RICKSHAW

Showing posts with label transport planing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label transport planing. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

world carfree day dhaka 2009












জ্বালানী সমস্যা থেকে উত্তরণের জন্য সর্বপ্রথম ১৯৭০ সালে কারমুক্ত দিবস পালিত হয়। দিবসটি পালনের মূল উদ্দেশ্য প্রাইভেট কার নিয়ন্ত্রণে সচেতনতা বৃদ্ধি করা। পরিবহণ ব্যবস্থায় প্রাইভেট কার বৃদ্ধির মাধ্যমে যানজট, রাস্তাঘাটের নির্মাণ ব্যয়, দূষণ, জ্বালানীর ব্যবহার ও দূর্ঘটনা বৃদ্ধি পায়। এছাড়া বিনোদনের জন্য উন্মূক্ত স্থান ও শিশুদের খেলাধূলার জায়গা কমে আসে। দীর্ঘস্থায়ী নগর পরিবহণ ব্যবস্থা গড়ে তুলতে পথচারী, সাইকেল, রিকশা ও উপযোগী পাবলিক পরিবহণের সমন্বয় করা প্রয়োজন। পাশাপাশি প্রাইভেট কার নিয়ন্ত্রণ করা জরুরী। এ লক্ষ্যে ইউরোপিয়ান বিভিন্ন শহরে ১৯৯০ সালে কারমুক্ত দিবস পালন করা হয়। এরপর ১৯৯৯ সালে ইউরোপিয়ান ইউনিয়ন প্রথম বিশ্ব কারমুক্ত দিবস পালন করলেও ২০০০ সাল থেকে বিশ্বের অন্যান্য অনেক দেশে দিবসটি পালিত হতে থাকে। এখন বিশ্বের অনেক শহরেই প্রাইভেট কার নিয়ন্ত্রণে নেয়া হচ্ছে জোর পদপে।


অল্প জায়গায় বেশি যাত্রী পরিবহণ করা যায় সেই ধরনের বাহনকে প্রাধান্য দিয়ে পরিকল্পনা গ্রহণের উপর জোর দেন। সেক্ষেত্রে বাসের সুবিধা বাড়ানো প্রয়োজন। ঢাকায় বর্তমানে প্রাইভেট কারের ব্যবহার অত্যধিক হারে বেড়ে যাচ্ছে। প্রাইভেট কারে চলাচল নিরুৎসাহিত করতে পাবলিক বাস, হেঁটে ও সাইকেলে চলাচলের সুবিধা থাকা প্রয়োজন। এ সকল সুবিধা না থাকায় ঢাকায় অনেকেই বাধ্য হয়েই প্রাইভেট কার ব্যবহার করছেন। উন্নত বাস সার্ভিস চালুর মাধ্যমে প্রাইভেট কারের উপর নির্ভরশীলতা কমিয়ে আনা সম্ভব। সেক্ষেত্রে যানজট নিয়ন্ত্রণ করা অনেক সহজ হয়ে যাবে। এর জন্য নগর পরিবহণ ব্যবস্থায় পরিবর্তন আনা সম্ভব।একটি বাসের সমান যাত্রী পরিবহণ করতে প্রায় ত্রিশটি প্রাইভেট কার প্রয়োজন পড়ছে। এছাড়া প্রাইভেট কার বৃদ্ধির সাথে সাথে বৈদেশিক মূদ্রার অপচয়, দূষণ, জ্বালানী ব্যয়, দূর্ঘটনা, পরিবহণ খরচ এবং সর্বোপরি যানজট বৃদ্ধি পায়। তাই প্রাইভেট কারের পরিবর্তে মানুষকে বাসে চড়তে উৎসাহী করতে হলে বাস সার্ভিসের উন্নয়ন ও স¤প্রসারণ করা প্রয়োজন। অন্যন্য পরিবহণের সঙ্গে সমন্বয় করে ঢাকার সর্বত্র বাসে চলাচলের ব্যবস্থা করা প্রয়োজন। সেক্ষেত্রে হাঁটা, সাইকেল ও রিকশায় চলাচলের সুষ্ঠূ ব্যবস্থাপনা গড়ে তোলা প্রয়োজন।

পাশাপাশি প্রাইভেট কার নিয়ন্ত্রণে কার্যকর পদপে গ্রহণ জরুরী।পর্যাপ্ত বাস, যাত্রী ছাউনী, বাসের জন্য পৃথক লেন এর ব্যবস্থা করা; নগরভিত্তিক বাস আমদানীতে কর কমানো ও প্রয়োজনে ভর্তূকি দেওয়া; প্রাইভেট কারের আমদানী কর বৃদ্ধি করা; একদিন বেজোড় সংখ্যা এবং অন্যদিন জোড় সংখ্যার লাইসেন্স অনুযায়ী প্রাইভেট গাড়ি চলাচলের ব্যবস্থা করা; নগরের ব্যস্ততম এলাকায় প্রাইভেট গাড়ি চলাচলের ক্ষেত্রে কনজেশন চার্জ গ্রহণ করা; সকল স্থানে পার্কিংয়ের জন্য জায়গা ও সময়ের মূল্যানুসারে পার্কিং ফি গ্রহণ করা; প্রাইভেট কারের লাইসেন্স বরাদ্দ সীমিত করা; শিক্ষা প্রতিষ্ঠান এবং অফিস আদালতে প্রাইভেট গাড়ির পরিবর্তে পাবলিক পরিবহণের ব্যবস্থা করা; প্রাইভেট কার এর পার্কিং হতে প্রাপ্ত অর্থ পাবলিক পরিবহণের মানোন্নয়নে ব্যয় করা প্রয়োজন।




যানজট হ্রাসের অতিসত্ত্বর প্রাইভেট কার ব্যবহারে নিরুৎসাহী করতে বাসের যাত্রীসেবার মান বৃদ্ধিতে পদপে গ্রহণ জরুরী। গত ২৬ সেপ্টেম্বর জাতীয় যাদুঘরের সামনে পরিবেশ বাঁচাও আন্দোলন, নিরাপদ ডেভেলপমেন্ট ফাউন্ডেশন, সিটিজেন রাইটস মুভমেন্টসসহ বেশ কিছু পরিবেশবাদী সংগঠনের সম্মিলিত উদ্যোগে বিশ্ব কারমুক্ত দিবস ২০০৯ পালিত হয়।




Sunday, September 27, 2009

Call for restriction on growth of private cars

Call for restriction on growth of private cars


Green activists held a sit-in at Shahbagh in Dhaka on Monday, demanding restriction on the growth of private cars to end nagging traffic congestion in the capital.
The government must check the growth of private cars and encourage launch of more buses on the roads to ease city’s traffic congestion, they said addressing the sit-in organised by Save Environment Movement.

The government has banned operation of a number of unfit and old buses in the last few days, which has only worsened the plight of the passengers, the green activists said.

Cashing in on the ban, the buses in operation on the roads have started charging extra fair, causing immense sufferings to the city people, they noted.
The government is virtually encouraging use of private cars by restricting operation of old buses although cars are mainly responsible for the traffic jam, they said.

Traffic congestion in the capital city will never come to an end until the government checks the unbridled growth of private cars, the speakers observed.
Stressing the need for launching more buses, the speakers mentioned that a private carries only 3 or 4 people while a bus can transport 30-40 passengers.
Cars often remain parked at roadsides causing severe traffic snarl in different areas of the city, they said adding that the Operation Clean Street has failed to stop traffic congestion in the city.

Tushar Rahman of Citizen Rights Movement, Mahbubul Alam, program manager of WBB Trust and Abu Naser Khan, chairman of the Save Environment Movement, among others, spoke at the programme.


http://www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
http://www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan http://www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
Save the Environment Movement

Friday, September 18, 2009

Saving the planet one step at a time

Saving the planet one step at a time

Have you heard of climate change?
Temperatures are getting higher. Storms are getting worse. Ice is melting and sea levels are rising. Portions of the coast of Bangladesh are likely to go underwater, lost forever. Millions will become homeless. The ability of the earth to sustain people is threatened.


Why is climate change happening?
Because people are burning up fossil fuels (diesel, petrol, natural gas, coal) at such rapid rates that future generations are now threatened.

Is it possible to slow climate change?

Yes, but we cannot continue to waste time. Carbon dioxide levels are rising rapidly. That is where the number
350 comes in. If we can limit CO2 in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million then we can avoid the worst of the harm to come.

Is there anything we can do?
No one person cam stop climate change but everyone contributes something significant. We can slow out own use of fossil fuels by walking and cycling and taking cycle rickshaws rather than using motorized transport. We can reduce our use of electricity. We can avoid, as a nation, burning coal (pure carbon) or selling it to others to burn. We can encourage the government to act to encourage reductions in fuel use and to encourage walking, cycling, and rickshaws.

This will mean making some changes. Fortunately most of those changes are likely to
increase rather than reduce our quality of life. Imagine being able to cycle safely in
Dhaka. Imagine the air being fresh and clean. Imagine children and youth being able to play in side streets. If we move our focus from cars to people, from traveling long
distances to accessing basic needs close to home, we can reduce congestion and all the misery it causes, We can have more time with family and for the other important parts of life.

Remember
350 is not just a number. It is not just an ideal. It is something we can all work to make a reality.







আপনি কী জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের বিষয়ে শুনেছে?
বায়ুমন্ডলে ক্রমাগত তাপমাত্রা বৃদ্ধি পাচ্ছে, বাড়ছে প্রাকৃতিক র্দূযোগ। তাপমাত্রা বৃদ্ধির প্রভাবে ঝড়,জলোচ্ছাসসহ মেরু অঞ্চলের বরফ গলে যাচ্ছে। বৃদ্ধি পাচ্ছে সমুদ্র পৃষ্ঠের উচ্চতা। সমুদ্র পৃষ্ঠের উচ্চতা বৃদ্ধির ফলে উপকূলীয় অঞ্চলের ল ল মানুষ গৃহহীন হবে। ইতিমধ্যেই উপক’লীয় কৃষি,পরিবেশ, শিক্ষা, যোগাযোগ, স্বাস্থ্যসহ বিভিন্ন ক্ষেত্রে এর প্রভাব পড়ছে উপকূলীয় জীবনযাত্রায়। আর অদূর ভবিষ্যতে জলবায়ুর এই পরিবর্তনে দেশে প্রায় ৪কোটি উপকূলীয় মানুষ সরাসরি ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত হবে।

কেন জলবায়ু পরিবর্তন ঘটছে
উন্নয়নের নামে প্রকৃতির উপর নিবিচার হস্তপে, মাত্ররিক্ত জ্বালানী ব্যবহারের ফলে বায়ুমন্ডলে কার্বণ ডাই অক্সাইডের বৃদ্ধিই জলবায়ুর পরিবর্তনের অন্যতম কারণ।

যেভাবে জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের এই ধারাকে মন্থর করা যায়
যদি বায়ুমন্ডলে কার্বনের মাত্রা ৩৫০পিপিএম মধ্যে রাখতে পারি, তাহলে আসন্ন বিপর্যয় থেকে রক্ষা পেতে পারি। এই বিষয়টিকে তুলে ধরার জন্যই ৩৫০ পিপিএম আজ একটি আন্দোলনে রূপ নিচ্ছে।

আমরা যা করতে পারি
একজন মানুষের একার পে এই জলবায়ুর পরিবর্তন ঠেকানো সম্ভব নয়। কিন্তু সকলের সম্মিলিত প্রচেষ্টায় এই ভয়াবহতাকে ঠেকানো সম্ভব। আমার আমাদের জীবন যাত্রার কিছুটা পরিবর্তনের মাধ্যমে জীবাশ্ম জ্বালানীর ব্যবহার কমিয়ে আনতে পারি। যেমন যাতায়াতের ক্ষেত্রে প্রাইভেট কার কমিয়ে হাঁটা, সাইকেল, রিকশাসহ অযান্ত্রিকযান ব্যবহারে নির্ভরতা বাড়ানো দরকার। মাত্রাতিরিক্ত বিলাসী জীবন পরিহারে করে জীবনযাত্রায় বিদ্যুতের ব্যবহার কমিয়ে আনতে পারি।
পরিকল্পনায় কিছু ইতিবাচক পরিবর্তনের মাধ্যমেই জ্বালানীর ব্যবহার হ্রাসের মাধ্যমে জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের ধারাকে মন্থর করতে পারি। যেমন নগর ব্যবস্থাপনায় মিশ্র এলাকা গড়ে তোলা। মানুষের যাতায়াত ব্যবস্থায় অমূলক পরিবর্তন আনা সম্ভব। মিশ্র এলাকার ফলে কাছাকাছি দূরূত্বে মানুষের প্রয়োজনীয় সুবিধাসমূহ থাকলে মানুষের যাতায়াতের চাহিদা অনেকাংশেই কমে যায়। এ সকল ইতিবাচক পরিবর্তনের ফলে মানুষের জীবন যাত্রার মান অনেকাংশে বৃদ্ধি পাবে। শহর হবে বায়ু দূষণমুক্ত, প্রানবন্ত এবং শিশুবান্ধব।

তাই আজ পৃথিবী ব্যাপী ৩৫০পিপিএম শুধু একটি শ্লোগান কিংবা সূচকই নয়। এটি আমাদের জীবন এবং ভবিষ্যতের প্রশ্ন। আসুন আমাদের কর্মের দ্বারা সৃষ্ট সমস্যাকে কর্ম দিয়ে সমাধান করি।


www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

Sunday, May 31, 2009


Restriction on rickshaw movement fails to stop traffic jam in city
Mahbubur Rahman Khan


Imposing ban on rickshaw movement on different roads of the capital could not stop traffic jam rather it accentuated the economic woes of people, pushed more rickshaw pullers into poverty trap and created transport problem for a large number of commuters.


Hundreds of poor people in the capital mange their bare necessities of life by pulling rickshaw. The earnings of the rickshaw pullers, however meager, could make dent on poverty and alleviate sufferings of their family members in the countryside at least to some extent. Rickshaw pullers of the Dhaka city remit about tk 2 crore to their village homes each month. But imposition of ban on rickshaw movement on certain roads in the capital has robbed a good number of rickshaw pullers of their means of livelihood, according to Human Resource Centre (HRC).


The revenue earnings of the government from the rickshaw related industry and trade are much higher than those of the small automobiles. The government earned Tk 1,980 crore in revenue from rickshaw sector compared to Tk 64 crore from small automobiles in 2004-05 fiscal, said a report of the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics.


Rickshaws in Dhaka city alone save fuel worth Tk 5,000 core every year and the yearly savings from the point of environment stand at Tk 10,000 crore, said a survey report of Paribash Bachao Andolon (PABA),an NGO.
There is no updated statistics on the actual number of rickshaws plying on different roads in the capital. Its number varies from two lakh to five lakh.
Imposition of ban on non-automobile transports on particular roads could not stop traffic congestion. A survey conducted by Human Development Resource Centre (HDRC) in 2004 found that the expenditure of rickshaw users has increased after the ban on rickshaws. Ban on the movement of rickshaws on certain roads in Mirpur area in the capital on the plea of reducing traffic jam has not produced the desired result. Rather the step increased traffic congestion on the roads which were made off-limit to rickshaws.
Citing example, the survey report said that following the imposition of ban on the movement of rickshaws on those roads, 25 percent of the commuters were compelled to walk through the roads in the absence of footpath. 42 percent of the people, who used to travel by rickshaws before the imposition of ban, are now hiring different modes of automobiles to go to different destinations. Extra pressure of mechanised transports on these roads made off-limit to rickshaws has simply choked them creating much discomfort for the commuters, the survey report added.


The imposition of ban on the movement of rickshaws has also reduced the income of rickshaw pullers by 32 percent, it claimed.


A survey report of Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP) said rickshaws in no way create obstacle in the movement of mechanized transports. After making some roads in Mirpur off limit to rickshaws the average speed of buses plying in the area rather dropped by 3.8 kilometer, it mentioned.
Shakil Bin Kashem, Professor, Department of Urban and Regional Planning of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), told The New Nation that the traffic system has deteriorated after imposition of ban on rickshaw on some roads in the capital.

Syed Saiful Alam
Save The Environment Movement
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

কতটা গতির দরকার? কতটা গতিতে চললে রিকশা ঢাকায় চলতে পারবে?



লেখাটি  somewhereinblog প্রকাশিত 

যানজট একটি আমাদের সবার জন্য সমস্যা আর এই সমস্যাকে পুজিঁ করে দেশি বিদেশি ব্যবসায়ীক শ্রেনী নেমে পড়েছে ব্যবসায়। জনগণকে জিম্মি করে তারা বছরের পর বছর ঢাকায় জনগণের টাকায় কিংবা ঋণের টাকায় বিভিন্ন প্রকল্প বাস্তবায়ন করেছে। কিন্তু যানজট কমেনি। শুধু প্রকল্পের বৃদ্ধিই ঘটছে ধারাবাহিক ভাবে। এই রকম অনেক প্রকল্প নিয়েই সুনিদিষ্ট তথ্যসহ তাদের ব্যবসার কথা জনগন ইতিমধ্যে জেনেছে। গতকাল ঢাকার যাতায়াত ব্যবস্থার সাথে জড়িত একটি বিভাগের উর্ধতন কর্মকর্তার কথা আজ বিভিন্ন পত্রিকায় প্রকাশ পেয়েছে। তিনি রিকশা নিয়ে কথা বলছেন রিকশা ধীর গতি সম্পন্ন যান। আর তাই মহাসড়কে রিকশা উচ্ছেদ করতে হবে। কিন্তু অতীতেও বিভিন্ন রাস্তা থেকে রিকশা উচ্ছেদ করা হয়েছে ফলাফল শুভ হয়নি।

যাত্রীদের যাতায়াত সময়-ব্যয় বৃদ্ধি, পরিবেশ দূষণ, যানজট বৃদ্ধি, পরিবহণ কোম্পানীগুলোর পরিবহণ পরিচালনার ব্যয় বেড়েছে। এই বিষয়টি নিয়ে বিস্তারিত একটি পোস্ট দেওয়ার কথা ভেবেছিলাম কিন্তু পোস্টটি বড় হয়ে যাবে ভেবে কয়েকটি পোস্ট দিব ঠিক করলাম। তারই ধারাবাহিকতায় আজকের পোস্ট " রিকসা কি আসলেই ধীর গতি সম্পন্ন যান‍"আজ এই ফোরামে এই বিষয়টি নিয়ে লিখছি আমাদের সবার যাতে রিকসা ধীর গতি সম্পন্ন যান এই সম্পর্কে ভ্রান্ত ধারণা পরিবর্তন ঘটে। রিকশা উচ্ছেদের অন্য কোন কারণ থাকতে পারে কিন্তু ধীর গতি সম্পন্ন যান তা উচ্ছেদের যুক্তি সই কারণ নয়। রিকসা কি আসলেই ধীর গতি সম্পন্ন যান? যখন অধিকাংশ যান্ত্রিক যানবাহন অযান্ত্রিক যানবাহন অপেক্ষা গতিশীল, তখন গতি আসলেই বিবেচ্য একটি বিষয়। কিন্তু জনবহুল শহরের প্রেক্ষিতে গতির বিষয়টি একটু ব্যতিক্রম।


ঢাকা শহরের বৈশিষ্ট হচ্ছে এখানে স্বল্প পরিমান জায়গায় অনেক লোক চলাচল করে থাকে, ফলে স্বাভাবিক ভাবেই সৃষ্টি হয় যানজটের। ঢাকার মতো বিশ্বের অন্য শহরগুলোতেও এই সমস্যা বিরাজমান। অযান্ত্রিক যান না থাকা এবং ব্যয়বহুল রাস্তা নির্মাণের পরও বিশ্বের অধিকাংশ শহর থেকে এ সমস্যার সমাধান করা যাচ্ছে না। মধ্য লন্ডনে গাড়ির গতিবেগ ঘন্টায় ৮ কিঃ মিঃ যা ১৮৮০ সালে ঘোড়ার গাড়ির সমপরিমান। কখনো কখনো এ গতি সাইকেল থেকেও ধীর এবং কখনো কখনো পায়ে হেটে চলাচলের সমপরিমান হয়। বাইসাইকেলে ঘন্টায় ১০-১৫ কিঃমিঃ বা তার চেয়েও বেশি যাওয়া যায়। ঢাকা যে সকল রাস্তায় অনেক আগেই অযান্ত্রিক যান নিষিদ্ধ করা হয়েছে, সেখানে এখন অসহনীয় যানজট বিরাজ করছে এবং সার্বিক যাতায়াতের সময়সীমাও বেড়ে গেছে। এ অবস্থায় যান্ত্রিক যানবাহনে শহরের দূরবর্তী এলাকায় যেতে রিকসা/বাইসাইকেলের প্রায় সমান সময় প্রয়োজন হয়। সেখানে রাস্তায় যেহেতু কোন অযান্ত্রিক যানবাহন নেই সেহেতু সেখানকার রাস্তার গতিহীনতার জন্য অযান্ত্রিক যানবাহনকে দায়ী করা যাবে না।


অর্থাৎ যান্তিক যান নিষিদ্ধ করেও ভাল কোন সুফল পাওয়া যাবে না। বরং অধিক যান্ত্রিক যানের কারণে এই রাস্তাগুলোতে অত্যাধিক হারে বায়ুদূষণ ঘটছে এবং যাতায়াতের অনুপোযোগি হয়ে পড়ছে। মিরপুর রোড, ভিআইপি রোড থেকে রিকশা উচ্ছেদ করা হয়েছে কিন্তু যানজট আগের চেয়ে বেড়েছে। তাহলে রিকশার সাথে যানজটের বিষয়টি আমাদের কাছে ভুল ভাবে উপস্থাপন করা হচ্ছে? সমস্যা অন্য জায়গায় একটু লক্ষ্য করুন থাইল্যান্ডের ব্যাংকক, ফিলিপাই, ইন্দোনেশিয়া যানজটপূর্ণ শহরগুলোর কথা।

তাদেরই বিভিন্ন পরামর্শ এবং প্রকল্প বাস্তবায়নের ফলে শহরগুলো যানজটের শীর্ষস্থান অধিকারী শহর হিসেবে নাম লিখাতে পেরেছে। তারা সেখানেও একই ভাবে রিকশা উচ্ছেদ করেছে। ওখানে ব্যর্থ যানজট সমাধানে কাল্পনিক চেষ্টায় এখন যানজট আরো বৃদ্ধি পেয়েছে। কিন্তু  যানজটকে পুঁজি করে নাগরিকদের জিম্মি করা ব্যবসায়ীদের ব্যবসা বেড়েছে তাদে কয়েক গুণ।

আমাদের দেশেও একই র্ফমুলা প্রয়োগ করা হচ্ছে। আমাদের এখনই সোচ্চার হতে হবে নয়তো আমাদের প্রিয় ঢাকা ব্যাংককের মত যানজটপূর্ণ শহর হবে। ব্যাংককে মোট্রে রেল, স্কাইরেল, ফ্লাইওভার, নৌপথ সবই আছে। সাথে আছে প্রচন্ড যানজট। পাশপাশি ওদের ব্যবসা কিন্ত প্রতিবছরই বাড়ছে। আসুন চিনে নেই তাদের নয়তো আমাদেরও যানজট আর যানজট শব্দের ফাঁদে ফেলবে কোটি কোটি টাকার ব্যবসা করবে। কিন্তু যানজট থেকে মুক্তির স্বপ্ন আমাদের স্বপ্নই থাকবে।

লেখাটি  somewhereinblog প্রকাশিত


Syed Saiful Alam
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

বাংলাদেশ রেলওয়ের উন্নয়নে অদুরদর্শী পরিকল্পনা অন্তরায়

দীর্ঘদিন পর কিছু ঋণ প্রদানকারী সংস্থা রেলের উন্নয়নে ঋণ প্রদান করে। কিন্তু এ সকল ঋণ সহায়তায় রেল উন্নয়নে স্টেশন রি মডেলিংয়ের নামে শত শত কোটি টাকা কিভাবে অনুৎপাদনশীল খাতে ব্যয় করা হচ্ছে তা একটি স্টেশনের উদাহরণ থেকেই অনুমান করা যথেষ্ট। রি মডেলিং প্রকল্পের একটি স্টেশন আখাউড়া রেলওয়ে জংশন। এই জংশন স্টেশনের রি মডেলিং বাবদ বরাদ্দ দেয়া হয়, ৯ কোটি ৫৩ লাখ টাকা। একই সঙ্গে ওই স্টেশনের ইন্টার লকিং সিগন্যালিং ব্যবস্থা প্রবর্তন বাবদ আরও ২০ কোটি টাকা বরাদ্দ দেয়া হয়। অর্থাৎ সর্ব সাকুল্যে ২৯ কোটি ৫৩ লাখ টাকা স্টেশন রি মডেলিং বরাদ্দ দেয়া হয়। এই রি-মডেলিংয়ের টাকা থেকে অনধিক ২৫ কোটি টাকায় একটি অত্যাধুনিক রেল ইঞ্জিন ক্রয় বা সংগ্রহ করেও অবশিষ্ট টাকা দিয়ে কাঁচামালের যোগান দেয়াসহ রেলওয়ে কারখানায় ওভার টাইম চালু করে কমপক্ষে ২০টি ইন্টারসিটি ট্রেনের অকেজো শোভন চেয়ার কোচ মেরামত করা যেত। ওই মেরামতকৃত কোচ ও সংগ্রহকৃত ইঞ্জিনের সমন্বয়ে গঠিত আন্তনগর ট্রেনটি ঢাকা চট্টগ্রাম লাইনে চলাচলের ফলে রেলের বার্ষিক আয় বৃদ্ধি পেতো প্রায় ১৪ কোটি ২৫ লাখ ৬০ হাজার টাকার উর্ধে। অথচ দেড়শ কোটি টাকার অধিক ভর্তূকি প্রতিষ্ঠানে এহেন রি-মডেলিং মানে রেলওয়েকে বাকীর খাতায় শূন্যই গুনতে হচ্ছে।




www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click


Syed Saiful Alam
Save The Environment Movement
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

বর্তমান সময়কালে অন্য যেসব স্টেশন রি-মডেলিংয়ের কাজ হয়েছে বা হচ্ছে তন্মধ্যে নরসিংদী, ভৈরব, কিশোরগঞ্জ, বি-বাড়িয়া,শায়েসত্মাগঞ্জ, শ্রীমঙ্গল, কুলাউড়া, কুমিল্লা, লাকসাম ও ফেনী স্টেশন উল্লেখযোগ্য। তাছাড়া পশ্চিমাঞ্চলেও এরকম বহু স্টেশন টেকসই কাজের পরিবর্তে নিম্নমানের কাজ করিয়ে অধিক অর্থ অপচয়েরও অভিযোগ পাওয়া গেছে। ঋণের টাকা যখন সিলেটের শায়েস্তাগঞ্জ স্টেশন রি-মডেলিং করা হচ্ছে, ঠিক সমসাময়িক ঘটনা হচ্ছে অর্থের অভাবে সিলেট-খাজাঞ্চি-ছাতক রেলপথ সংস্কার করা যাচ্ছে না, ফলে তা ঝুঁকিপূর্ণ হয়ে উঠেছে। বিগত কয়েক মাসে রেল লাইন সংস্কারের অভাবে অনেক দূর্ঘটনা হয়েছে এবং অনেক মানুষ আহত হয়েছে। ঝুঁকি নিয়ে মানুষ চলাচল করছে। অথচ টাকা নেয়া হচ্ছে স্টেশন আধুনিক করা জন্য। মানুষ যদি নির্দিষ্ট সময়ে নির্দিষ্ট গনত্মব্যে পৌছতে পারে তবে স্টেশনে বসে থাকবে কেন? স্টেশন আধুনিক করা অপেক্ষা রেল লাইন উন্নয়ন করা জরুরি, জরুরি রেলের বগি ও ইঞ্জিন বাড়ানো।

একদিকে বলা হচ্ছে ঋণ ছাড়া চলা সম্ভব নয়, অপর দিকে এমন খাতে ঋণ দেওয়া বা নেওয়া হচ্ছে যা অপ্রয়োজনীয়। যেসব স্টেশন রি-মডেলিং করা হয়েছে সেসব স্টেশনের আয় বৃদ্ধি হয়েছে কিনা তা পরীক্ষা নিরীক্ষা, মূল্যায়ণ করে জনসম্মুখে তুলে ধরা প্রয়োজন। কারণ রাষ্ট্রীয় প্রতিষ্ঠানের মালিক জনগণ। রেলওয়ে জাতীয় সম্পদ বিধায় রেলের মালিকও আপামর জনগণ এবং তাদের এ তথ্য জানার অধিকার রয়েছে। আন্তজার্তিক অর্থলগ্নিকারী (ঋণ বাণিজ্যিক) প্রতিষ্ঠানগুলো রেলওয়ের চেয়ে সড়ক পথের উন্নয়নে বেশী আগ্রহী। দ্বিতীয়ত ঋণ প্রদানকারী সংস্থাগুলো শর্তসাপেক্ষে রেলওয়ের উন্নয়নখাতে সরকারকে ঋন দিয়ে থাকে যা স্টেশন রি মডেলিংয়ের মত অনুৎপাদনশীল খাতে ব্যয় করা হচ্ছে। তৃতীয়ত তথাকথিত ঋণ সংস্থার পরামর্শ ও দিক নির্দেশায় অনেক উন্নয়ন গৃহীত হচ্ছে। ফলে দেশীয় অনেক প্রেক্ষাপটের বিষয়ে তাদের অভিজ্ঞতা না থাকায়, আশানুরূপ উন্নয়ন হচ্ছে না। এক্ষেত্রে দেশীয় বিশেষজ্ঞ এবং অন্যান্য সংশ্লিষ্টদের সম্পৃক্ততা জরুরি। আন্তজাতিক অর্থলগ্নিকারী প্রতিষ্ঠানগুলোর পরামর্শে বিভিন্ন উন্নয়ন নীতিমালা প্রণীত হয়। অভিযোগ রয়েছে এ সকল পরামর্শ যা দেশের শিল্প কারখানা ও সেবা খাতগুলোর উন্নয়নে সরকারকে উদ্যোগী হতে নিরুৎসাহিত করে। মুক্ত বাজার অর্থনীতির সুবাদে এ দেশকে বিদেশী পণ্যের বাজারে পরিণত করতে দেশের শিল্প কারখানা ও সেবা খাতগুলোকে ধ্বংসের দিকে ঠেলে দিয়ে পরিশেষে সবকিছু ব্যক্তি মালিকানায় ছেড়ে দেয়ার পরামর্শ প্রদানই এসব সহযোগীদের মুখ্য উদ্দেশ্য বলে অনেকেই উৎকণ্ঠা প্রকাশ করেছে।

বিগত দিনে উন্নয়নের নামে এই এডিবি ও বিশ্বব্যাংকের পরামর্শেই খুলনা বাগেরহাট, মোগল হাট লালমনির হাট, ভেড়ামারা-রায়টা, নরসিংদী-মদনগঞ্জসহ বিভিন্ন রেলপথ বন্ধের মাধ্যমে সংকোচন করা হয়েছে। রেলওয়েতে দীর্ঘদিন ধরে স্টেশন রিমডেলিং এর মতো বিদেশী ঋণপ্রদানকারী সংস্থার ঋণের অর্থ প্রকৃতপক্ষে অনুৎপাদনশীল খাতে ব্যয় করা হচ্ছে যা আদৌ এ মুহূর্তে জরুরী প্রয়োজন ছিলনা বলে ওয়াকিবহাল মহল মনে করে। দুঃখজনক হলেও সত্য যেসব খাতে বিনিয়োগ করলে রেলওয়ে সেবাকে জনগণের কাছে সহজলভ্য ও রেলের রাজস্ব বৃদ্ধিতে সরাসরি সহায়ক হতো সেসব খাতে যথেষ্ট বরাদ্ধ নেই। ফলে রেলের অনুৎপাদনশীল খাতে ব্যয়িত ঋণের টাকা সুদে আসলে পরিশোধ করতে বছরের পর বছর চলে যাবে।


বস্তুতপক্ষে ঋণপ্রদানকারী সংস্থার কারণে রেলের সত্যিকার উন্নয়ন হয়ে উঠেছে বাধাগ্রসত্ম, যা কারো কাম্য নয়। রেল লাইনের সংস্কার নেই, বগি নেই, ইঞ্জিন নেই ইত্যাদি সমস্যা জর্জরিত রেলওয়ে এহেন বেহাল দশা থেকে উত্তোরণে উপযুক্ত খাতে ঋণের টাকা ব্যয় না করে শুধু স্টেশন রিমডেলিং করার অর্থ হলো আশীতিপর বৃদ্ধাকে মেকাপ লাগিয়ে অষ্টাদশী তরুনী বানানোর ব্যর্থ চেষ্টারই নামানত্মর মাত্র। ঋণ গ্রহনের পূর্বে অবশ্যই বিবেচনা করা প্রয়োজন এ অর্থ কিভাবে পরিশোধ করা হবে? এ ঋণ হতে কি পরিমান লাভ হবে? যদি দেখা যায়, স্টেশন আধুনিকায়নের জন্য ঋণ প্রদান করা হচ্ছে, কিন্তু রেল লাইন সংস্কার, ইঞ্জিন বা বগি ক্রয়ের সমস্যার জন্য রেল যোগাযোগ বিঘি্নত করা হচ্ছে। তবে এ ধরনের ঋণ গ্রহন না করা উচিত। মৌলিক প্রয়োজনের পরিবর্তে এ ধরনের ঋণ গ্রহন অপচয়। কারণ এ ধরনের অহেতুক ঋণের মাধ্যমে প্রতিষ্ঠানকে দূর্বল করা হয়।


এশীয় উন্নয়ন ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) ঋণের টাকায় বাংলাদেশ রেলওয়ের চার বছর মেয়াদী চলমান সংস্কার কর্মসূচীকে ঘিরে খোদ রেলওয়েসহ বিভিন্ন মহলে অসন্তোষ বিরাজ করছে। অভিযোগ উঠেছে, এডিবি'র ঋণ ও পরামর্শ সংস্কারের নামে বাংলাদেশ রেলওয়েকে পরিকল্পিতভাবে পঙ্গু করার পায়তারা চালানো হচ্ছে। বিভিন্ন মহলের অভিযোগ এবং অনুযোগ সর্তকতার সাথে বিবেচনা করা প্রয়োজন। কারণ যে সকল প্রতিষ্ঠানে এডিবি এবং বিশ্বব্যাংক পরামর্শ দিয়েছে তা আশানুরূপ ফলাফল অর্জনে ব্যর্থ হয়েছে। পৃথিবীর অনেক দেশেই এ বিষয়ে প্রশ্ন উঠেছে। উদ্ভুত পরিস্থিতিতে বাংলাদেশ রেলওয়ের বৃহত্তর স্বার্থে এডিবির ঋণে চলমান সংস্কার কর্মসূচী মূল্যায়ন করা প্রয়োজন।




www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click


Syed Saiful Alam
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Sustainable Transport for Developing Countries and STP initiatives for Dhaka City

Dear Sir or Madam,

On behalf of Roads for People, a movement dedicated to the development of an eco-friendly and sustainable transport system in Dhaka City, I would like to draw your attention to some of the features of your recently concluded symposium.

First of all I would like to congratulate the organisers of the symposium for undertaking initiatives for sustainable transport development in developing countries. However, it is a matter of deep concern that in the name of sustainable transport development, the forum was mainly used to promote unsustainable, capital intensive, car-friendly and anti-fuel free transport policy directives, notably the Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka City. The STP initiatives cannot be regarded as sustainable transport initiatives under any circumstances because the approach:

· Shows total disregard to the majority of trips, i.e. all short trips (76% of the total trips) and fuel free transport (48% of the trips);

· Takes a stand against sustainable transport modes by banning fuel free transport and restricting intercity buses and railways, etc.;

· Invests the maximum amount of resources (237% more) for the less optimal transport solution;

· Promotes car friendly and unsustainable policy directives like change of modal share in favour of cars, promotion of more car parking facilities, etc.;

· Promotes auto-friendly, inefficient and environmentally disastrous projects like the Eastern Bypass, elevated expressways and other unnecessary road projects, defying the findings of the STP study itself;

· Develops transport alternatives considering only the supply side of the problem under the assumption of unconstrained demand, which would likely promote unsustainable use of scarce resources;

· Takes important transport policy decisions solely on the basis of arbitrary reasoning without any valid supporting scientific analysis;

· Promotes long distance trips and encourages the need for more travel, which is likely to induce more congestion and pollution;

· Provides a disproportionate amount of resources for car-friendly and capital intensive projects and allocates inadequate provisions and funding for sustainable transport systems such as walking, fuel-free vehicles (bicycles and rickshaws), public transit and an integrated waterway system;

· Promotes inequality and social injustice.


A detailed review of the main features of the STP and ongoing unsustainable transport interventions is attached herewith, which you may find useful.
In this connection, it might be appropriate to learn lessons from the dismal failure of Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP) (DUTP 2006, Bari and Efroymson 2006). The approach adopted in the DUTP was very much similar to that of the recommended solutions of STP. Key features of the project include: construction of a number of flyovers, banning of fuel-free transport from main roads, forcing the pedestrians to take elevated crossings, widening of roads at the expense of footpaths, etc. It may be mentioned here that the total travel time disbenefits of the project were at least twenty times more than the tiny savings of travel times. The moral from the dismal failure of DUTP is that in planning for a multimodal transport system, there is no scope to take decisions on the basis of prejudices while defying standard approaches of transport appraisal. Yet a similar unscientific approach is evident both in DUTP and in STP.
The main conclusion of the project is that there is no justification for wasting public money in the name of so-called development projects, such as DUTP, which cause colossal damage to the economy (well over Tk 7.78 billion per year), reduce mobility of people and goods, divide neighbourhoods and sever service facilities, inflict environmental degradation, destroy the basic fabric of sustainable development, deny vulnerable sections of the society their fundamental rights to accessibility and income, promote social inequality, and exacerbate poverty and hunger. An independent assessor appointed by the World Bank (World Bank 2007) also came down heavily on the justification of the key initiative of the project which attempted to ban fuel-free transport in favour of a tiny minority of car owners, who represent less than 5% of the population.

The dual role currently being played by a section of academics related to some higher learning institutions in Bangladesh is a matter of serious concern. These academics seem to be directly involved in formulating unsustainable, capital-intensive and environmentally disastrous policy directives like the banning of fuel-free transport, promotion of more free car parking facilities, and construction of flyovers and elevated expressways. It is difficult to understand how it could be appropriate to, one the one hand, be key members of STP or DUTP, while at the same time being directly involved in lucrative consultancy services for these wasteful and capital-intensive infrastructure projects. Such consultants would seem to assign more time to promoting lucrative infrastructure projects rather than for research and academic activities. Such behaviour not only represents a serious conflict of interest but also acts as a hindrance for the congenial development of academic and research activities, particularly at the postgraduate level. I would like to draw the attention of such malpractices to the University Grant Commission and other relevant authorities and hope that concerned academics will keep them above criticism and uphold the dignity and sanctity of higher learning institutions of Bangladesh.

The use of a sustainable transport development forum to promote such unsustainable STP or DUTP policy directives represents both insult and injury to the genuine movement for sustainable transport development. Those of us in that movement strongly deplore such practice and hope that organisers will in future be careful to avoid allowing their forum to promote such misguided transport initiatives.

We also hope that the sponsors of the symposium would constitute an enquiry committee comprising an international panel of experts on sustainable transport development to review the activities of the so-called sustainable transport development symposium and undertake requisite corrective measures to avoid such controversies in future and hence to uphold the dignity of the basic philosophy of sustainable transport development, that is, to promote low-cost, eco-friendly, space- and energy-efficient transport that recognizes the rights of the majority rather than prioritizing the elite.

Sincerely,

Mahabubul Bari
International Expert on Transportation Infrastructure
Independent Adviser to the Ministry of Infrastructure
Republic of Rwanda
Kigali
Post Box: 4989
Rwanda

Mobile: +250 0341 6508



www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
Save The Environment Movement
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + Digital Copy)Kindle Leather Cover, Black (Fits 6" Display, Latest Generation Kindle)Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + Digital Copy)

Thursday, September 4, 2008

London’s congestion charge cuts traffic jams by 30%

London’s congestion charge cuts traffic jams by 30 percent

By James Monaghan
London Mayor Ken Livingstone’s central London congestion charging system celebrated its first anniversary in February 2004 to general acclaim at home and abroad. Despite of the prophets of doom and even some of its supporters back in 2003, the centre of the UK capital has achieved and maintained its figure of 30 per cent fewer traffic delays inside the charging zone compared with the period before charging was introduced.


Transport for London (TfL), the city’s transport authority, told City Mayors: “Estimates of year-on-year changes in traffic levels show a reduction of 18 per cent in traffic entering the zone during charging hours." In the first six months after the introduction of the scheme in February 2003, the reduction had only dropped by 16 per cent. This is a small but gratifying sign that central London’s streets are becoming safer and more congestion- and pollution-free.


Ken Livingstone, who became London’s first ever directly elected Mayor in 2000, had made transport one of the main planks of his campaign. He stressed the need to ease traffic congestion in central London by persuading people to switch from private cars to public transport. He promised to do this by introducing a congestion charge while at the same time dramatically increasing the number of buses on London roads. Under the scheme, private car drivers entering central London pay a daily fee of five pounds (eight dollars) with heavy goods vehicles paying the same.


To a large extent, Mr Livingstone’s claims to City Mayors in July 2003 seem to have been vindicated. He said then, “It has helped to get London moving again after years of choking traffic. London has become the first of the great world cities to set about substantially reducing congestion in the central area.”


The congestion-charging scheme was at the heart of a larger transport strategy designed from the outset to tackle four key transport priorities for London: reducing congestion; improving bus services; improving journey time reliability for car -users; and making the distribution of goods and services more reliable, sustainable and efficient. It has also been designed to raise significant funds to improve London’s transport system.


The London congestion charge was strongly opposed by Conservative members on the London Assembly (London’s municipal council) and 'The Evening Standard', London’s evening newspaper. The paper’s prediction of traffic chaos never materialised. London’s public has always supported the scheme, while opinion in the business community was divided. Office-based businesses were largely in favour of congestion charging because it was likely to ease travel to work for their staff. Some retailers, on the other hand, claim loss of trade. The Labour Party initially adopted a wait-and-see attitude, but now welcome it since Mr Livingstone rejoined the Party.‘Congestion Charging: Update on scheme impacts and operations’, released at the first anniversary by TfL claims among other things that, • Buses continued to experience significant gains in reliability in and around the charging zone with up to 60 per cent reduction in disruption caused by traffic delays.


• There has been a year-on-year increase of 29,000 bus passengers entering the zone during the morning peak period, for which sufficient additional public transport capacity has been provided.


• When over 700 businesses inside and just outside the charging zone were asked if they supported congestion charging zone, as long as there is continued investment in public transport, 60 per cent agreed, around 20 per cent disagreed. Only 12 per cent said the congestion charge affected business performance.


• On the other hand, net revenues from the scheme are less than anticipated. Instead of raising more than £100 million during the scheme’s first year, “congestion charging contributes £50 million of net transport benefits to London’s economy per year, mainly through quicker and more reliable journeys for road and bus users”. This is partly explained by TfL’s claim that 50,000 fewer cars per day were being driven into central London since the introduction of the charging scheme – although they also claimed that the number of people entering the centre of London had only fallen by some 4,000 in 2003.


Some controversies remain. TfL is carrying out a public and stakeholder consultation on behalf of the Mayor, who is proposing to extend the present central London charging scheme westward into Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster. If accepted, the proposals, which are widely accepted by the Liberal Democrats, opposed by the Conservatives and found to be too restricted by the Greens, would not be implemented before 2006.


TfL also released a report in early March 2004 into Transport in London and its national ramifications. The report warns, “Inadequate transport will limit office development, job creation, house-building and the efficiency of the labour market” unless heavy investment in the transport system takes place.


Within a decade there will be the equivalent of 19 more passengers on each carriage of the Tube (the London underground rail system) during rush hour. Some trains currently are already leaving their first station with no seats left.
The dire warnings are partly due to political manoeuvring to increase central Government funding for transport, but in general congestion charging is becoming less of a hot issue and the Mayor is moving into other areas such as energy efficiency.



www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
shovan1209 [at] yahoo.com

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Work for a Better Dhaka

No Traffic on a Saturday? Well, No Cars, Anyway

With a few simple steps, we could make Dhaka more livable. The first step is to change our priorities, by emphasizing access, not mobility, short rather than long distance travel, children, not cars, and livable environments, not just transport. To achieve this, we must change our policies; for instance, by enforcing the ban on parking on footpaths; reducing parking and charging a fair market rate for it; creating positive infrastructure for non polluters: pedestrians, cyclists, and rickshaws; and by putting children first: building more or better schools, libraries, and parks, and by making streets safer. In short, “We need a model in which happiness, rather than consumption levels, is the measure of success.”


www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
shovan1209 [at] yahoo.com

Rickshaws are the main source of vehicular transport for the middle class.

Rickshaws are in many ways the ideal form of transport

They provide door-to-door transport at all hours and in all weather, emit no fumes, create no noise pollution, use no fossil fuels, and employ large numbers of the poorest people.

It is not the rickshaws that are clogging the streets; it's the cars. In 1998, the less than 9% of vehicular transport by car required over 34% of road space, while the 54% travelling by rickshaw took up only 38% of road space. The solution is not to reduce rickshaw transport, but to prevent the growth of car use, by minimising the road space and parking space allocated to cars.


In addition, there are many simple solutions that could benefit both the rickshaw-riding majority and the car-owning minority. Instead of banning rickshaws, the World Bank and local authorities could be (a.) providing dedicated lanes and cycle rickshaw stations that would prevent conflicts between modes, (b.) implementing a programme to help improve the quality of the rickshaws, (c.) supporting cycle rickshaw drivers with training, uniforms, tariff standardisation, etc., (d.) creating cycle lanes throughout the city, and (e.) supporting public transit through bus-only lanes, bus-only turns, etc.

Many rickshaw pullers fled from starvation in the villages. With exceptionally bad floods this year, many villages lack sufficient food and seeds. Cutting back on rickshaw income means directly attacking the ability of the poorest and most vulnerable to survive - not just the rickshaw pullers themselves, but the families and entire villages that they support.


The Mirpur Road is a disastrous choice for a rickshaw ban, as there are no alternate roads for rickshaws, and it is extremely difficult to walk on this road because of the prevalence of street vendors.

Accommodating the automobile over other modes is undemocratic, supporting a wealthy elite while the majority suffers. In the long run, even the rich will not benefit from rickshaw bans, as current policies will lead to more traffic jams, dirtier air and increased noise pollution.
The World Bank figure that the rickshaw ban will cover "only 6% of roads" is highly misleading. Maybe 6% of roads, but those corridors carry well over 50% of all the traffic in the city. Further, the figure of 6% is misleading because Dhaka has only a small number of arterial roads which due to the lack of a secondary road network means must carry all kinds of traffic, including short trips by pedestrians and rickshaws as well as longer trips by motor vehicles. The proposed restrictions cover almost all the main arterials (the widest roads in Dhaka), and almost all of the north-south corridors, where a large percentage of the overall traffic occurs. The rickshaw-ban roads are almost all in the range of 25 metres to 45 metres wide (including walkways), i.e., at least three lanes in each direction. Some are even wider. So the World Bank's claim that traffic cannot be segregated on the arterial roads is simply false.


World Bank policy in Dhaka is inconsistent with the spirit of the World Bank's urban transport strategy, Cities on the Move (2001), which is highly progressive and supportive of non-motorised transport.


Rickshaws are the main source of vehicular transport for the middle class. Since there are often not alternatives within their means, a rickshaw ban is a restriction of their freedom of movement, and therefore a violation of Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.


While proposing for further rickshaw bans between Russell Square and Azimpur, the Dhaka Transport Coordination Board presented data showing an increase in average motor vehicle speeds (15 kmh to 24 kmh) in other parts of the same corridor where a rickshaw ban has already been imposed. But did they analyse how robust and stable the gain in speed reductions would be? Considering experiences of the other rickshaw-free roads, is it not more likely that the gain in speed would be very short lived and the extra space created would soon be filled by more motorised vehicles? And further, wouldn't a ban on motor vehicles on major roads similarly speed up the rickshaws and also allow space for bicycles and pedestrians?



www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam

shovan1209 [at] yahoo.com

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Specific Recommendations on Dhaka Transport

Specific Recommendations on Dhaka Transport

Despite the fact that the STP model has a number of shortcomings, the study appears to be more or less successful in identifying the preferred mass transit option for long trips, that is, Strategy 1a: Roads+, ALL BRT, NO Metro. Strategy 1a represents a combination of moderate investment in roads and an intensive BRT system as the means for mass transit. The option requires only a fraction (42%) of the total amount of USD 4.52 billion required by the STP-preferred alternative. It also represents the best option considering economics, safety, social development, affordability and sustainability. The surplus resources could be better utilised for the development of a balanced multimodal transport system by providing due consideration to the following vital issues:

1. Adopt integrated demand and supply management for the development of a sustainable transport system for Dhaka City.

2. Adopt a sustainable and “Smart” land use policy, which prefers a concentrated and mixed-use land development and reduces need to travel.

3. Adopt a people-oriented transport policy aiming at maximising door-to-door mobility and accessibility of people and goods, not just movement of vehicles within road links.

4. Assess transport policy by considering key wider policy issues such as economy, environment, accessibility, safety and social equity.

5. Abandon car-friendly and capital-intensive transport policy and explore eco-friendly and sustainable alternatives.

6. Start a fresh study for the development of sound transport policy considering impacts of all transport users and providers, not just FDT.

7. Ensure fair representation of all stakeholders and transport professionals in the decision making and planning process.

8. Properly integrate the proposed BRT system with improved local transport, ensuring adequate and continuous FFT and pedestrian facilities.

9. Provide a continuous bicycle lane throughout Dhaka City.

10. Develop an integrated commuting surface rail services within the Greater Dhaka Metropolitan Area.

11. Reintroduce centrally located stations for bus services (intercity and local).

12. Retain the central railway station at Kamalapur, and revive the old rail stations and service lines at Furbaria and other parts of Dhaka city.

13. Develop an integrated waterway system for Dhaka City.

14. Develop a hierarchical transport model suited to the Greater Dhaka Metropolitan Area for evaluation of different land use and transport development options.

Syed Saiful Alam
Save the Environment Movement

Transport, Environment, Economics and Health: Promoting an All-Win Situation

Transport, Environment, Economics and Health:Promoting an All-Win Situation
Syed Shamsul Alam


While economic gains may be sufficient in themselves—assuming a reasonably fair distribution of those gains—to improve conditions in health and education, the opposite tends to happen with transport. Market economies support transport investments and infrastructure that actually lead to worsening traffic conditions, and richer cities tend to suffer from worse transport problems—including more traffic congestion, more pollution, and more injuries and deaths from road crashes—than poorer cities.

As i**es increase, if the government does not intervene, then car use will increase. In the case of Hong Kong and Singapore, the governments quickly realized that a drastic increase in car use in proportion to rising i**es would lead to an impossible situation on the streets, and thus instituted strict measures for car control, such as mandating that car owners first buy parking spaces, or charging very high fees for licenses. Where governments have not taken such proactive steps—or where such steps are taken and then loosened under pressure of car manufacturers and others—the traffic situation will invariably decline as i**es rise.

While we often hear of the subsidies given by government for mass transport, few talk of the subsidies governments give for cars. Yet such subsidies play an important role in increasing car ownership, and can represent vast sums of money being spent providing free parking, road space, and other infrastructure (such as elevated expressways) for cars, or on fuel subsidies largely used by car owners. Meanwhile, the increase in cars and government moves to increase road space for them—often by limiting or banning other transport—result in a decrease in fuel‐free transport (mostly walking, cycling, and cycle rickshaws), due to danger, lack of road space, and the unpleasantness of trying to use such modes adjacent to noisy and polluting motorized vehicles.

The “free” market thus fails us by resulting in more fuel-dependent transport (FDT), with serious consequences for the environment and health. (Of course if the market were really “free”, there would not be huge subsidies for cars, and car owners would be expected to pay in real terms for the damage they cause, so that a very different picture would likely result.) Damage to the environment of fuel-dependent (motorized) transport includes air and noise pollution, space used for roads and parking that could have been green space (for agriculture, parks, and nature), and contribution to climate change. Damage to health includes rising rates of respiratory and other disease from pollution; injuries and deaths from road crashes; lack of physical activity caused both by more time spent in cars, and the inability to walk or cycle due to the presence of so many cars; increases in obesity due to lack of physical activity; and the reduced possibility of interacting with neighbors, or of children and youth enjoying outdoor recreation, due to the conversion of open spaces to parking and the danger from so many fuel-dependent vehicles.


Other problems caused by fuel-dependent transport include economics, poverty, and insecurity. For example, the average American spends $6,000/year for car costs, or 20% of gross earnings for the ʺprivilegeʺ of owning a car. Given that one main reason to own a car is to drive to work—so that one can then pay for one’s car—the futility and wastefulness of the current system is obvious. People b**e further impoverished due to high expenses on transport, which can represent a significant portion of monthly i**e. For instance, traveling by bicycle is essentially free, whereas bus fares can prove very costly to the low‐i**e. Those whose i**e is dependent on fuel‐free transport are also affected by bans on their livelihood, including rickshaw and van pullers and handcart peddlers. Finally, global insecurity is increased due to dependence on foreign oil and the wars that result as countries fight for control over existing oil supplies.


Shifting from the “free” market focus, with its emphasis on further enriching wealthy corporations, to a focus on transport for development, would lead to significant changes and gains—not only for the poor, but for everyone. Namely, such a focus would emphasize the need for more fuel-free transport (FFT). FFT has many benefits, including the facts that it is inexpensive, does not cause air or noise pollution, generates employment, provides convenient exercise (allowing people to incorporate physical activity into their daily routine, rather than having to make extra time and spend extra money on it), and increases equity by giving people of different i**e equal rights on the street (or prioritizing the poor over the rich, which would make a small contribution towards balancing the great inequalities favoring the rich).


In working to achieve change in the transport‐health‐environment‐economics equation, our overall goal is to create people‐friendly cities. Given the significant role transport can play in increasing or decreasing quality of life in a city, transport must play a significant role in making cities more livable. Needed changes include an increase in fuel‐free transport (walking, cycling, cycle rickshaws), an increase in public transport, a decrease in car use (brought about by high parking fees reflecting actual land values, license controls, and car‐free areas), and encouragement of high-density, mixed‐use areas, which in turn would lead to a reduction in traffic demand as access is emphasized over mobility.Of course bringing about changes in transport, affected as such changes are by economics and politics, is by no means easy. Significant opposition arises from a number of sources, for rather obvious reasons; such opponents include those manufacturing and selling cars, road and highway construction**panies, media (consider the role of car advertisement in electronic and print media), much of government, and some international agencies.


While there is no one set of working methods guaranteed to bring success, a mix of approaches modified for one’s own political environment is likely to include at least some of the following: signature campaigns, letter writing (to newspapers and policymakers), meetings with journalists and other ways of giving journalists information, research and publications, meetings and other**munication with government officials, seminars, press conferences, and demonstrations.Local, regional, and international alliances can also help support the work. Such alliances can include local NGOs working on the issues of environment, rights of the poor, and public health; a regional network with HealthBridge partners; and international support from such networks or groups as the World Carfree Network (WCN) and possibly the Institute for Transportation & Development Policies (ITDP).


While success is difficult in this area, it is by no means impossible. For instance, successes in Bangladesh included a major slowing of rickshaw bans, and an expressed reversal of World Bank policy in Dhaka regarding those bans. In the words of World Bank Country Director, Christine Wallich: “Any future support from the World Bank would be possible only if it can be demonstrated that aggregate positive impacts of NMT‐free conversion on transport users and transport providers outweigh the aggregate negative impact.” Other countries within theHealthBridge network and beyond have also experienced significant successes.


There is much to learn from the work, and while the difficulty is great, there is still much cause for optimism. Significant lessons include the obvious—that accepting that defeat is inevitable guarantees defeat. That is, if we believe before we start that we will fail, and thus don’t even try, we will indeed fail. Only by trying do we at least have the possibility of success—a possibility that can, surprisingly, materialize at times! After all, as we have also learned, policies serving only a powerful elite will, necessarily, have limited appeal among the masses. While the rich have access to resources that may seem overwhelming, there is tremendous power in public opinion. Therefore, supporting the masses can succeed—if, of course, the work is done wisely.
In sum, we need to work together to guarantee a major role for fuel‐free transport (and to reduce transport needs overall by emphasizing proximity over mobility), and to reduce fuel‐dependent transport. By reducing car use, we can create an all‐win situation, in which even car users benefit. How? By supporting jobs and inexpensive transport for the poor; by decreasing pollution, congestion, and noise; by increasing levels of physical activity and thus improving health; by increasing access to convenient transport for all groups, and by increasing availability of and access to safe outdoor play spaces for children. The result of all these measures is friendlier, people‐focused cities—cities in which all inhabitants will gain.

Syed Saiful Alam
Save the Environment Movement

Friday, August 15, 2008

Could People-Focused Planning Reduce Traffic Congestion in Dhaka?

Could People-Focused Planning Reduce Traffic Congestion in Dhaka?
A Transport Engineer’s Perspective

Mahabubul Bari

It is important from the transport planning point of view to adopt a people-focused policy, which would ensure maximisation of door-to-door mobility and accessibility for the majority of road users, not just maximization of vehicle-km/movements of cars within road links. Moreover, a people-focused planning process should promote environmentally-friendly, energy- and space-efficient sustainable transport modes.


Approaches to transport development can lead either to a focus on the movements of vehicles or on the movement of people. In the urban context, the former, which is analogous to maximization of vehicle-km, tends to favour long distance and high speed travels, whereas the latter favours long distance and high-speed travel only when taken by public transport, and creates favourable conditions for short distance travel by fuel free transport (FFT) and walking. This in turn can lead to the development of a people-focused policy by prioritizing sustainable, environment-friendly, fuel- and space-efficient options, as demonstrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Traffic Prioritization on the Basis of Pollution and Fuel Ratting and Occupancy
Mode
Pollution
Rating
Fuel Rating
PCU
Vehicle
Occupancy
Occupancy
per PCU
Priority
Pedestrian
Zero emission
Zero
0.02
1.00
50
1st
Bicycle
Zero emission
Zero
0.12
1.00
8.3
2nd
Rickshaw
Zero emission
Zero
0.40
1.36
3.4
3rd
PT (Bus)
Moderate
Moderate
2.00
88.40
44.2
4th
Car
High
High
1.00
2.20
2.2
5th
Considering the nature of trips in the mixed urban environments of Dhaka City, which are predominantly short (76% of trips are less than 5 km) people-oriented approaches would ensure maximum door-to-door mobility and accessibility of the majority of road users. Moreover, such approaches could also ensure maximization of overall social and environmental benefits.
Considering the superiority of the people-oriented approach, most of the developed cities of the world have adopted maximization of the mobility of people rather than vehicles as their policy objective. In well-planned German cities, over 80% of trips under 3 km take place by walking and cycling, whereas in Jakarta, where rickshaws were banned during the 1980’s and poor conditions exist for walking and cycling, over 70% trips are made with motorcycles and other motorised para-transits. Yet per capita income of Indonesia is only one-twentieth (5%) that of Germany. We also know the consequences of the pro-motorisation policy on Jakarta, which is notorious for its unbearable congestion and pollution.


Despite the obvious consequences of pro-car versus pro-people planning, the planning process in Dhaka has set maximization of the movement of vehicles as their target, thereby ignoring the mobility and accessibility of the majority of the city dwellers. For example, the proposed 20-year Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka City totally ignores the contribution of short trips (76% of all trips) as well as all fuel-free transport (pedestrians, rickshaws and bicycles). Within STP, resources were allocated apparently arbitrarily for the capital-intensive projects, which promote long-distance travel and car-friendly policy options (and thus are likely only to lead to further traffic congestion).


In order to develop alternative transport strategies, STP adopted the top-down approach, employing a number of influential bureaucrats, a group of 32 advisors mainly drawn from the elite section of the society, and a consortium of local and foreign consultants. No attempt was made to ensure wider participation of stakeholders, NGOs, professionals and socially-deprived sections of the society in the decision-making process.


Disregarding their own evaluation process, the STP team selected a preferred alternative, which is 231% more expensive than the option which they themselves ranked as number one, out of a set of eleven (original ten and a modified option) previously-developed alternatives. Their final choice, based not on the extensive evaluation they had carried out, instead involved a sequential elimination process on the basis of arbitrary reasoning.


The best transport strategy, thus adopted, is unlikely to represent the best possible compromise considering overall technical and economic perspectives; rather, it reflects the evaluator’s own interests, biases and convictions. While some already-privileged sections of society may benefit—including those who profit from road-building—the interest of the majority of the city dwellers, and particularly vulnerable groups, would likely be seriously undermined by such an arbitrary and nebulous planning process.


For many years, discussion of transport issues and problems in Dhaka has had a singular focus on the supposed contribution of cycle rickshaws to traffic congestion, and the need to facilitate movement of automobiles. In line with this analysis of the transport situation, various projects have been undertaken, focusing on banning rickshaws and rickshaw vans from major roads, and sometimes relegating them to narrow rickshaw lanes. The problem of car parking has been addressed mainly through insistence on provision of separate parking places by offices, shops and restaurants, even by enacting law under the building code. Yet not a single transport policy decision was undertaken from the perspective of people-focused planning, which seeks to maximise the door-to-door mobility and accessibility of people and goods, rather than the movements of vehicles within road links.


The results of these various initiatives have been made clear through government-mandated studies, including the HDRC report on the rickshaw ban on Mirpur Road, and the DUTP after-study report. The results, almost astonishingly negative, would suggest that the basis for such anti-rickshaw and pro-automobile policy decisions and transport plans are flawed.
Moreover, despite the strong evidence of increased travel costs and traffic congestion, transport planning continues to focus on expanding the role of the automobile and reducing that of fuel-free transport. That pattern has been reflected by the further extension of the rickshaw bans on more city roads. Yet policies continue to give car owners absolute priority, while ignoring the fundamental principle of any transport project appraisal, that is, that net user benefits of any transport intervention must exceed net loss.


Now, it may be appropriate to investigate whether a people-focused transport policy in fact reduce congestion in Dhaka City. In the following paragraphs, answers to this question will be analysed from the perspective of traffic engineering.


Performance of FFT Modes at Intersections of Dhaka
From the traffic-engineering point of view, the capacity of the road network of a city is usually governed by the capacities of the junctions. Under the STP study, the passenger car equivalent of different vehicles was determined at the stop lines of 25 intersections within Dhaka City. The supplementary data from another study are also presented. The data clearly demonstrate that the passenger car equivalent (PCE) values of FFT are significantly lower than that of cars, which indicates the superiority of FFT and the potential for FFT priority measure in relieving congestion from Dhaka City. As shown below, over eight bicycles or 2.5 rickshaws occupy the same space as just one car.


STP PCE values (from STP 2005)
Car/Jeeps = 1.0; Small Bus = 1.5; Large Bus = 2.0; Auto-rickshaw = 0.7; Rickshaw = 0.4
PCE value from Ali (2006)
Motorcycle = 0.41; Bicycle = 0.12
That is, fuel-free transport (walking, cycling, and rickshaws) could move people while occupying far less space per passenger, and would—though not captured in the above figures—also involve significant reductions in demand for space for parking. In terms of the prejudice that cars are faster than other transport forms, the shorter travel times during hartals, when travelling by rickshaw rather than car, suggest that cars offer little in terms of speed in congested urban conditions—just the conditions which will prevail in mega-cities.


Reduction of Traffic Congestion by Integrated Demand and Supply Management Under a People-Focused Transport Policy
The growth of motor vehicles is so great that it neutralizes whatever development is carried out to improve the transport infrastructure of the city. That is, as cities around the world have experienced, it is impossible for road building to keep pace with the increase in car growth—unless strong measures are introduced to reduce the growth in cars and to encourage the use of less polluting and less space-consuming means of transport, i.e. fuel-free transport (FFT). The promotion of short-distance travel and people-oriented transport modes by integrating fuel-free transport with adequate public transport could in fact act as a deterrent to car growth and thus contribute to reduction of traffic demand. The restraining impacts of sustainable modes of transport could have far reaching impacts in reducing traffic congestion in a mega-city like Dhaka.



International experience has shown that an integrated public transit and bicycle priority lane could increase passenger carrying capacity of an urban road significantly. Similar findings have also been reported in research in Greater Dhaka. The study developed and validated incremental linear mixed models using audio and video speed and flow data from 27 road sections within and around Dhaka City. Using the models it can be demonstrated that the replacement of 65% of cars with the equivalent number of rickshaws could increase passenger carrying capacity of a road by as much as 43%.


More importantly, there is no justification to ban FFT from city roads, when a combination of FFT and public transport (PT) priority measures in fact offers the best possible solution for the reduction of congestion and pollution, at the same time ensuring significant improvement of roadway capacity and person mobility, as PCE (Passenger Car Equivalent) values for FFT are significantly lower in comparison to cars and other motorized para-transits. (And, as mentioned above, the differences would be even more significant if space demands for parking were included.) The STP in its original working paper on public transport recognised the superiority of a combination of FFT and public transport (PT) options and proposed three possible alternatives for roads of Dhaka City, such as a pedestrian lane +a single-lane bus rapid transit (BRT) for very narrow roads; a pedestrian lane + a mixed mode lane + a single lane BRT for intermediate to major corridors; and a pedestrian lane + one/two FFT-only lanes + one/two BRT lanes for intermediate to major corridors.


It is important to note that STP did not propose any combination of BRT and fuel-dependent transport (FDT) solutions. If Dhaka introduces public transit (PT) priority measures, such as BRT, there will be no need to give additional priorities to cars and motorised para-transits. BRT will be able to cater to the needs of intermediate and long trips in combination with FFT priority measures, which will ensure the ease of short trips. Such an integrated FFT and bus priority measure has the potential to significantly reduce traffic congestion in Dhaka City.


The advantages of integrated bicycle and bus operation were demonstrated in a number of case studies in New Delhi. The studies demonstrated that a combination of bus lane and NMT (bicycle) lane could increase mobility and passenger carrying capacity of three-lane corridors, where only motorised vehicles were allowed to operate. The passenger carrying capacity of such corridors can be as good as any other capital-intensive mass rapid rail transit system (MRRTS).
Concluding Remarks This paper has shown that measures prioritizing people—by emphasizing pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws over automobiles—could significantly reduce congestion in Dhaka. It is important, in conclusion, to point out that pro-people planning must involve a strong collaboration between urban planning and transport policy. Traffic congestion will most effectively be reduced when travel demand, rather than supply, is addressed. As such, short trips must be emphasized. However, short trips are only viable when most of people’s daily needs (for instance, to reach workplaces, schools, shops and recreation) are accessible close to homes. Urban planning that attempts to separate uses will by necessity increase the need for travel and the length of such trips, thereby increasing congestion; the opposite is true of urban planning that encourages mixed use.


When considering the need of people rather than automobiles, it becomes clear that requirements for car parking, wide roads, bans on rickshaws, and failure to give attention to the needs of pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws, will both increase congestion and worsen the day-to-day existence of city dwellers. That is, car-friendly measures, by inviting more car travel, also invite more air and noise pollution, and make life ever more difficult and expensive for those who do not travel by car. Fortunately, by focusing on the needs of people rather than a single mode of transport (the car), it is possible to improve the situation for all of Dhaka’s residents by easing congestion, reducing pollution, and creating people-friendly environments wherein socialization will be enhanced. Surely such a city is one worth working to attain.

Dhaka Rickshaw Pro-people Transport Plan All Newspapers on one click

http://www.dhaka-rickshaw.blogspot.com/ Dhaka Rickshaw
http://www.dhaka-transport.blogspot.com/ Pro-people Transport Plan
http://www.dhakanewspapers.blogspot.com/ All Newspapers on one click

Syed Saiful Alam
Save the Environment Movement

shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

Knowledge-based Transport Planning and More Rickshaw Bans in the Dhaka City

Knowledge-based Transport Planning and More Rickshaw Bans in the Dhaka City

Dr.Mahabubul Bari

For several years, discussion of transport issues and problems in Dhaka has had a singular focus on the supposed contribution of cycle rickshaws to traffic congestion, and the need to facilitate movement of automobiles. In line with this analysis of the transport situation, various projects have been undertaken, focusing on banning rickshaws and rickshaw vans from major roads, and sometimes relegating them to narrow rickshaw lanes. The problem of car parking has been addressed mainly through insistence on provision of separate parking places by offices, shops and restaurants even by enacting law under the building code. It is a matter of deep regret that not a single transport policy decision was undertaken after conducting a proper scientific or knowledge-based analysis of the transport problems of the city. It has become a standard norm to take important policy decisions rather arbitrarily, whether it is rickshaw ban or Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for the city.

The results of these various initiatives have been made clear through government-mandated studies, including the HDRC report on the rickshaw ban on Mirpur Road (HDRC 2004), and the DUTP after-study report (DUTP 2006). The results, almost astonishingly negative, would suggest that the basis for the policy decisions and transport plans are flawed. This would be less than surprising when considering the fact that important transport policy decisions were taken without employing any knowledge-based approach or scientific study.

Moreover, despite the strong evidence of increased travel costs and traffic congestion, transport planning continues to focus on expanding the role of the automobile and reducing that of fuel-free transport. That pattern has been reflected by the further extension of the rickshaw bans on more city roads. In this connection, readers are requested to draw their attention to the following news item:

Paltan-Bijoynagar Road made off-limits to rickshaws
Staff Correspondent
“Traffic Division of the Dhaka Metropolitan Police made Purana Paltan-Bijoynagar Road off-limits to rickshaws from Thursday. The decision was taken at a meeting on Wednesday. All the deputy commissioners of four traffic divisions were present at the meeting. M Sayedur Rahman, deputy commissioner (south) of traffic division, told New Age on Thursday that the authorities banned plying of non-motorised vehicles on the stretch between Purana Paltan and Bijoynagar to ease traffic congestion.” The New Age, Dhaka, Friday, October 19, 2007”.

This arbitrary decision making process as depicted in the news item draws attention to a number of disturbing questions as follows:
Do the police have the authority to ban or restrict rickshaw movements?
If yes, from whom do they get that authority?
Do the police have similar authority to limit the movement of motorised vehicles when there is not sufficient road capacity for them, e.g. narrow lanes, which cannot accommodate cars without causing traffic jams?

Probably not, it is therefore clear that such misguided policy actions are being pursued just to give absolute priority in the transport system of the city for a tiny minority of car owners, i.e. the so called elite section of the society.

Do the police have requisite training to make proper transport decisions?
If so, why dies Dhaka needs organisation like DTCB, when the police can do the job better?
The rickshaw bans are being extended beyond Mirpur Road, but it seems unlikely that those bans were carried out by the police, rather than by a section of the powerful bureaucrats behind the scene. It may be mentioned here that after failure of the rickshaw ban in the demonstration project of the Mirpur Road, the World Bank has set the standard of extending further bans on the condition that: “Any future support from the World Bank would be possible only if it can be demonstrated that aggregate positive impacts of NMT-free conversion on transport users and transport providers outweigh the aggregate negative impact”.

It is matter of deep regret that policies continue to give car owners absolute priority, while ignoring the fundamental principle of any transport project appraisal, that is, that net user benefits of any transport intervention must exceed net loss.

Now, it may be appropriate to concentrate on, possibly, the most important argument in the news item, that is, “the authorities banned plying of non-motorised vehicles on the stretch between Purana Paltan and Bijoynagar to ease traffic congestion.” In the following paragraphs answer to this question and other related aspects of such transport policy interventions, will be analysed in the light of knowledge-based and participatory decision-making approach.
Did the previous rickshaw ban in Dhaka City ease traffic congestion?

The answer lies in the “After Project” report of the government mandated study of the Mirpur Road Demonstration project (DUTP 2006), where fuel free transport was banned.
It might be appropriate to look into the issue considering a number of key congestion indices with respect to before and after scenarios of the Mirpur Road Demonstration project as follows:

Average journey time per vehicle
Average journey time per person
Journey reliability
Throughput (total number of vehicles per time interval that pass a point on the carriageway)
Average Journey time per Vehicle
The Table 1 shows the comparison of travel times of fuel dependent (motorised) vehicles between 2000 and 2005. Considering large variability of the travel time data, it is evident that there is no statistically significant difference of travel times of fuel dependent or motorised vehicles between pre and post rickshaw ban scenarios. This means that no travel time gain for fuel dependent vehicle was achieved due to rickshaw ban.

Table 1: Comparison of 2000/2005 Travel Times (average of two directions) in Mirpur Road Corridor (Source: DUTP 2006)
Year
Average Speed (km/h)
Travel Time (min.)
Delay (sec)
No of Stops
Delay in Stop (sec/stop)
Gabtoli - North South Road (Demonstration Corridor)
2005
19.9
36.1
717
20
36
2000
19.2
38.3
720
17
42
% Difference
3.6%
-5.7%
-0.4%


The Table 2 demonstrates the comparison of travel times of buses between 2000 and 2005. Although there is no statistically significant difference of travel times for fuel dependent vehicles between pre and post FFT ban scenarios, the travel times for buses did undergo significant deterioration with a 26.1% increase of travel times. This means that bus congestion has increased significantly due to imposition of rickshaw ban in the Mirpur Road demonstration corridor.

On balance average vehicle congestion in terms of journey time per vehicle has increased significantly due to the rickshaw ban.
Table 2: Comparison of 2000/2005 Travel Times for Buses in along Mirpur Road Corridor (Source: DUTP 2006)
Bus Line
Year
Speed (km/h)
Travel Time (min)
No of Stops
Line 7: Gabtoli to Gulistan Via Neel Khate
2005
13.2
50.2
45.2

2000
17.0
39.8
45.2
% Change

-22.4%
26.1%

Average journey time per person
Bus travel has worsened following the FFT ban, with a 26.1% increase in travel time; passenger travels by bus has become slower than by rickshaw. Thus all the bus passengers (28.1% of total passengers)—both those who continue to travel by bus in pre- and post-project scenarios, and those who were forced to shift from rickshaws—have experienced significant increase in travel times.

Impacts of the project on car passengers who have been riding a car both pre- and post-project are more or less neutral, as there is no significant difference in travel time.
The passengers of motorised para-transit who continue to travel both in pre- and post-project scenarios are likely to suffer increase in average journey times. While there is no significant difference in travel times between scenarios, the times required to find a driver who would be willing to go for short trips have gone up substantially as per HDRC report (HDRC 2004) thereby increasing average travel times per person.

Despite being subjected to a ban on Mirpur Road, rickshaws remain the most popular means of transport in the corridor, accounting for 30% of all trips. Rickshaw passengers have become net losers, being forced to take long detours using congested side roads, and thereby substantially increase their travel time.

These evidences from the after project studies prove that congestion in terms of average journey time per person have increased significantly after rickshaw ban in the Mirpur Road demonstration corridor.

Journey Reliability
Both DUTP after project study (DUTP 2006) and HDRC studies reported significant deterioration of waiting times for bus passengers. Again, as reported in the HDRC report, baby taxi operators are reluctant to take short trips, causing significant increases in waiting times for passengers. Similarly, finding suitable taxicabs at an affordable cost has become increasingly troublesome and time-consuming for short trips.


It is therefore clearly evident that journey reliability of the Mirpur Road demonstration project deteriorated significantly due to imposition of rickshaw ban. This in turn represents increase of congestion.
Throughput (total number of vehicles per time interval that pass a point on the carriageway)
Although it might not be appropriate to compare throughputs between a FFT free road and a mixed vehicles road, it is obvious from the Table 3 that number of vehicles that pass at North of Dhanmodi R#2 of Mirpur Road, decreased significantly both in terms of absolute number of vehicles and passenger car equivalents due to rickshaw ban. This indicates the congestion in terms of throughput has increased significantly due to rickshaw ban in Mirpur Road.
Table 3: Comparison of 2000/2005 throughputs at North of Dhanmondi Road #2 Section of Mirpur Road (Source: DUTP 2006)
Road section of Mirpur Road
Year
Vehs/hr
PCE/hr
North of Dhanmondi R#2
2000
167235
96112
North of Dhanmondi R#2
2005
55822
55930
Difference %

-66.62%
-41.81%
Again, although passenger carrying capacities of the whole network under investigation were found to increase on average by 30% due to a significant increase of bus services under a private sector-driven initiative, increase in passenger capacity for the demonstration project was only 15%. Again, a careful analysis of data reveals that nearly total elimination of FFT combined with a very high increase in bus service resulted in only a 15% increase in passenger capacity, whereas a small decrease in cars combined with only a modest increase in bus service resulted in a 27% increase in passenger capacity in a VIP road, which has been under FDT-only operation in the base case, indicating that as far as road capacity is concerned the problem is cars, not rickshaws.


Whether car more efficient than rickshaws in terms of road space occupancy?
Despite constant claims of the city officials that rickshaws are the main source of traffic jams, data indicate that rickshaws are far superior to cars as far as road space occupancy is concerned (see Table 4). In the base case i.e. before fuel free transport ban, rickshaws made up 69.8% of vehicles, yet utilised only 43.5% of road space to transport 59.4% of passengers (all trips). Cars made up only 6.4% of vehicles, yet occupied as much as 29.9% of the road space in the base case to transport far fewer passengers (5.5%) than by rickshaw.


Despite being removed from the main roads, rickshaws are still the most popular mode of transport, serving 30% of the passengers, whereas cars serve only 8.5% of all trips (11% of vehicular trips) while requiring the greatest share of road space (54.2%). Although the modal share of cars in overall has gone up only 3.0%, they now claim about 25% more road space than prior to FFT ban. If one considers the additional parking space required for them, total road space required would be much higher. It is clear that a combination of fuel-free transit and public transit would be far superior to a fuel-dependent transport and public transit option.
Table 4: Road Space Occupancy Impacts of DUTP on Mirpur Demonstration Road (Sources: DUTP 2006, STP 2005 and HDRC 2004)
Year
Attribute
Light 4-whl.
Buses
Cycle Rickshaws
2000
% Modal Share of All Trip (HDRC 2004)
5.5%
10.7%
59.4%
2000
% Modal Share of Vehicular Trip (HDRC 2004)
6.4%
12.6%
69.8%
2000
% Space on the Main Road Link
29.9%
5.2%
43.5%
2000
% Passenger on the Main Road Link
13.6%
37.4%
30.6%
2005
% Modal Share of All Trip (HDRC 2004)
8.5%
20.8%
29.5%
2005
% Modal Share of Vehicular Trip (HDRC 2004)
11.0%
26.9%
38.1%
2005
% space on the Main Road Link
54.2%
21.3%
0.1%
2005
% Passengers on the Main Road Link
12.5%
79.9%
0.0%
It may be mentioned here that despite 50% traffic growth of motorised vehicles during 2000 to 2005 period, the traffic in terms of PCE (passenger car equivalent) in Mirpur Road Demonstration corridor was lower in 2005 in comparison to that of 2000. However, despite having less number of traffic in 2005, the performance of the corridor was significantly worse under FFT free condition after the ban.

It is therefore clearly evident from the data analysis of the DUTP after project study that congestion in terms of all major congestion indices has increased significantly due to imposition of fuel free transport ban in the Mirpur Road demonstration corridor.
Whether net economic benefit of previous rickshaw ban in the Mirpur Road Demonstration Corridor was positive?

The economic impact of fuel free transport ban on the demonstration corridor has been quite devastating; even DUTB’s figures indicate an enormous net loss. Revised figures suggest a colossal loss as high as Tk 1.52 billion per year for the demonstration corridor. Not a single item produced any positive benefit.

Although banning rickshaws means that many former rickshaw passengers will now have to travel by foot, including to access buses, absolutely nothing was done to improve the situation of pedestrians. The banning of FFT in the demonstration corridor has deteriorated accessibility of the majority of road users by cutting access to side roads, destroying the continuity of the transport system, and hampering door-to-door mobility of passengers.
The fuel free transport ban has been proved to be highly regressive in economic terms, with 83% of the road users becoming the ultimate losers as against only 1%, those who shifted from rickshaws to cars, emerging victorious.

Figure 1 Impact of Mirpur Road Demonstration Project on Road Users
Can fuel free transport ban ensure social equity and protect the right of the most vulnerable sections of the society?


Any city development initiative should contribute positively to social equity and protect the right of the most vulnerable sections of the society. On the contrary the fuel free transport ban created serious social exclusion problems by depriving the most vulnerable section of the society like women, children, the elderly, the disabled and the infirm of a feasible mode of transport.
Again, the initiative has generated undue advantages to a tiny minority of the urban elite, that is, car owners, by allocating them absolute priority in all spheres of the city transport system at the expense of mobility and convenience for the majority of the road users, i.e. pedestrians and rickshaw passengers. In the demonstration corridor, cars now make up only 8.5% of all trips but they occupy 54% of road space. Moreover, undue privilege to cars has also been manifested in terms of providing them with unlimited space for parking free of cost, giving preferential access along road links, ensuring uninterrupted movement at pedestrian crossings and giving undue long green times at traffic signals, etc.

Above all, the FFT ban project shattered the life of the vulnerable rickshaw pullers and operators by reducing their income by 32-41% despite being forced to adopt longer working hours, caused them to take less food, and above all deprived them from their fundamental right of earning a living by a legal means.

Knowledge-based and participatory decision-making approach for transport planning for Dhaka City

Given the complexity of the enterprise and the fact that transport and urban planning have significant effects on the economic and overall well-being of a city’s residents, it is important not to undertake any important transport policy initiative, such as fuel free transport ban arbitrarily. It is high time to institutionalise a knowledge-based and participatory decision-making process for the Dhaka City. It is a matter of deep regret that important transport policy decisions are being taken without conducting any knowledge-based analysis by involving people who do not have proper training on transport or urban planning process. In this connection lessons can be learnt from the arbitrary decision making process of STP where a top-down planning process was adopted by involving a number of part-timers mainly drawn from the section of the urban elite without wider participation of major stakeholders and socially deprived sections of the city. As is always the case in such scenarios, the tendency to allocate resources rather arbitrarily for car-friendly (pro-rich) and capital-intensive projects becomes evidently clear from the STP approach. The experiences of different cities of Brazil prior to participatory budgeting were more or less similar, when decisions regarding urban developments were the exclusive right only for the elite and the powerful. Participatory budgeting, which has been in operation in Brazil since 1989 (Souza 2001), is emerging as an innovative urban development management theme with enormous potential to support cities in the adoption of socially integrated, inclusive, accessible, transparent, participatory and accountable urban governance and management, with a view to ensuring equitable and sustainable urban development. There is no reason why such approaches could not be institutionalised and integrated with appropriate knowledge-based process ensuring people-oriented transport developments.

In this connection, some of the major recent transport policy decisions is worth discussion. The government has recently undertaken an initiative to build 52 kilometres of subway in Dhaka City on commercial basis using private sector financing. A similar initiative on building of a system of elevated expressway under a commercial venture is probably also in the agenda. Any move to build a mass transit system for Dhaka City is long overdue and welcome. However, there are number of issues which demand especial attention prior to undertaking major policy initiatives as follows:

· It might not be appropriate to build a mass transit system as a commercial enterprise under a profit or loss system. A profit making public transit system would likely to be expensive and beyond the reach of the ordinary people despite some fancy claims from the investor. A profit making enterprise would have an adverse impact on social equity and integration. Such a transport system will definitely deny the most vulnerable section of the society about the right to accessibly and mobility. The very objective of the development of mass transit system, i.e. to provide an affordable public transport system for the majority will be defected if it is run on a commercial basis.

· Despite some over optimistic claims, the underground metro will not be able to solve the transport problem of the Dhaka city on its own. Without a proper integrated demand and supply management approach it is unlikely that only an underground metro will solve the transport problem of Dhaka City.

· It is essential that any mass transit system, such as underground metro, should be integrated appropriately with other transport sustainable transport modes, like pedestrians and FFT to make it effective.

· The bitter experience of STP planning process should not negate the need for implementing a well-integrated mass transit system under a knowledge-based and participatory transport planning process.

· The implementation of car incentive project like elevated expressway system would likely to eat up some of the potential benefits of the proposed mass transit system. Current anti-FFT and pro-car transport initiatives would likely to be counter-productive for the development a sustainable transport system for Dhaka City.

Concluding Remarks
The truism “history repeats itself” applies to those who ignore the lessons of the past and insist on forging ahead, committing the same mistakes, and experiencing the same results. It is hoped that, city authority will learn form the mistakes of the Mirpur Road Demonstration project and try to assign due importance of FFT as it deserves. Given the small modal share of autos and the many problems they cause, there should be no provision for creating more auto-only roads within urban areas, and all existing auto-only roads should be converted into mixed-use roads by properly integrating public transit, FFT and fuel-dependent transport (FDT).
Again, while developing mass transit system for a mega city like Dhaka, efforts should be made to develop an affordable system for the majority under a well-integrated multi-modal system. It would be rather unfortunate to develop a mass transit system mainly as a profit making enterprise.


Given the complexity of the transport planning process and the fact that transport and urban planning have significant effects on the economic and overall well-being of a city’s residents, it is important adopting a knowledge-based and participatory approach involving all segment of the stakeholders. Such participatory planning process should take into account not only technical issues about feasibility and efficiency, but also the likely effects of policies on mobility, accessibility, and quality of life for all those affected, with a particular focus on vulnerable groups, those most likely to be left out of, and highly affected by, the existing planning process.


References:
DUTP (2006), “Impact Assessment of DUTP: After Project”, Final Report submitted to Dhaka Transport Coordination Board, by DHV Consultants BV, the Netherlands, Japan Overseas Co., Ltd., Japan, Finnroad Oy, Finland, Operation Research Group, India, SARM Associates Ltd., Bangladesh, Desh Upodesh Ltd., Bangladesh, DevConsultants Ltd., Bangladesh in Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP), Dhaka, February 2006.

HDRC (2004), “After Study on the Impact of Mirpur Demonstration Corridor Project (Gabtoli-Russell Square)” Report prepared for Dhaka Transportation Coordination Board (DTCB), Human Development Research Centre, August 2004, Dhaka

Souza, C. (2001) “Participatory budgeting in Brazilian cities: limits and possibilities in building democratic institutions.” Environment & Urbanization, Vol. 13 No 1, April 2001.

It is important to have an open discussion to explore the scientific validity of the further extensions of fuel free transport bans and the justification of the building a mass transit mainly as a profit making enterprise under the perspectives of sustainable transport development in the Dhaka City. We, the proponents of sustainable transport development, would be very keen to discuss the issues at lengths at any place in Dhaka in between December 29 2007 to January 21, 2008. Active participation of DTCB, DCC, police, high officials from the Ministry of Communications, academic from universities, representatives from the development partners and members of STP advisory committee would be highly appreciated.

This article also pulished
  1. The Finacial Express Dhaka needs proper transport planning
  2. The Daily New Nation Knowledge-based transport planning and rickshaw bans


Syed Saiful Alam Shovan
shovan1209[at]yahoo.com

Dhaka Rickshaw Pro-people Transport Plan All Newspapers on one click