Are foot over-bridges really good for a city? 

It’s high time to use funds allotted for foot over-bridges - for instance 47 foot over-bridges are to be renovated as part of the Tk319.23-crore project to improve Dhaka’s traffic management - to make more and effective zebra crossings in the country 

A man carries an ailing woman  across one of the many overbridges in the city. Photo: Syed Saiful Alam Shovan        

A few years ago, two photos made the rounds on social media. One showed a young man climbing the stairs of a foot over-bridge in front of a major city hospital carrying an older woman who seemed to be unwell. Another showed a disabled man on a wheelchair at the foot of a foot over-bridge, apparently trying to figure out how to cross the street.

Over the past decades, Dhaka's zebra crossings have been disappearing, replaced by foot over-bridges.

Emphasising foot over-bridges over zebra crossings poses a real problem: it makes movement harder for certain groups of people, for instance, the disabled, people with heart and other medical conditions, pregnant women and so on.

But this foot over-bridge culture has impacts far beyond the crippling of movement for certain people, according to a new generation of urban activists.

"Walking is the most environmentally-friendly transport system. Overdependence on mechanised vehicles pollutes air, makes the cities unlivable by causing huge traffic pressure. On the other hand, a pedestrian takes the least amount of space while going from one place to another. For these various reasons, roads need to be optimised for pedestrians," said Syed Saiful Alam Shovan, an activist and a development professional.

"Foot over-bridges are constructed to give motorised vehicles a priority over the pedestrians," Shovan added.

Foot over-bridges are a rarity in the western world. They rely more on crosswalks.

Even in South Asia, instances of people making sensible use of zebra crossings is not rare, where there are no foot over-bridges.

In Sri Lanka and Bhutan, even school children are seen walking an extra 20 to 25 metres to cross the road over zebra crossings, despite the absence of any physical barriers to force pedestrians to do so.

It is understandable that in a populous country like Bangladesh, enforcing a pedestrian-first policy (that gives priority to pedestrians; when someone indicates intent to cross the street, motorists stop) may not be feasible but it is not hard to control traffic/pedestrian movement using traffic lights, or conventional hand signals of traffic police members.

But in Bangladeshi cities like Dhaka, people are forced to go on foot over-bridges, which most of them despise. The administration, from time to time, runs campaigns where they spot pedestrians not using foot over-bridges, and fine them. They tend to overlook and completely dismiss the reasons behind people disliking foot over bridges. 

"People do not like to climb up the stairs to cross the road because it simply takes more physical effort than walking on the plane," explained Shovan.

Overlooking the weaknesses of foot over-bridges, forcing people to use these is considered an educational necessity in Bangladesh, and even mass media joins the shaming campaign by publishing photographs of jaywalkers. There is a significant amount of social media trolling over the subject too.

However, higher walkability is also consistent with ongoing mass transport mega projects such as metro rail and bus rapid transit (BRT), according to zebra-crossing activist Shovan.

"These projects require passengers to come to the stoppage. Unless roads are more pedestrian-friendly, people will not ditch cars for trains, which are comparatively eco-friendly," said the activist.

In a city that is not pedestrian-friendly, it is only normal that authorities, while reconstructing footpaths or road dividers, cut down trees indiscriminately, Shovan stated. When the shades are taken away, the scorching sun further discourages a commuter from walking on foot.

This kind of transport system impacts human lives in ways one cannot imagine. 

"I know a family who is planning to conceive a baby only after they are able to buy a car. For them, using Uber on a daily basis is not affordable, and the public transport is not friendly for a pregnant woman," remarked Shovan, in a sad tone.

Foot over-bridges are also costlier than zebra crossings, Shovan pointed out. "Ironically, pedestrian bridges are being built with climate funds, which is not in favour of the most eco-friendly transport, i.e., walking, because people simply do not like to climb up the stairs to cross the streets," he continued.

Due to such policies that give priority to cars instead of walkability, the majority of the population have to face the majority of challenges, the activist opined.

For the cities to be more effective, we need to build them in a "smart" and humane way, the zebra-crossing campaigner stressed. People who do not use the stairs inside a building design foot over-bridges for the city dwellers, he criticised.

Elaborating on this, another urban activist and sustainable lifestyle enthusiast Saba Homaira Ahmad said, "Foot over-bridges are designed by the engineers and foreign consultants with their bird's eye understanding of city planning. They don't account for how a septuagenarian, or a pregnant woman, or a pheriwala with heavy baggage or a differently abled person is supposed to navigate the city." 

No, adding an escalator that's out of commission 80% of the time does not count, she added.

"There is heavy funding on constructing hideous foot over-bridges through foreign aid . If there's funding to build these ugly structures, there's funding to teach and enforce the use of simple zebra crossings," concluded Saba.

News Link

https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/are-foot-over-bridges-really-good-city-302692

Syed Saiful Alam Shovan/shovan

Let’s stand by our lone rangers: The role of RTI activists

When young Shovon moved to Dhaka from his village not very long ago, he went looking for ponds to bathe in. He discovered quite a few of them, spread all over the city. But he was soon dismayed to learn that ponds and other waterbodies were fast disappearing to make way for development. Fearing the same fate for the remaining ponds, he began looking for those which were in danger, hoping to do something to save them. He has done so since then. The activist in him put him on a relentless mission to help the remaining ponds of Dhaka to survive.

It may not seem obvious, but Shovon is following a long Bengali tradition. Bengal was the bastion for social and political activism during British India. Activists of Bengal led the way for the eventual departure of the British from India. Similar activism during Pakistani times hastened the emergence of Bangladesh.

Democracy thrives best in societies where citizens play an active role to hold in check power and authority. Bangladesh is fortunate to have inherited a rich tradition in this regard.

Activism is, however, context-dependent. What was useful in colonial times may not be so under democracy. The approach deployed against a more democratic and tolerant regime may not fare well under repressive and harsh rule. The current international trend towards greater authoritarianism and control is reflected in Bangladesh as well. The government is better equipped today than before to deal with public dissent. As a result, the methods we used in the past such as blockading, boycotting and the like, appear to be out of place today: the word "hartal" has almost disappeared from our political lexicon.

New approaches for activism are sprouting in this new era. Much has been written about the explosive growth of social media—and the other technological advances of our time—and their role in social change. But let us not ignore a new, albeit low-tech, tool. It too is readily available and full of promise: the Right to Information (RTI) Act 2009.

The adoption of the RTI Act was based on the principle that in a democracy citizen have the right to know how well their government is serving their interest. Citizens may obtain relevant information available with most public bodies to monitor their work and ensure that they perform their tasks honestly and diligently. Activism is thus built into the system.

While the law is yet to be fully understood and used by our citizens, a few who have are already putting it to good use.

People entitled to government's safety net programmes such as vulnerable group feeding, old age and maternity benefits, etc. are being helped by activists to send RTI queries to relevant bodies, seeking information on—for example—who is on the list or how recipients are chosen. Such requests were often enough for them to be called in and told that they are indeed on the list: the authorities would rather give in than have their misdeeds revealed. In some places, it became a practice to post recipient lists on notice boards.

RTI interventions were addressed to public health clinics for information on the list of medicines made available to them by the government for free distribution to the indigent. Where previously the medicines were sold to the intended beneficiaries by corrupt officials, the free medicine lists are now published on notice boards of the clinics.

Similarly, scholarship money meant for school children is now being disbursed in full. Before RTI activists turned their attention to them, they were subjected to unlawful deductions by school authorities. In all these examples, the law helped to bring systemic change for proper implementation of government programmes.

Sadly, there are not enough such stories. RTI activists must jump over many hurdles and through many hoops. They face difficulties and threats from irate public officials or those fearing exposure of their corruption. The Information Commission too is far from helpful. Instead of being pro-active, as envisaged in the law, it is prone to question the intention of the applicant for seeking the information in the first place. It is enough to dampen the spirit of any RTI user.

When Shovon discovered that ponds in Dhaka were being filled up, he informed himself on the law and found that the Natural Waterbodies Conservation Act 2000 made filling of ponds a punishable offence. He then began to contact the Environment Directorate whenever he learnt about any imminent danger to a pond.

In early 2016, Shovon learned that a pond, known as "Pottery Pukur", in Rayer Bazar area of the city, was being filled up by a Housing Company. He immediately tried to contact the Environment Directorate. He called, wrote and cajoled. His dogged persistence forced the Directorate to finally undertake an on-site investigation, in May 2016. It revealed that "Pottery Pukur" did indeed exist but was now totally filled up, illegally. A Housing Company was preparing to commence construction on the spot.

The Environment Directorate ordered a halt on all further activities on the spot, threatening the Company of legal action in default. It informed the concerned city authorities to undertake necessary measures to bring the pond back to its original state. A fine of more than Tk 14,00,000 was subsequently imposed on the Company and duly levied. But after that nothing happened to indicate that the pond would resurrect. Fearing inaction, Shovon proceeded like a lone ranger, with more phone calls, more letters, more outreach to anyone who could help, including the media. He also resorted to the RTI Act for help.

He found the Information Commission's role particularly unhelpful and perfunctory. His complaint hearing took place without him, as the Commission refused to change the date despite his formal request for a short postponement due to personal reasons. The Commission heard only the representative of the Environment Directorate and directed him simply to provide the information sought by Shovon. It made no effort to find out about the fate of the pond itself, as clearly anticipated in the RTI Act. The Environment Directorate simply informed Shovon what he already knew. There was nothing to indicate what further action it intended to take on the matter, if at all.

More than three years have passed since Shovon embarked on his mission to save "Pottery Pukur". He hasn't given up yet, though he fears retaliation by those disturbed by his intransigence. His efforts with all the concerned authorities have continued, yielding only perfunctory and evasive answers.

Will the matter simply fizzle out? Will our "Pottery Pukurs" continue to be stolen? Will our Shovons be forced to give up their dreams to be useful citizens of the country? Are the days of activism in Bangladesh over? Let us remember the contribution of activists of the past to bring us where we are today. And remember that each age needs its own activists.

Dr Shamsul Bari and Ruhi Naz are Chairman and Project Coordinator (RTI section) respectively of Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB

Two Environmental Activists, the ADB Office, and a Canal turned Drain

Syed Saiful Alam Shovan

We had an interesting meeting today with the Asian Development Bank (ADB). We were at their office in Dhaka to discuss some problems that occurred following their “development” of canals in Brahmanbaria and other small cities. Following the “development” of the canal by cementing the sides, what was once a healthy natural place supporting fish and other life has now become a filthy polluted drain.

During the meeting, as is natural, they offered us refreshment. One of us asked for a glass of water. The ADB officials, among whom were two environmental experts, drank coffee and juice, and ate biscuits. The “glass of water” was a small plastic bottle. The coffee came in paper cups with disposable plastic lids and a plastic stirrer. The juice came in a large plastic cup with plastic lid and plastic straw. The biscuits, naturally, were served on single-use plastic plates.

While consuming the food, the officials explained that the problem with the Brahmanbaria canal is the lack of proper solid waste management. The residents of slums, being poor and uneducated, simply toss their waste out the door of their shacks. The local government, despite being trained by ADB, does not dispose of the waste properly. He also suggested that we, as individual activists, go talk to the local government to clean up the mess created by ADB in the first place. (If the local authorities can’t handle the project responsibly, then perhaps you shouldn’t have built it?

One of us launched into a critique of their own practices. How could they criticize slum residents when they know that the rich generate far more trash per person? What about the trash they were generating in their own office? In our office, she continued, we compost our waste and avoid using single-use plastics. We serve water in glasses. We have glass water bottles for seminars. We of course eat off of ceramic or metal plates. How hard is that?

An ADB official responded that, yes, we should separate our waste. He did not even seem to grasp the possibility of avoiding using single-use plastics, though another ADB official acknowledged that these were “good points”. In response to the idea of a surcharge on single-use plastics, they responded that public awareness is the solution. After all, why would an institution focused on economic growth as measured by GDP and on private sector development understand the possibility of reining in the corporations that profit from the use of environmentally-hazardous single-use plastics?

At another point in the meeting, one of us inquired what ADB does if their project has a negative environmental assessment. The answer was a bit hazy; we try to mitigate…but the official did not say that ADB stops the project if the environmental hazards are clear.

When we questioned the wisdom of making cement sides to the canal and thus destroying biodiversity, their response was that this is a city, not the countryside. In a city one cannot have canals and farmland as one would in the city. One may as well say that cities are by definition polluted places that are deathly to their residents, who must choke on the fumes of the cars, be subjected to mounds of plastic trash, and drink dirty water…because that is urbanization, you know, development.

We might have expected that ADB would have the sufficient resources to do a bit of research on ecological practices. Surely they have heard of ecosanitation? Surely they realize that there are ecological ways of dealing with rainwater? Oh, let’s see, has anyone ever heard of rainwater catchment, or systems for recharging groundwater, or parks that become, in part, temporary lakes during the rainy season? These are not difficult issues to research. No, the engineer responsible for the project must instead lecture us on the proper dimensions of a canal to maximize drainage, and one of the environmental experts innocently inquire where she might learn of more ecological practices.

One might also hope that ADB, which claims to wish to end poverty, would have an environmental vision for the future. Surely they understand that poverty also consists of an impoverished environment, where air, water, and soil are polluted and contribute to ill health and early mortality. Surely, then, they will wish to learn from their failures and implement more ecologically-sound projects in future. Instead, they use words like “compromise” and suggest, as above, that cities cannot be environmentally-friendly.

At the end of the meeting, we again asked whether they can unequivocally state that concrete is not environmentally-friendly and is not conducive to biodiversity. They could not. (Earlier in the meeting one official did accidentally remark that in several cases, the canals had been a disaster. When we pushed them to state in which cities, they only named two: Brahmanbaria and Manikganj. The official was obviously aware that he had mis-spoken…not that what he said was not accurate, but it was outside the bounds of what he had meant to say.

Activists will be dreamers…and we will not easily be silenced. We will continue to pursue this issue. We will push ADB to accept that concrete sides of canals are not good for the environment and that there are better solutions to dealing with rainwater. We will alert other municipalities to the possibility of such projects coming to their locale and will urge them not to just “cut and paste” ADB’s mistakes. Our country deserves a much better future than that.

Let’s fight against the company’s colored water terrorism.

Bangshi River

This is ‍the story of an ‘exported’ river. People who have been living on the bank of this river for the last 30 years know all about it. They know how the river has been exported in the name of garment export to the European-American market. The exporters have not only exported the river, but they have also endangered the lives of the people whose livelihoods depend on this river. 



The picture shows the dumping of untreated water into the river by a famous garments factory that makes world famous branded garments. The factory claims that they are producing their garments in a 100 percent safe environment, and that they are cautious about both the environment and the safety of their workers. They keep saying this in all of their social events and conferences that take place in the big three star hotels, and they even state this on their website.

 However, these images prove how cautious they are about the environment, and that the reality is completely opposite to what they claim. ETP (Effluent Treatment Plant) is a process that is designed for converting the industrial wastewater into an effluent that can be either reused or returned to the water cycle with minimal environmental issues, and this takes place only when the audit officer or buyer is present in the factory.

 Heavy rain still continues to fill up the river. However, that clear water of the river gets colored by the chemicals that are disposed from the factories. The huge water body gets colored by the wealth of a few rich individuals Amidst the chemical waste, the river is also carrying away the tears of thousands of people whose livelihood depends on it.


We export garments, but we obviously do not want to export our rivers, agriculture, land, water, livelihood and health in the name of garment export. Laws, rules, and policies from all over the world are in our favor. Come let's talk about this issue, and let’s fight against the company’s colored water terrorism.

The river is being tortured now.

The Buriganga is biologically dead and the Sitalakhya is dying, “Had we protected the Sitalakhya, we could have got at least half of the city’s water from it.”

We want our river back.

Rakhal Dashi

After 4 years of libration , Rakhal Dashi got marrid off to Radha Rajbonshi. Father had said, “Dear, there’s blessing in  the Rajfulbaria village. And you have a nice fortune. All the big fishes get caught in theis village, you’d stay happy”

The days weren’t that bad for Rakhal Dashi by the grace of god , bread and butter along with life came through the magical water of the river it self. Sometimes fishes weighing 20/30 pounds get caught too.  But before selling it off in the market, fellow village women were summoned to witness big catch. And now the waters are filthy enough not to go near it . And bathing in the spring in this water means to get vibrant with colors along with the company.

Rakhal Dashi was happy every “Haat” day, her husband used to bring a saree for her. The fisherman villagers didn’t use to send their children in school. What would they learn there even if they did? Would it make any difference? That’s why they didn’t and the boys learnt how to catch fist like their fathers and their fathers before them. Throughout the whole year, they would fish in the river. Well, that used to be the picture at last.

The river is being tortured now. God has taken all his blessings back. And some fishes are caught in the rainy season. But what at the other times? They try to survive through loans from various NGO’s. Among the four sons only one got married. Other is still living alone. They can’t feed themselves so what would they feed their wives?

Your clothes didn’t take our clothes only: it took our right to live and not to survive. The amount of food you give to your pet dog is just the same as for six of us. And you can see the truth of that of you see the broken rice bowl of Rakhal Dashi; lying in a corner of the house.

#We_want_our_river_back.
#dwAlap
#RMG  

Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges

Responses to World Bank on Footover Bridges

The World Bank says that in order to improve air quality and safe mobility in Dhaka, one needed measure is more footover (pedestrian) bridges. On a recent visit, the World Bank explained to us that in addition to building 70 km of footpaths, an initiative for which we congratulate them, they are also building a number of footover bridges. When pedestrians cross the street they slow down cars, which makes the cars pollute more, they told us. Also, since there is little or no enforcement at zebra crossings and intersections, the only safe way to allow people to cross the street is through the use of the bridges. They explained that the project began many years ago when the World Bank had not yet spelled out a policy on universally accessible design, and in any case, with virtually no other facilities for people with disabilities in Dhaka, why not spend money building new infrastructure that is also inaccessible? They also mentioned that the directors of one hospital had requested a footover bridge because of staff being hurt or killed crossing the street. (Apparently the patients visiting that hospital are sufficiently strong and healthy to make use of the bridge. Or maybe since they’re already sick, it’s OK if they get run over.)

When we pointed out that they seemed to be saying that pedestrians are an obstacle to cars, they explained that pedestrians also slow down other traffic on the street, including buses. But they hastened to assure us that they had not said that pedestrians are the reason that buses move so slowly.

They further commented on the limited amount of road space in Dhaka, at about 7% whereas they feel that over twice that is the minimum necessary. When we commented that in a situation of limited road space, one should discourage, rather than encourage, the most space-inefficient means (the private car) they dropped that topic.

Throughout the conversation, one thing was clear: the World Bank officials only regard motorized trips as trips. They are trapped in car-based thinking. They consider all non-motorized forms as unimportant and, worse, an obstacle to all those important trips that are occurring with the use of fuel. Further, since fuel-burning vehicles pollute, they suggested that non-motorized transport including walking causes pollution by slowing down the otherwise smoothly moving motorized transport. That cars are the main reason that cars and buses are stuck in traffic does not appear to have occurred to them, nor did they seem aware of the abundant work that has been done in the past few decades on environmentally-friendly and people-focused transport policies to replace the old car-based ideas. We can only imagine two possible explanations for the World Bank’s refusal to acknowledge a more people-focused and environmentally-friendly approach to transport: either they are unbelievably ignorant that such possibilities exist, or their real interest is in selling cars and car-based infrastructure.

The Bank officials also mentioned that they are not in a position to tell the government what to do; rather, they must respond to the government’s request. Which is fine up to a point. But obviously funders have policies about what they will and will not fund. Under a Clean Air and Sustainable Environment initiative, they obviously could agree to fund footpaths and refuse to fund footover bridges. Conversations with officials at the World Health Organization and the Asian Development Bank have also made clear that while they cannot dictate what governments do, they do have significant scope to engage in persuasion to adopt (or not) more enlightened approaches. Finally, the holder of the purse strings is obviously not without influence on the recipient.

The Bank officials also said that they must listen to different perspectives and that there are different views on this matter. We could not agree more. There are people who have worked for years on transport and urban planning issues and who have done research on successful and failed policies in cities around the world. There are people who simply approach the issue with blind prejudice that the car is the only means of transport. There are people who care about the environment, about safety, about access for those with disabilities (special needs), and about the poor, and there are people who only care about selling cars. We personally do not feel that all opinions should be accorded equal value.

And now to have a little fun with what they said...

According to the World Bank: Cars pollute. Cars main and kill. Let’s treat cars as the kings of the road!

According to the World Bank: There is not enough road space in Dhaka, so let’s prioritize the most inefficient users, the car, while making life difficult for the more efficient users, including pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws.

According to the World Bank: People in cars are making trips. People on foot are creating obstacles.

According to the World Bank: Enforcement of road rules in Dhaka is poor. It is obviously impossible to improve enforcement, so let’s just reward those causing the problem and punish the victims. (More simply put: Drivers behave badly, so let’s punish pedestrians.)

According to the World Bank: We must listen to different sides and then ensure that those being hurt are kept safe. Let’s say we had a problem with sexual harassment (eve teasing) on the streets. We will invite men and women to discuss the problem, in order to involve different stakeholders. The women complain that they can’t move about the city without being subjected to rude remarks. The men say that they are just being men. Hmm...it is difficult to make men behave and respect women. Hmm...ah, I know! Let’s ban women from moving about the city!!

According to the World Bank: Simple logic works. For example: cars pollute; pedestrians slow cars; pedestrians pollute. This is akin to saying that tobacco creates jobs; we need jobs; so let’s promote tobacco use. Just because a few statements seem to lead to a logical conclusion does not mean that those statements are in fact logical!

According to the World Bank: It is difficult to create universally accessible design in Dhaka so let’s start by adding more infrastructure that is obviously not accessible!

According to the World Bank: The long term is far away so let’s forget about it and focus on the short term.

According to the World Bank logic: If the thief is breaking your windows, hand him a key to the door.

According to the World Bank: Cars do not stop at intersections. Cars do not have to stop to allow other cars to go. Too many cars in limited road space does not create congestion. The main obstacle to the smooth movement of cars is pedestrians.

According to the World Bank: If you’re only traveling a short distance and doing it without the use of fuel, you may as well just stay home and make space for all those important people moving about while using fuel, e.g. creating pollution, congestion, and danger for everyone else.

According to the World Bank: Pedestrians should not be on any road that is arbitrarily labelled a highway, but it is OK for cars to enter the narrow lanes of Dhaka even if that causes a long line of rickshaws to become stuck in traffic.

According to the World Bank logic: If people surrendered their wallets to thieves, then thieves wouldn’t need to carry a gun. So victims of crime make thieves dangerous. (While this is possibly true, it is obviously utterly irrelevant!)

According to the World Bank logic: If small kids can’t play on the playground because a big bully keeps beating them up, and if you’ve repeatedly asked the bully to stop but he has ignored you, then you should tell the children to stop playing there...and declare the problem solved.

And a final suggestion: If the real objective of your project is to promote the smooth movement of cars in Dhaka, then change the name of the project to “Promotion of Cars for a Polluted, Congested, & Unsafe Dhaka (PCPCUD).” After all, if you accept, or worse, promote the idea that facilitating the movement of cars is good for safety and the environment, you are damaging not only the situation in the present, but for many years to come. This may be news for you, but whether on foot, bicycle, rickshaw, or by motorized means, a trip is a trip. The main difference is that some non-motorized modes do not pollute, do not hurt or kill others, are good for the environment, and require little road space, in direct contrast to motorized transport and especially to the car. Treating the car as the king of the road will simply encourage more people to drive and thus make all the problems caused by the car worse, not better.

#Footover_Bridges, #World_bank

Footover Bridges   
World Bank

No footover bridges in the name of clean air!!

No footover bridges in the name of clean air!!

The World Bank, under its Clean Air Project, is building many footover (pedestrian) bridges in Dhaka. This is wrong on at least two counts. The point of footover bridges is to facilitate the movement of cars, which pollute. Meanwhile, they hinder the movement of pedestrians, who do not. Efforts to improve air quality should focus on improving the situation of non-motorized transport, including walking. It does not make sense to penalize pedestrians in the name of clean air. In fact, street-level crossings (zebra crossings or crosswalks) would help to smooth ear traffic; as it is, cars rush to the next stoplight, only to sit and wait. Most cities around the world have stopped building footover bridges and torn down existing ones, as they are extremely unpopular with pedestrians, do not reduce accidents, and do nothing to smooth traffic flow.

Second, it is the World Bank's policy that all new transport projects must incorporate Universally Accessible Design. There is no way that a person in a wheelchair, or most people with a disability, or even someone with a fairly minor problem walking, can use a footover bridge. A bridge equipped with an escalator is still unusable by a person in a wheelchair. It is obviously completely impractical to create bridges with lifts (elevators) throughout the city. Nor is there any reason to do something so wasteful and likely to land up broken and thus useless within a short period. Zebra crossings make street crossings easier for all users, and thus contribute to independent movement by all, as well as contributing to clean air.

This catastrophe is unprecedented in the Sundarbans and we don't know how to tackle this..........................

Breaking records: Dhaka rickshaws make the Guinness Book of World Records

Breaking records: Dhaka rickshaws make the Guinness Book of World Records

For years, city officials have complained that “no other city has as many rickshaws as Dhaka,” somehow equating rickshaws with poverty and backwardness. Now, with Guinness recognizing Dhaka as an exceptional city for its many lakh non-polluting, truly green rickshaws, we can proudly say that “no other city has as many rickshaws as Dhaka!”

The city streets of Dhaka are choked with cars, despite only 5% of trips being made by car. Imagine if that figure doubled to 10%? Traffic would come to a complete standstill, or we would have to bulldoze more and more buildings in order to build ever wider roads, thus making destinations ever farther apart and generating even more traffic. Rickshaws, meanwhile, fit easily down all but the narrowest lanes. They move about as quickly as the average car in crowded streets. They require no fuel to operate and spew out no poisonous fumes. They provide much-needed employment to countless people, and offer the comfort and convenience of door-to-door transport to city dwellers.

European transport officials talk proudly of the high percentage of trips that are made by bicycle in their cities. Bicycles represent green transport, requiring no fuel to operate and very few resources for their construction or disposal. The “cleanest” car is still dirty when we consider the source of its fuel (electricity often comes from coal, which is even worse than petrol) and all the resources needed to build and dispose of it. And what is a rickshaw but a three-wheeled bicycle?

The fact that we can still breathe the air in Dhaka, and that it is still possible to move about the city (albeit slowly and with difficulty) is in large part thanks to the presence of the rickshaws. Even if we get a great system of public transit, people will still need “last mile connectivity”: a way to get to and from the public transit stops. Rickshaws will be essential for that service. They are also essential for short trips, especially given how miserable and dangerous the conditions currently are for walking and cycling. Rickshaws offer a relatively independent mode of travel for people with disabilities. And all without generating pollution.

The eyes of the world are now turning to Dhaka. For many years, the rickshaw has been a symbol of pride, an example of local art cum transport. It is exhibited in the Dhaka airport, at various hotels, and at local and international events. Yet there are those who have been keen to see it banned or restricted on city streets, despite the mounting evidence that reducing the rickshaw has absolutely no beneficial effect whatsoever on the flow of traffic, and that rickshaw bans likely contribute to ever-increasing air pollution. With this welcome recognition from Guinness, it is time to match our actions to our gestures. The rickshaw should indeed be a source of national pride, and it should be welcomed and encouraged on our city streets. We all need to recognize that the rickshaw is a solution, not a problem, in terms of traffic congestion, pollution, affordable transport, and employment. 

We all can

join in 

celebrating 

Dhaka as the City 

of the Rickshaw.

http://youtu.be/oaN9fTpYxzY