montreal, most of the pedestrian projects are in central areas which have quite high property values. The small commerce owners often cannot afford to live in such areas, and have moved to more distant car-oriented suburbs. Thus, the owners arrive at their commerces by car and naturally assume that most of their clientele arrive in a similar manner. Access to parking spaces is a very important concern for these people.... But in my opinion, the larger issue is the fact that small business owners cannot afford to live in the area where their businesses are located.�

Richard has also made a number of excellent points. The link between pedestrian and cycling improvements (or any transportation project) and economic "development" is far from direct. There are many other factors at work, and many perverse incentives�which encourage or discourage certain development outcomes.....�

�

1. �Well, in the US, there were a number of pedestrianized malls created in the 1960s and 1970s. �With a couple of exceptions, most have been removed. �They weren't successful for multiple reasons: (1) cities were depopulating; (2) locally-owned stores in downtowns were decamping to the suburbs; (3) community mental health facilities weren't created as a part of the deinstitutionalization movement and so center cities became a kind of holding place for "street people" (people with health and substance abuse issues that made it difficult for them to live "normally"); (4) locally owned department stores failed, further reducing the impact of downtown as a commercial destination.

So basically, streets were pedestrianized simultaneously with a severe decrease in the number of pedestrians, and an increase in other problems. �As someone said on a now defunct Project for Public Spaces e-list on public space (maybe it's another list topic to pick up and run with as part of the New Mobility Agenda), plants don't animate places, people do. �And so having motorized traffic has been considered to be an important albeit not lovingly component of place activation.

4. �When I was in Montreal for vacation in July 2010, some merchants on St. Catherine Street had a campaign against the Art Festival on the street, which banned cars for many blocks (from the Rue Berri-UQAM station pretty far down but not all the way (I think) to the Papineau Station.

And Montreal has a number of other pedestrian street initiatives--near McGill U, and in the Old City. �I bet Zvi Leve could offer some insights as to what merchants think today.

Pedestrian and cyclist development in Montreal has become a *highly* contentious topic. Projet Montr�al which won all of the seats in the central Plateau Mont-Royal borough has been pushing non-stop to get as many progressive transportation things done while they can, but they are encountering significant push-back from many directions (from merchants on one of the pedestrian streets for example). �On the other hand, Jimmy Zoubris who is a small commerce owner on Parc Ave (a long-struggling commercial artery) recognizes that we are in for a "rough ride" but he has thrown his support fully behind the Projet Montreal team.�

Best,

Zvi

Reply | Messages in this Topic (6)

#1791

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:07 am
Subject: Report on Public Bikesharing in North America:.

fekbritton

Send Email

From: Susan Shaheen [mailto:sashaheen@...]
Sent: Monday, 09 July, 2012 22:09
To: Susan Shaheen
Subject: Mineta Transportation Institute Publishes Report on Public Bikesharing in North America: Download it for free

Dear All,

Our North American Public Bikesharing report is now available. Thank you so much for your support and interest in this research.

You can download it for free at: transweb.sjsu.edu/project/1029.html. Please feel free to circulate to others that might be interested.

Best wishes,

Susan

P.S. We have recently been funded to continue this research in 2012-2013 by the Mineta Transportation Institute. So, please stay tuned.

Donna Maurillo
Director, Communications and Tech Transfer
Mineta Transportation Institute

210 North Fourth Street, Fourth Floor
San Jose, California 95112 USA
+1-408-924-7564 direct
+1-831-234-4009 mobile

1 of 1 Photo(s)

twitter.png

7 of 7 File(s)

1029 - Public Bike Sharing - 070912 FINAL.doc

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1792

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:07 am
Subject: No Parking, No Business 3: Walking and cycling perspectives

fekbritton

Send Email

Eric Britton posted in World Transport Policy and Practice

Eric Britton

9:05am Jul 12

No Parking, No Business 3: Walking and cycling perspectives

worldstreets.wordpress.com

Continuing our coverage of the open “No parking, No business” conversation, more on walkability imp...

View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1793

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:32 am
Subject: Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

fekbritton

Send Email

New post on World Streets : The Politics of Transport in Cities

Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

by Eric Britton, editor

There are of course quite a number of reasons, but one of them is NOT that we do not have sufficient knowledge and experience in order to figure out and implement effectively a very large number of measures and policies, each of which one step at a time will draw us just one bit more [...]

A different way of thinking about social movements

Book cover, Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility

Sarah Soule, the Morgridge Professor of Organizational Behavior, has looked at thousands of protests staged over numerous causes to find the answers. Her conclusions? Movements have their greatest effect in the early stages of policy debate on a given issue, before the debate becomes too broad and acrimonious and before cause supporters become too outspoken. And, she says, activism often begets more activism as groups that come together over one issue find future ground for agreement and take on yet more issues.

Before 2000, researchers had not proven empirically the power of protest to create change, says Soule, who joined the Business School's organizational behavior faculty in 2008 after teaching at Cornell and the University of Arizona. She and colleagues set out to find evidence of whether social movements make a difference, and if so, when they have the most impact.

A third article is about Green Marketing. It's not as scintillating as the other articles, but is interesting nonetheless. See "Green Business."

They illustrate something I learned while working for one of the nation's leading consumer groups and as a local activist. (Reprinted from another blog entry...)

My sense of what I call the issue continuum.

I learned that the best consumer groups stake out the hard core, toughest, most progressive position.

You do this because in the end, you get much more movement towards the ideal, than if you were willing to compromise early, often, and far more conservatively.

It means that you never win. Because there is always plenty that you end up giving up.

But the end result, at the time, is far better than if you caved earlier.

It's why I tend to stake out much harder core positions, and criticize easy compromise, and wimpiness.

Some people and organizations have to stake out the harder core position in order get a better result. But the world is better as a result. Even if you personally are always disappointed, and seeking more.

From: Utkin Marek <mutkin@...>
To: "WorldCityBike@yahoogroups.com" <WorldCityBike@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 4:21 PM
Subject: ODP: [WorldCityBike] Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

> You can put Smiley stickers on these cars, on the screen or on the mirror, with as text asking them to respect the cyclists space and that of pedestrians, often their space is blocked as well.

In Poland we used to put on cars "Punishment c0ck" stickers:
http://www.dwmedia.pl/kutas/zdjecia/karnykutas99.jpg

For to keep gender balance, "Punishment Pu$$y" appeared:
http://www.dwmedia.pl/kutas/zdjecia/karnapipa99.jpg

They're made with glue which is very difficult to remove.
And it's A WAY better, than a fine -- if the boy (moronic thug) wants to impress her girfriend, parking his tuned 20-years-old BMW on two parking places or cyclepath, he will be not so happy, seeing this, when they're back from restaurant or cinema. If she would start to wiggle, it's a disaster for him...
};-D

Marek

--
Marek Utkin
Inspektor
URZ?D M.ST. WARSZAWY
Biuro Drogownictwa i Komunikacji (BD)
Wydzia? Sta?ej Organizacji Ruchu
ul. Solec 48, pok?j -, 00-382 Warszawa
tel. +48224430659
faks +48224430641
mutkin@...
www.um.warszawa.pl

Wiadomo?? ta jest przeznaczona tylko dla okre?lonych adresat?w i mo?e zawiera? informacje prawnie chronione.
Zakazane jest rozpowszechnianie i przesy?anie informacji do os?b nieuprawnionych do ich otrzymania.
Zabronione jest tak?e wykorzystywanie tych informacji w celu innym ni? zosta?y przes?ane.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#1797

From: "Paul Minett" <paulminett@...>
Date: Sat Jul 21, 2012 2:15 am
Subject: RE: WorldTransport Forum Re: ODP: [WorldCityBike] Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

paulminett@...

Send Email

Richard

While I agree with you that we are not thinking big enough, I take issue with your central statement that: there are 3 elements to sus. trans. -- walking, biking, transit + the livability/placemaking/streets aspect + the general issues of land use and mixed use

You are missing ridesharing – or perhaps I should say you are missing ‘passengership’. A car that has four people in it is as energy efficient per passenger mile as a bus that is 40% full: and the carpool does not deadhead empty to collect more riders. Of course people will ‘split off and pursue the aspect that interests them the most’ if you leave out huge chunks of the solution-set.

I agree with your suggestion that we should take ‘much harder core positions, and criticize easy compromise, and wimpiness’.

At the Ridesharing Institute we talk about defeating traffic congestion, which can be done with surprisingly small amounts of personal change on the part of commuters, but it is a position that people are uncomfortable with. I think their discomfort stems from an expectation that we will fail if our goal is too grandiose. They think we will fail in two ways: one by not being taken seriously, and one by not achieving the goal because it has not been achieved in the past.

The worst examples of traffic congestion in US cities could be defeated by every person choosing to become a passenger just one day out of five, or about double the current rate. The current approaches to reducing congestion do not focus on what it takes to get people to make this choice, but rather to providing solutions that we hope fit in the category of ‘if we build it they will come’. Experience shows us that this does not deliver.

Kind regards

Paul

Paul Minett

Ridesharing Institute

www.ridesharinginstitute.org

64 21 289 8444

64 9 524 9850

From: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Layman
Sent: Saturday, 21 July 2012 12:38 a.m.
To: WorldCityBike@yahoogroups.com; worldtransport@yahoogroups.com
Subject: WorldTransport Forum Re: ODP: [WorldCityBike] Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

we might be losing the war, but it's because we aren't thinking big enough. People are mostly looking at things too narrowly.

This is from an old blog entry:

So the issue is creating a comparable effort that works over the long term--a "sustained effort".

It's a process.

Now I don't think every locale needs 40 years to get to where Portland is today, but "critical mass" bike rides and Occupy movements that refuse to use microphones aren't going to get us there.

The Stanford Business School magazine had a couple articles a few years ago about work by their professors on social movements and business changes aided by "social movements." I wrote about it here:

A different way of thinking about social movements

Comes to us from the organization behavior department of the Stanford University Graduate School of Business and their magazine, which profiles various efforts by faculty at the school.

The story "Market Rebels" features professor Hayagreeva “Huggy” Rao, and his work/book on the link between technology and/or product adoption and the "social movement" actions both inside and outside of an organization that are necessary for the technology to become adopted.

"Social Movements," features the work of Professor Sarah Soule, which has been published as Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility. From the article:

... how exactly do social movements create change? And at what stage do these movements have the most impact on governments and even on corporations?

Sarah Soule, the Morgridge Professor of Organizational Behavior, has looked at thousands of protests staged over numerous causes to find the answers. Her conclusions? Movements have their greatest effect in the early stages of policy debate on a given issue, before the debate becomes too broad and acrimonious and before cause supporters become too outspoken. And, she says, activism often begets more activism as groups that come together over one issue find future ground for agreement and take on yet more issues.

Before 2000, researchers had not proven empirically the power of protest to create change, says Soule, who joined the Business School's organizational behavior faculty in 2008 after teaching at Cornell and the University of Arizona. She and colleagues set out to find evidence of whether social movements make a difference, and if so, when they have the most impact.

A third article is about Green Marketing. It's not as scintillating as the other articles, but is interesting nonetheless. See "Green Business."

They illustrate something I learned while working for one of the nation's leading consumer groups and as a local activist. (Reprinted from another blog entry...)

1. It's appropo at the beginning of the new year to repeat a line I have:

When you ask for nothing, that's what you get. When you ask for the world, you don't get it, but you get a lot more than nothing.

2. Which is based on something I learned a couple decades ago while working at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer group with Nader lineage (which CSPI tried to disavow). I learned this through observation, it wasn't something that the organization taught to its staff people.

Basically, you need to treat an issue as a continuum of positions, with a variety of policy-proscription points. I prefer to think of it as a kind of scatter plot, with the most conservative position on the far left of the line, and the most progressive position on the far right of the line, and all sorts of positions, all over the map, in between.

My sense of what I call the issue continuum.

I learned that the best consumer groups stake out the hard core, toughest, most progressive position.

You do this because in the end, you get much more movement towards the ideal, than if you were willing to compromise early, often, and far more conservatively.

It means that you never win. Because there is always plenty that you end up giving up.

But the end result, at the time, is far better than if you caved earlier.

It's why I tend to stake out much harder core positions, and criticize easy compromise, and wimpiness.

Some people and organizations have to stake out the harder core position in order get a better result. But the world is better as a result. Even if you personally are always disappointed, and seeking more.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#1798

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:17 am
Subject: Infoposter ECONOMICS - now available

fekbritton

Send Email

From: CEE PORTAL [mailto:press@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 25 July, 2012 08:15

The new infoposter "ECONOMICS" is now available:

- the poster gives an overview of the development of economic theory from its beginnings.

- the poster shows the historical roots of economic ideas and their application to contemporary economic policy debates.

View and order at http://www.cee-portal.at/PrestaShop

VOUCHERS:
20 % discount available until 26.07.2012. Quote voucher code AEA2012 during online checkout.

Best regards

Martin Kolmhofer

CEE Portal
1210 Vienna
Austria

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1799

From: "Todd Alexander Litman" <litman@...>
Date: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:58 pm
Subject: Re: "So much for green transport." - More Comprehensive Evaluation

litman@...

Send Email

There is considerable debate among transport economists concerning how to
correctly value congestion delay and travel time costs. The conventional
practice, which evaluates transport system performance based primarily on
vehicle traffic speeds and roadway level-of-service, is inherently biased in
favor of mobility over accessibility and automobile travel over other modes.
More comprehensive project evaluation should at least consider the following
factors:

* Comprehensive congestion evaluation. Many economists criticize the way
that congestion impacts and costs are quantified. See
http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0505.pdf.

* The barrier effect (delay that motor vehicle travel imposes on
non-motorized travel). Incorporating this factor recognizes that expanding
roads and increasing vehicle traffic reduces accessibility for many
travelers, and therefore imposes travel costs as well as benefits. See
http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0513.pdf .

* The tendency of roadway expansion to generate traffic and induce sprawl,
which reduces the congestion reduction benefits of highway expansion,
increases external costs (downstream congestion, parking subsidies,
accidents, fuel consumption and pollution emissions). See
http://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf.

* The full costs of accommodating increased vehicle traffic. For example,
each additional urban roadway lane typically accommodates 2,000 to 4,000
commute trips, each of which requires an additional parking space - costs
that are avoided if the same trips are made by public transport. Similarly,
automobile travel requires each user to have a vehicle, improving public
transit can allow some households to reduce their vehicle ownership,
providing large consumer cost savings. Taking into account parking and
vehicle ownership costs will often shift the "preferred option" from highway
to transit improvements - yet by tradition these are ignored in conventional
project evaluation.

* Non-drivers travel demands, and therefore the inherent efficiency and
equity value of improving transport system diversity. See
http://www.vtpi.org/choice.pdf .

For more information see:

Steve Abley, Paul Durdin and Malcolm Douglass (2010), Integrated Transport
Assessment Guidelines, Report 422, Land Transport New Zealand
(www.nzta.govt.nz); at www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/research/reports/422.

ITDP (2012), Transformando La Movilidad Urbana En M�xico (Transforming Urban
Mobility In Mexico), Institute for Transportation and Development Policy
(www.mexico.itdp.org); at
http://mexico.itdp.org/documentos/transformando-la-movilidad-urbana-en-mexic
o.

ITDP (2012), Transforming Urban Mobility In Mexico: Towards Accessible
Cities Less Reliant on Cars, Institute for Transportation and Development
Policy (www.mexico.itdp.org); at
http://mexico.itdp.org/wp-content/uploads/Transforming-Urban-Mobility-in-Mex
ico.pdf.

ITDP (2012), El Coche Nos�, Institute for Transportation and Development
Policy (www.mexico.itdp.org) and Trek Films; at
http://mexico.itdp.org/galeria/videos/el-coche-nos, with English subtitles
at http://mexico.itdp.org/archivo/galeria/videos.

Booz Allen (2012), Integrating Australia�s Transport Systems: A Strategy For
An Efficient Transport Future, Infrastructure Partnership Australia
(www.infrastructure.org.au); at
www.infrastructure.org.au/DisplayFile.aspx?FileID=812.

Todd Litman (2007), Evaluating Accessibility for Transportation Planning,
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at
www.vtpi.org/access.pdf .

Todd Litman (2011), Comprehensive Transport Planning, VTPI (www.vtpi.org);
at www.vtpi.org/comprehensive.pdf.

PennDOT & NJDOT (2008), Smart Transportation Guidebook, Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation and the New Jersey Department of
Transportation, Smart Transportation Partnership
(www.smart-transportation.com); at
www.smart-transportation.com/guidebook.html.

Nariida C. Smith, Daniel W. Veryard and Russell P. Kilvington (2009),
Relative Costs And Benefits Of Modal Transport Solutions, Research Report
393, NZ Transport Agency (www.nzta.govt.nz); at
www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/research/reports/393/docs/393.pdf.

Sincerely,
Todd Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
litman@...
facebook.com/todd.litman
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
�Efficiency - Equity - Clarity�

-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+litman=vtpi.org@...
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+litman=vtpi.org@...] On Behalf
Of Madhav Badami, Prof.
Sent: July-26-12 7:46 AM
To: bruun@...; Alok Jain
Cc: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com;
Sustainable Transport in the south
Subject: [sustran] Re: "So much for green transport."

Eric et al,

Indeed! Let me re-state my posting more precisely: Sadly, assigning a high
value even for small time savings for car users, WHILE NOT VALUING RESULTING
TIME LOSSES FOR OTHERS, and thereby swaying the results in the favour OF CAR
USERS is more the norm, than heresy. Even more sadly, what this approach
leads to in the long run is misery for all, including car users, as other
modes become unviable, and people who have access to cars are compelled to
use them even for trips for which cars are easily avoidable (this effect is
in addition to the sprawl and longer commuting distances that you talk
about, Eric).

Following this approach is bad enough in contexts in which the majority,
even if not everyone, has access to cars. It is obscenely criminal in
contexts in which the vast majority does not.

According to Ivan Illich, who was a philosopher (and not a transportation
engineer), and therefore perhaps understood better, said in his classic
Energy and Equity that motorized vehicles "create remoteness which they
alone can shrink. They create distances for all and shrink them for only a
few"; automobile passengers become "consumers of others' time"; and finally,
that motorized vehicles (and planning for them) "steal time from (poor)
groups and reallocate it to usually richer groups".

Madhav

************************************************************************

"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." -- George
Orwell

Madhav G. Badami, PhD
School of Urban Planning and McGill School of Environment McGill University

Macdonald-Harrington Building
815 Sherbrooke Street West
Montreal, QC, H3A 2K6, Canada

Phone: 514-398-3183 (Work)
Fax: 514-398-8376; 514-398-1643
URLs: www.mcgill.ca/urbanplanning
www.mcgill.ca/mse
e-mail: madhav.badami@...
________________________________________
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+madhav.g.badami=mcgill.ca@...
[sustran-discuss-bounces+madhav.g.badami=mcgill.ca@...] on
behalf of bruun@... [bruun@...]
Sent: 26 July 2012 10:27
To: Alok Jain
Cc: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com;
Sustainable Transport in the south
Subject: [sustran] Re: "So much for green transport."

Alok

No, it isn't heresy. It is standard practice for neoclassical cost-benefit
analysis. We may think it is a bad idea, but it is quite common.

The way to criticize it so that the public understands what an outrage it
can be is to compare saving 5 minutes for a wealthy business person's
commute with saving a full hour for a poor person. If the rich person earns
12 times as much, then according to this technique saving the rich person 5
minutes is just as valuable as saving the poor person a full hour.

Even worse, using this kind of justification for time savings promotes
sprawl. All evidence shows that eventually time saved turns into longer
commuting distance instead.

Eric Bruun

Quoting Alok Jain <alok.priyanka@...>:

> Initial feedback that I received was that this report was based on
> value of time judgements and assigns a much higher VOT for car users
> thereby swaying the results in their favour. This is obviously heresy.
> I will only know it once I have a sight of the full report.
>
>
> On 25-Jul-2012, at 8:24 AM, Karthik Rao-Cavale wrote:
>
>> So essentially the argument is that since Delhi has more car traffic,
>> the city cannot have dedicated bus lanes (no point going into the
>> argument of whether they constitutes  BRT or not. That debate is
>> futile and meaningless.)
>>
>> But I would like to see the weighting of bus and car trips in CRRI's
>> study. Their claims to expertise have no relevance to the value
>> judgments they made regarding the assignment of these weights.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Alok Jain <alok.priyanka@...>
wrote:
>> The Delhi BRT Saga continues. Instead of fixing problems with BRT,
>> everybody busy pointing fingers.
>>
>> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/CRRI-explained-why-Ahme
>> dabad-BRT-works/articleshow/15133172.cms?intenttarget=no
>>
>> CRRI explained why Ahmedabad BRT works Rumu Banerjee, TNN | Jul 25,
>> 2012, 03.46AM IST Article Comments
>>
>>
>> inShare
>>
>> Read More:CRRI|Central Road Research Institute|BRTS|Ahmedabad BRT
>> Works|Ahmedabad BRT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> NEW DELHI: In its desperation to save its ill-conceived and poorly
>> executed BRT project, Delhi government is now shooting the messenger.
>> It has not only questioned the study conducted by the Central Road
>> Research Institute (CRRI) but also launched a scathing attack on the
>> institute itself.
>>
>> Falling back on its worn-out argument of a rich-poor divide, it
>> called car owners "arrogant" and accused those who conducted the
>> study of ignoring bus commuters.
>>
>> But berating car owners will in no way make the public transport
>> system any better - for that governance has to improve ? just as
>> launching a tirade against CRRI will not make a dent in the
>> organisation's reputation. CRRI director, Dr S Gangopadhyay, told
>> TOI: "CRRI has been researching on road and transport solutions for
>> decades. If anyone has questions about the methodology used for the
>> study, we will be happy to answer. Our report has used international
>> norms employed in such studies."
>>
>> Gangopadhyay's reaction comes in the wake of the government getting
>> stung by CRRI's finding that "no BRT" was the best option. It has
>> been promptly dubbed "anti-poor" by the government. It may help to
>> recall that the agency had been hired by Delhi government on the
>> suggestion of the court, which had rejected the transport
>> department's plan to hire RITES for the study. Incidentally, RITES in
>> a 2004 study of transport solutions for Delhi had recommended 34 BRT
>> corridors. Preparation of the CRRI report, which is based not only on
>> a week-long experimental trial run but also on a series of field
>> surveys, culminated with a simulation exercise. The simulation was of
>> the traffic scenario on the 5.8km stretch in 2015 with and without
>> BRT, keeping the existing traffic volume as the base, factoring in an
>> annual increase in traffic of 5-7%.
>>
>> The study found that doing away with BRT would result in a decrease
>> of 48% in travel time, and a substantial 61% decrease in delay on the
>> stretch. Compare this to the option of continuing with BRT, which
>> would result in a further increase in travel time of 13% in
>> 2015 as well as an increase of 15% in delays on the corridor.
>>
>> Sources said the surveys undertaken ? including user perception,
>> occupancy studies, pedestrian studies, passenger flows and saturation
>> flow studies ? show that BRT is not working at its optimum at
>> present. Said a transport department official, "There is no denying
>> that there are traffic issues on the stretch. Unlike the Ahmedabad
>> BRT, the Delhi BRT is after all an open corridor."
>>
>> It's a point that the CRRI report has also underlined. It observes
>> that the proportion of cars is almost 1.5 times that of Ahmedabad on
>> the motor vehicle lane of Delhi BRT, which contributes to the lower
>> journey speeds. This, says the report, is because the "width of the
>> available MV lane is only 7-8m in either direction of travel". This
>> width is less than the 10m width available for each direction of
>> travel before BRT was conceived.
>>
>> The report adds: "Since the Ahmedabad BRTS is a closed system, the
>> commercial travel speeds are much higher. The bus composition is
>> about 3% of total traffic in both cases. The observed average speed
>> of buses on Ahmedabad BRT section varies between 22-25kmph (CEPT
>> Ahmedabad) which is much higher than that of Delhi BRTS -
>> 13-15kmph)."
>>
>> The last fact seems to have been completely overlooked by Delhi
>> government, which has been citing the success of the Ahmedabad BRT to
>> continue with its floundering experiment.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
>> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>>
>> ================================================================
>> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
>> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
>> countries (the 'Global South').
>>
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------
To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss

================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').
--------------------------------------------------------
To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss

================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1800

From: "P. Christopher Zegras" <czegras@...>
Date: Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:22 pm
Subject: RE: [sustran] Re: "So much for green transport."

czegras

Send Email

The broader questions about allocation of scarce public resources to improving
social welfare are important - practically, few if any societies I know of make
well-assessed, cross-sectoral decisions (better toilets or more BRT lanes....?).

With respect to the travel time question, it is important to clarify the
difference between individual VOT (which we actually do need to know to begin to
attempt to make some reasonable estimate of demand by different user groups) and
the societal VOT which should be used for project appraisal (and, in theory,
allow one to determine - better toilets, more BRT lanes....).  "Social" values
of time (not individual) have long been recommended for project appraisal;
transparency in the approach is CRUCIAL - as pointed out in this thread: whose
time is being weighted and by what weight?  Given the large number of public
transport users and a very strong equity argument which could be made for the
importance of their time, I find it impossible to believe that any TRANSPARENT,
reasonably well-done evaluation of BRT in Delhi would not strongly support that
option relative to other transportation projects (although, again, perhaps the
public monies would be better spent on sanitation infrastructure for all I
know).

For a thorough, modestly technical, publicly available overview, with good
recommendations (somewhat easily generalizable, in theory...):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52889305/The-Value-of-Travel-Time-Savings-in-Evaluatio\
n


As to what the users do with their saved time and costs (move to the suburbs,
make more trips, buy more tea, ...) - I believe the negative consequences should
be accounted for and dealt with in the respective markets.  In practice, I know
that is a real can of worms; but, whether times savings will be re-invested in
longer distances ("sprawl") or whether the congestion will accelerate sprawl is
an open question.  Undoubtedly both forces are at work, but not improving
transportation conditions for the poor at the risk of inducing sprawl seems a
bit misguided to me.



Chris Zegras, MIT-DUSP
http://czegras.scripts.mit.edu/web/
one step
Tel: 617 452 2433


-----Original Message-----
From: Visweswar [mailto:vissu.indian@...]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:42 AM
To: Anjali Mahendra
Cc: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustainable Transport in the south;
NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [sustran] Re: "So much for green transport."

Anjali,

I think you really made a valid statement " our methods of analysis need serious
revisiting " . It is extremely pitiful to see that discrimination exists in
every aspect of life, discriminating poor is not new in India. We "rehabilitate"
slums and build malls and develop IT parks, we are in the process of renovating
several airports in India and already have invested hundreds of Crores of rupees
building fancy airports in all Indian metro.
But do we ever care of providing cleaner toilets in our railway stations as a
minimum? Seriously we don't need experts nor their expertise to do analysis and
justify airports, we need good human beings and fellow citizens who value and
understand needs of everyone and not only the rich.
It is so stupid to see that we value the hunger of a rich car owner more than
the hunger of a poor bus commuter. VOT needs to be put in
trash.....1000 rupees of a rich person might buy him a days fuel for his car but
the same 1000 rupees of a poor bus commuter would meet months of his commuting
needs, so whose 1000 rupees is more valuable??

Visweswara Rao Gantasala.
Transportation Planner, IBI Group.

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Anjali Mahendra
<anjali.mahendra@...>wrote:

> I agree, and your ideas are good.  The problem is pervasive in every
> area of transport policy.  Thinking about toll roads and congestion
> pricing, an area I work on quite a bit -- toll rates are set based on
> average incomes in a corridor and on average values of time, deepening
> the equity impact on poor drivers.  While strategies exist to mitigate
> this impact, I do think our methods of analysis need serious
> revisiting.  I'm glad you deal with this in your book.
>
> -Anjali
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:04 AM, <bruun@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Anjali
> >
> > Yes, what the US Dot suggests is certainly better than assigning
> > each individual commuter their own value of time based on their
> > income, as the theorists would
> like
> > to do.
> >
> > But there is still a large bias between corridors based on average
> income.
> > There is no escaping the fact that a corridor with a higher average
> income
> > along it will still have higher total monetized time savings
> > benefits
> than
> > a corridor with poorer people, given the same actual travel time
> reduction
> > on both corridors. Thus, it is still easier to justify building both
> > highways and transit for the wealthy than the poor.
> >
> > In my book I argued against monetizing the time savings and instead
> > break it down into actual time by demographic group to see what the
> distribution
> > of time savings is (and perhaps even increases in time for some
> > people as our professor from Mc Gill pointed out.)
> >
> > Eric Bruun
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting Anjali Mahendra <anjali.mahendra@...>:
> >
> >  I agree with Eric that it is standard practice, which is why
> neoclassical
> >> economics is never the right approach to analyze such
> >> transportation policy issues.  However, interestingly, here's a
> >> guidance document from the
> U.S.
> >> DOT that recommends using the same hourly values of time for
> >> auto/car drivers and transit passengers:
> >> http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/**policy/Data/VOTrevision1_2-11-**03.pdf<
> http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/policy/Data/VOTrevision1_2-11-03.pdf>
> >>
> >> Values of time also vary by trip purpose.  Values of time for a
> >> poor person commuting to work and a rich person going shopping may
> >> well be similar.
>  I
> >> wonder if CRRI accounts for that.
> >>
> >> Has there been any work/research on values of time in large cities
> >> of
> the
> >> developing world that anyone could direct me to?
> >> A couple of years ago, I prepared a guidance document on conducting
> >> exactly such an analysis in the U.S. context, of converting an
> >> existing lane on
> an
> >> arterial for BRT. I would appreciate any feedback:
> >> http://onlinepubs.trb.org/**onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rrd_**352.pdf<
> http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rrd_352.pdf>
> >>
> >> The Delhi BRT is what it is and has its issues: poor execution,
> >> it's
> not a
> >> BRT but simply dedicated bus lanes, poor selection of pilot
> >> corridor,
> and
> >> interesting issues Alok raised earlier like problems with driver
> training.
> >>  But, it certainly deserves a rigorous analysis to identify the
> >> issues that must be tackled as more corridors are considered.
> >>
> >> -Anjali
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM, <bruun@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Alok
> >>>
> >>> No, it isn't heresy. It is standard practice for neoclassical
> >>> cost-benefit analysis. We may think it is a bad idea, but it is
> >>> quite common.
> >>>
> >>> The way to criticize it so that the public understands what an
> >>> outrage it can be is to compare saving 5 minutes for a wealthy
> >>> business person's commute with saving a full hour for a poor
> >>> person. If the rich person earns 12 times as much, then according
> >>> to this technique saving the rich person 5 minutes is just as
> >>> valuable as saving the poor person a full hour.
> >>>
> >>> Even worse, using this kind of justification for time savings
> >>> promotes sprawl. All evidence shows that eventually time saved
> >>> turns into longer commuting distance
> instead.
> >>>
> >>> Eric Bruun
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Quoting Alok Jain <alok.priyanka@...>:
> >>>
> >>> > Initial feedback that I received was that this report was based
> >>> > on value of time judgements and assigns a much higher VOT for
> >>> > car users thereby swaying the results in their favour. This is
> >>> > obviously heresy. I will only know it once I have a sight of the full
report.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On 25-Jul-2012, at 8:24 AM, Karthik Rao-Cavale wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> So essentially the argument is that since Delhi has more car
> >>> >> traffic, the city cannot have dedicated bus lanes (no point
> >>> >> going into the argument of whether they constitutes  BRT or
> >>> >> not. That debate is futile and meaningless.)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> But I would like to see the weighting of bus and car trips in
> >>> >> CRRI's study. Their claims to expertise have no relevance to
> >>> >> the value judgments they made regarding the assignment of these
weights.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Alok Jain
> >>> >> <alok.priyanka@...
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >> The Delhi BRT Saga continues. Instead of fixing problems with
> >>> >> BRT, everybody busy pointing fingers.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> http://timesofindia.**indiatimes.com/city/delhi/**
> >>> CRRI-explained-why-Ahmedabad-**BRT-works/articleshow/**
> >>> 15133172.cms?intenttarget=no<
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/CRRI-explained-why-Ahmed
> abad-BRT-works/articleshow/15133172.cms?intenttarget=no
> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> CRRI explained why Ahmedabad BRT works Rumu Banerjee, TNN | Jul
> >>> >> 25, 2012, 03.46AM IST Article Comments
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> inShare
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Read More:CRRI|Central Road Research Institute|BRTS|Ahmedabad
> >>> >> BRT
> >>> >> Works|Ahmedabad BRT
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> NEW DELHI: In its desperation to save its ill-conceived and
> >>> >> poorly executed BRT project, Delhi government is now shooting
> >>> >> the messenger. It has not only questioned the study conducted
> >>> >> by the Central Road Research Institute (CRRI) but also launched
> >>> >> a scathing attack on the institute itself.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Falling back on its worn-out argument of a rich-poor divide, it
> >>> >> called car owners "arrogant" and accused those who conducted
> >>> >> the study of ignoring bus commuters.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> But berating car owners will in no way make the public
> >>> >> transport system any better - for that governance has to
> >>> >> improve ? just as launching a tirade against CRRI will not make
> >>> >> a dent in the organisation's reputation. CRRI director, Dr S
> >>> >> Gangopadhyay, told
> >>> >> TOI: "CRRI has been researching on road and transport solutions
> >>> >> for decades. If anyone has questions about the methodology used
> >>> >> for the study, we will be happy to answer. Our report has used
> >>> >> international norms employed in such studies."
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Gangopadhyay's reaction comes in the wake of the government
> >>> >> getting stung by CRRI's finding that "no BRT" was the best
> >>> >> option. It has been promptly dubbed "anti-poor" by the
> >>> >> government. It may help to recall that the agency had been
> >>> >> hired by Delhi government on the suggestion of the court, which
> >>> >> had rejected the transport department's plan to hire RITES for
> >>> >> the study. Incidentally, RITES in a 2004 study of transport
> >>> >> solutions for Delhi had recommended 34 BRT corridors.
> >>> >> Preparation of the CRRI report, which is based not only on a
> >>> >> week-long experimental trial run but also on a series of field
> >>> >> surveys, culminated with a simulation exercise. The simulation
> >>> >> was of the traffic scenario on the 5.8km stretch in 2015 with
> >>> >> and without BRT, keeping the existing traffic volume as the base,
factoring in an annual increase in traffic of 5-7%.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The study found that doing away with BRT would result in a
> >>> >> decrease of 48% in travel time, and a substantial 61% decrease
> >>> >> in delay on the stretch. Compare this to the option of
> >>> >> continuing with BRT, which would result in a further increase
> >>> >> in travel time of 13% in
> >>> >> 2015 as well as an increase of 15% in delays on the corridor.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Sources said the surveys undertaken ? including user
> >>> >> perception, occupancy studies, pedestrian studies, passenger
> >>> >> flows and saturation flow studies ? show that BRT is not
> >>> >> working at its optimum at present. Said a transport department
> >>> >> official, "There is no denying that there are traffic issues on
> >>> >> the stretch. Unlike the Ahmedabad BRT, the Delhi BRT is after all an
open corridor."
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It's a point that the CRRI report has also underlined. It
> >>> >> observes that the proportion of cars is almost 1.5 times that
> >>> >> of Ahmedabad on the motor vehicle lane of Delhi BRT, which
> >>> >> contributes to the lower journey speeds. This, says the report,
> >>> >> is because the "width of the available MV lane is only 7-8m in
> >>> >> either direction of travel". This width is less than the 10m
> >>> >> width available for each direction of travel before BRT was conceived.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The report adds: "Since the Ahmedabad BRTS is a closed system,
> >>> >> the commercial travel speeds are much higher. The bus
> >>> >> composition is about 3% of total traffic in both cases. The
> >>> >> observed average speed of buses on Ahmedabad BRT section varies
> >>> >> between 22-25kmph (CEPT
> >>> >> Ahmedabad) which is much higher than that of Delhi BRTS -
> >>> >> 13-15kmph)."
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The last fact seems to have been completely overlooked by Delhi
> >>> >> government, which has been citing the success of the Ahmedabad
> >>> >> BRT to continue with its floundering experiment.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ------------------------------**--------------------------
> >>> >> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> >>> >> http://www.google.com/coop/**cse?cx=014715651517519735401:**
> >>> ijjtzwbu_ss<
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ==============================**==============================*
> >>> >> *==== SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of
> >>> >> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a
> >>> >> focus on developing countries (the 'Global South').
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------**--------------------------
> >>> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> >>>
> http://www.google.com/coop/**cse?cx=014715651517519735401:**ijjtzwbu_s
> s<
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss>
> >>>
> >>> ==============================**==============================**==
> >>> == SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of
> >>> people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus
> >>> on developing
> countries
> >>> (the 'Global South').
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
> countries (the 'Global South').
>



--
Vissu

Support Akshaya patra: Unlimited food for education (
http://www.akshayapatra.org/)
Every small contribution makes a difference.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1801

From: "FEKBRITTON" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:53 pm
Subject: the single concept of EQUITY

fekbritton

Send Email

Not meaning to talk all the time about the same subject, but our position
(my position) is that if we wisely  base all aspects of our
transport/mobility system investments and policies on the single concept of
EQUITY, just about all the injustices and stupidities (and heresies -- I
liked that a lot Alok) wash right out of the system.  ( A bit on that in
process at http://equitytransport.wordpress.com/.)

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#1802

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:52 pm
Subject: the single concept of EQUITY

fekbritton

Send Email

Madhav and others,

I could not agree more. Bearing in mind that economics is in fact a branch
of moral philosophy (True for Adam Smith and true too for us today if you
think about it), in situations like this where some folks and schools have
run amuck with unthoughtout mechanistic notions that confuse economics with
a sort of indifferent plumbing, it is always a good idea to look around and
try to figure out what really is going on.

So when you talk about Chambers ("putting the last first") and Gandhi, let
me add to your pantheon the great democrat Victor Hugo who put it more of
less like this (my translation and memory): We must learn to replace the
notion of charity with a far better one, solidarity.

The point in all this being that if we get our ethics right, we are going to
be far less likely to run into these silly and oh so harmful "traps of
technicity gone berserk").

Now back to EQUITY!

Eric Britton




-----Original Message-----
From: Madhav Badami, Prof. [mailto:madhav.g.badami@...]
Sent: Thursday, 26 July, 2012 19:14
To: FEKBRITTON
Subject: RE: the single concept of EQUITY

Eric,

I agree. If our fundamental objectives in public policy are just and
equitable, and we put the last first, to paraphrase Robert Chambers, and
give voice to the voiceless, including the environment, all else follows, as
the night the day. As Mahatma Gandhi -- sadly forgotten in the land of his
birth -- said, it is futile to dream up systems (and may I say, analytical
approaches) so perfect that no one will need to be good. This is precisely
why I said the fault is not in our analytical approaches, but in ourselves;
and that transport policy, like all public policy (whether related to urban
transport or public sanitation in India or health care in the USA), is
fundamentally about ethics and politics, and only then about science,
technology, and economics.

Madhav

************************************************************************

"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." -- George
Orwell

Madhav G. Badami, PhD
School of Urban Planning and McGill School of Environment McGill University

Macdonald-Harrington Building
815 Sherbrooke Street West
Montreal, QC, H3A 2K6, Canada

Phone: 514-398-3183 (Work)
Fax: 514-398-8376; 514-398-1643
URLs: www.mcgill.ca/urbanplanning
www.mcgill.ca/mse
e-mail: madhav.badami@...
________________________________________
From: FEKBRITTON [fekbritton@...]
Sent: 26 July 2012 12:53
To: Madhav Badami, Prof.; 'Anjali Mahendra'; 'Alok Jain'
Cc: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com;
'Sustainable Transport in the south'
Subject: the single concept of EQUITY

Not meaning to talk all the time about the same subject, but our position
(my position) is that if we wisely  base all aspects of our
transport/mobility system investments and policies on the single concept of
EQUITY, just about all the injustices and stupidities (and heresies -- I
liked that a lot Alok) wash right out of the system.  ( A bit on that in
process at http://equitytransport.wordpress.com/.)

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#1803

From: Simon Norton <S.Norton@...>
Date: Sat Jul 21, 2012 3:38 pm
Subject: ridesharing

simonphillip...

Send Email

Sorry, I remain unconvinced that ridesharing can play a major role in solving
our transport problems.

Paul says that a full car is as energy efficient as a bus with 40% occupancy.
However this only yields real energy savings if as ridesharing develops the
number of buses is reduced to compensate. And then how will the remaining bus
passengers travel ? Can ridesharing really cater for every single person who now
goes by bus, as opposed to those who are making regular journeys to/from work or
who can plan their journeys sufficiently far in advance to enable them to ring
up for transport ?

Even for regular journeys, can a non car owner take up a job entailing a commute
that is unsuitable for conventional public transport on the basis that he/she
will be able to find someone to share with ?

Is it possible that ridesharing will actually have a negative effect by
encouraging people to stick with their cars even for journeys that are short
enough to walk or cycle or where public transport is adequate ?

Ridesharing can certainly bring some benefits, but I think it is inherently
unsuitable to form a major part of a transport solution.

  Simon Norton

Reply | Messages in this Topic (4)

#1804

From: Richard Layman <rlaymandc@...>
Date: Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:43 am
Subject: Re: WorldTransport Forum Re: ODP: [WorldCityBike] Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

rlaymandc

Send Email

I don't disagree with you that we can separate out ridesharing as a different category. Although I would argue that a rideshare option isn't always a sustainable choice on an absolute basis, but maybe on a comparative basis.

E.g., it's better to carshare than to own a car. But is it better to use car2go (a one way carshare program offered in US cities) instead of biking, walking, or transit?

Shouldn't taxis be allowed to carry multiple fares within one ride to better use the vehicle? What about jitneys? But in many cities, including DC and Arlington County Virginia, otherwise one of the US's best examples of sustainable transportation planning, taxi service isn't even addressed in the transportation element of the master plan.

Does Autolib in Paris promote driving rather than more sustainable modes such as walking, biking, or transit, while on the other hand does it reduce car ownership, because it enables occasional use especially for trips involving multiple passengers or heavy packages?

Should we consider package delivery services as an element of sharing or enabling more sustainable transportation choices too? Pretty much we aren't. e.g., http://www.freetrailer.dk/ (I've have talked with this company about the US market, and they are interested but mostly they say, "In the US, cars are so much bigger than in Europe and many people have SUVs anyway, so we don't think there is much of a market for this kind of service.")

Or bikeshare is criticized in places like Montreal because fewer than 15% of the trips are diverted from the car, but I would argue having ridden the Metro in Montreal, which is often very crowded plus the cars are narrow, that easing the congestion on the Metro through bikesharing would be a net positive. (Similarly, in DC, bikesharing for residents is mostly diverting trips from transit.)

And your points about carpooling are right on (at least for commute trips), but somewhat problematic because origins and destinations are so dispersed. It's hard to be efficient. OTOH, the DC region is known for the "slugging" phenomenon, which aids car utilization through the incentive of HOV lanes and faster trips.

In the Washington DC region, home of the US federal government, vanpooling is a particularly successful component of TDM. OTOH, we can criticize this method for enabling people to live very far distances from work and contributing to sprawl.

And note that one of the lines of business of my firm is bikesharing (and this book on collaborative consumption is top notch: _What's Mine is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption) so I am all for sharing.

I think we need to still figure this out, we haven't wrestled with all the issues.

With regard to your general point, in DC proper, while we have some roads that are almost permanently congested because they are major entrypoints in and out of the city generally, or in particular districts-sectors of the city, for the most part, streets aren't congested much at all. This has been a progressive phenomenon that I have noticed over the 25 years I've lived in DC.

I think it's a demonstration that a combination of the walking city spatial pattern given to us by L'Enfant, complemented with a subway system and surface transit, plus walking and biking, enabled with increasing amenities in neighborhoods derived from an increasing population (density) reducing the need to travel longer distances to accomplish tasks works very well to reduce car use/improves sustainable mobility.

Even though the quality of the subway system is in a period of steep decline, for the most part, the system works. It's a clear demonstration of the effectiveness of transit (as it is in Manhattan/Brooklyn/Queens New York as well).

From: Paul Minett <paulminett@...>
To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; WorldCityBike@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:15 PM
Subject: RE: WorldTransport Forum Re: ODP: [WorldCityBike] Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

Richard

I agree with your suggestion that we should take ‘much harder core positions, and criticize easy compromise, and wimpiness’.

Kind regards

Paul

Paul Minett

Ridesharing Institute

www.ridesharinginstitute.org

64 21 289 8444

64 9 524 9850

we might be losing the war, but it's because we aren't thinking big enough. People are mostly looking at things too narrowly.

This is from an old blog entry:

So the issue is creating a comparable effort that works over the long term--a "sustained effort".

It's a process.

Now I don't think every locale needs 40 years to get to where Portland is today, but "critical mass" bike rides and Occupy movements that refuse to use microphones aren't going to get us there.

The Stanford Business School magazine had a couple articles a few years ago about work by their professors on social movements and business changes aided by "social movements." I wrote about it here:

A different way of thinking about social movements

They illustrate something I learned while working for one of the nation's leading consumer groups and as a local activist. (Reprinted from another blog entry...)

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#1805

From: "Todd Alexander Litman" <litman@...>
Date: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:32 pm
Subject: RE: WorldTransport Forum ridesharing

litman@...

Send Email

Ridesharing (car- and vanpooling, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm34.htm ) is
very efficient for commutes to dispersed origins and destinations. Vanpools
in particular are very resource efficient (money, fuel and road space)
because they do not require a paid driver or an empty backhaul.

For example, it would be far more efficient to organize vanpool services
from a suburban location to a central worksite, or for off-peak commuting to
a hospital, than to run conventional bus services that have low load
factors.

However, ridesharing can only serve a limited portion of trips: regularly
scheduled commutes. Most rideshare programs require participants to commit
to a regular schedule, such as every weekday or Tuesdays and Thursday. As a
result, conventional bus services can serve a wider variety of trips
(non-commute and occasional trips) which are not effectively served by
ridesharing.


Sincerely,
Todd Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
litman@...
facebook.com/todd.litman
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"


-----Original Message-----
From: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Simon Norton
Sent: July-21-12 8:39 AM
To: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com
Subject: WorldTransport Forum ridesharing

Sorry, I remain unconvinced that ridesharing can play a major role in
solving our transport problems.

Paul says that a full car is as energy efficient as a bus with 40%
occupancy.
However this only yields real energy savings if as ridesharing develops the
number of buses is reduced to compensate. And then how will the remaining
bus passengers travel ? Can ridesharing really cater for every single person
who now goes by bus, as opposed to those who are making regular journeys
to/from work or who can plan their journeys sufficiently far in advance to
enable them to ring up for transport ?

Even for regular journeys, can a non car owner take up a job entailing a
commute that is unsuitable for conventional public transport on the basis
that he/she will be able to find someone to share with ?

Is it possible that ridesharing will actually have a negative effect by
encouraging people to stick with their cars even for journeys that are short
enough to walk or cycle or where public transport is adequate ?

Ridesharing can certainly bring some benefits, but I think it is inherently
unsuitable to form a major part of a transport solution.

  Simon Norton

Reply | Messages in this Topic (4)

#1806

From: "Paul Minett" <paulminett@...>
Date: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:19 pm
Subject: RE: WorldTransport Forum ridesharing

paulminett@...

Send Email

Todd and Simon

I respectfully disagree with the sweeping assumptions that you both make.

Firstly Simon: my goal is not to displace buses, but rather to displace single occupant (or low-occupancy) cars. My point about the comparison to buses is that IF we have a choice for solving congestion, between: 1) putting on more buses and convincing car drivers to switch; and 2) getting the same drivers instead to carpool; then from an energy efficiency standpoint the (new) buses would have to be at least 40% full on average before they would be more energy efficient than the (new) carpools, as long as the carpools have 4 people in each. My reason for promoting this observation is to counter the lobby that seems to think the only solution is to add more buses – it is not. I have never suggested that bus services should be reduced, and our work at the Ridesharing Institute is agnostic towards which seat a ‘ride-sharer’ fills: a seat in a bus, car, or van. As long as people take trips by road, we want them to be passengers more of the time. The main point is that research and development that leads to more people being passengers more of the time will reduce congestion, energy consumption, tailpipe emissions, and even the economic waste that occurs due to over-investment in destination-end parking spaces that could be instead used for productive purposes such as classrooms, offices, factories, or even green space. The other point is that there is available capacity in the empty seats in cars, while there is not much capacity in well routed bus services, which these days tend to be fuller, so the main focus of our work is to fill empty seats in private vehicles.

Our focus is not so much ‘non-car-owners’, though if the choice for serving these people is between adding NEW buses, and finding ways to get them to carpool, it is much less costly for society (and probably less polluting and energy consuming) to get them to carpool.

Second to Todd: you rightly say that ‘most rideshare programs require participants to commit to a regular schedule such as every weekday, or Tuesdays and Thursdays’ and so ‘can only serve a limited portion of trips’. Yes, it is true that most ridesharing programs require this, but it does not have to be so. The most successful carpooling systems in the world are the slug-lines and casual carpooling, which do not ‘require’ anything of the participants. Their strength is in the absence of pre-arrangement. It is surprising to see you being this narrow in your interpretation of the question. Clearly innovation is required to disrupt ridesharing programs that are so narrow. Currently efforts are focused on making ridesharing more ‘dynamic’. You also say that ridesharing can only serve regularly scheduled commutes. Examples like Zimride show that this is incorrect, as the current crop of venture funded ridesharing businesses are mainly serving the ‘non-commute’ market.

I close by focusing on Simon’s opening statement: “I remain unconvinced that ridesharing can play a major role in solving our transport problems.” Surprisingly, when there are bus strikes transport problems tend to be solved very elegantly by carpooling. And before that statement sets of a whole flurry of objections, it is only being used as an example. I agree that if we do not successfully innovate in this space, ridesharing will not play a major role in solving transport problems. I am absolutely convinced that ridesharing could make an incredibly large difference to transport problems, particularly congestion, if the general commuting populace could be convinced to choose to be a passenger (on average) about one day out of five. At that level of demand, ridesharing service providers would find a large enough market to make it worth investing in innovation, and at the same time the broader community could cut back on many transportation related investment programs. At the moment in the US commuters choose to be passengers on average about one day out of eleven.

Paul Minett

Ridesharing Institute

www.ridesharinginstitute.org

64 21 289 8444

64 9 524 9850

From: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Todd Alexander Litman
Sent: Tuesday, 31 July 2012 3:33 a.m.
To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: WorldTransport Forum ridesharing

Ridesharing (car- and vanpooling, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm34.htm ) is
very efficient for commutes to dispersed origins and destinations. Vanpools
in particular are very resource efficient (money, fuel and road space)
because they do not require a paid driver or an empty backhaul.

For example, it would be far more efficient to organize vanpool services
from a suburban location to a central worksite, or for off-peak commuting to
a hospital, than to run conventional bus services that have low load
factors.

However, ridesharing can only serve a limited portion of trips: regularly
scheduled commutes. Most rideshare programs require participants to commit
to a regular schedule, such as every weekday or Tuesdays and Thursday. As a
result, conventional bus services can serve a wider variety of trips
(non-commute and occasional trips) which are not effectively served by
ridesharing.

Sincerely,
Todd Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
litman@...
facebook.com/todd.litman
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"

-----Original Message-----
From: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Simon Norton
Sent: July-21-12 8:39 AM
To: worldtransport@yahoogroups.com
Subject: WorldTransport Forum ridesharing

Sorry, I remain unconvinced that ridesharing can play a major role in
solving our transport problems.

Paul says that a full car is as energy efficient as a bus with 40%
occupancy.
However this only yields real energy savings if as ridesharing develops the
number of buses is reduced to compensate. And then how will the remaining
bus passengers travel ? Can ridesharing really cater for every single person
who now goes by bus, as opposed to those who are making regular journeys
to/from work or who can plan their journeys sufficiently far in advance to
enable them to ring up for transport ?

Even for regular journeys, can a non car owner take up a job entailing a
commute that is unsuitable for conventional public transport on the basis
that he/she will be able to find someone to share with ?

Is it possible that ridesharing will actually have a negative effect by
encouraging people to stick with their cars even for journeys that are short
enough to walk or cycle or where public transport is adequate ?

Ridesharing can certainly bring some benefits, but I think it is inherently
unsuitable to form a major part of a transport solution.

Simon Norton

Reply | Messages in this Topic (4)

#1807

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Wed Aug 1, 2012 2:26 pm
Subject: Portland to Rewrite Car-Centric Street Engineering Standard |

fekbritton

Send Email

Eric Britton posted in World Transport Policy and Practice

Eric Britton

3:45pm Aug 1

Portland to Rewrite Car-Centric Street Engineering Standard | Streetsblog.net

streetsblog.net

“Level of Service,” or LOS, for short, is the rather arcane engineering standard that has turned str...

View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#1808

From: "eric britton" <eric.britton@...>
Date: Fri Aug 3, 2012 2:37 pm
Subject: FW: [New post] On Building New Mobility Ecosystems: A Thinking Exercise

fekbritton

Send Email

Subject: [New post] On Building New Mobility Ecosystems: A Thinking Exercise

New post on World Streets: The Politics of Transport in Cities

On Building New Mobility Ecosystems: A Thinking Exercise

by Eric Britton, editor

I understand Professor that you are preparing a major public address on new transport ideas for our city tomorrow. My staff tells me you are calling it "On Building New Mobility Ecosystems". Now that sounds quite intriguing, but can you tell me in a few words that you have in mind to talk to us [...]

New post on World Streets: The Politics of Transport in Cities

Editorial: Why are we losing the sustainability wars? In transport, in cities, in our lives? Because we are . . .

by Eric Britton, editor

Consider these irrefutable unpleasant truths: There may be successes and improvements in this project, in this place, in this way, but when we look at the bottom line -- i.e., the aggregate impact of our transport choices and actions on the planet -- it is clear that we (that's the collective "we" including all of [...]

Yahoo! Groups

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...

Messages

New post on World Streets : The Politics of Transport in Cities

Why are we losing the war on sustainable transport, sustainable cities and sustainable lives?

A different way of thinking about social movements

A different way of thinking about social movements

A different way of thinking about social movements

New post on World Streets: The Politics of Transport in Cities

On Building New Mobility Ecosystems: A Thinking Exercise

New post on World Streets: The Politics of Transport in Cities

Editorial: Why are we losing the sustainability wars? In transport, in cities, in our lives? Because we are . . .