Ecomobility becomes an agenda for ICLEI. Many discussion and best practices around the World were shared. The first ecomobility city at Suwon, Korea will be further refined during the Ecomobility Festisval to be held on 1-30 September this year. Some presenters at the World Congress 2012 highlighted that connecting people from dot to dot should be an efficient way, ecological friendly and equitable. Some said it is a case of moving people without the fuel or less consumption on the non renewable energy. Some said why are we making so much fuss on walking afterall every trip is starting and ending with walking. Even we drive, we walk to our car and similarly to board a train need walking as well to the platform. Thereby, if the driving journey is less than 10 minutes, is that any difficulty of walking? Of course Malaysian including me will qoute hot weather and safety as excuse of not walking at all. Cycling on the other hand is promoted as an viable alternative transportation mode. Conpenhegen, Denmark for example took less than 15 years to inculcate the value of cycling in which 35% trips are cycling based with target of 50% by 2015. Cyclists are given top priority when it comes to traffic management and urban planning. Special lanes with cyclists to decide their own speed are built throughout the city. Connectivity is without disruption but rather vehicles are required to make way at the cross junction. It is all down to the political choice and commitment. It is interesting to note that car ownership rate in Copenhengen is high but ownership of bicycle is even higher. People using bicycle to work, shop and even for leisure. Cars are stored in the garade for weekend long distance outing. Contrast to this, China and Vietnam , the two nations with high cycling rate is threatened by the enroute of traffic vehicles. More and more highways and lanes are built. The question ponder here is this the price of development we so used to talk about? Number of vehicles is reflection of the developed status of a nation? Is it a symbol of prosperity and wealth creation? I believe this mind set is hard to change, but unavoidable need to be recorrected. We might need to learn from the experience of Denmark in CEPA (communication, education
and public awareness) campaign of getting people to prioritise the cycling on normal routine with short distance and car trip for out station journey as a start. However, without sufficient infrastructure with connectivity, affordability, comfort and convenience as well as perceived safety in place, nothing will be forthcoming.
Providing pedestrian street and cycling path above the ground is a place for humanity in making. Our cities are losing their humanity now. We witnessed the reduction of places for social integration. We do not bother to see vehicles be given priority when it comes to resource allocation for infrastructure development, perhaps because we are part of it. We forget that only minority of us owning cars but majority relies on other mode of transportations. Thereby, designing a ecomobility city is talking about restoring humanity and life to the city. Try to imagine a 24 feet 2 lanes 100 feet length street can accommodate approximately 14 cars compared to 100 bicycles or more. With same construction cost but higher turn over of people, will the businesses prefer cyclists over the drivers? I presume yes. It is also about fundamental right of the mass as walking and cycling is cheap and affordable.
With the environmental degradation is real and the need for paradigm shift in planning our cities, do we bold enough to have ecomobility as top priority? I presume we have a choice, the political one.
and public awareness) campaign of getting people to prioritise the cycling on normal routine with short distance and car trip for out station journey as a start. However, without sufficient infrastructure with connectivity, affordability, comfort and convenience as well as perceived safety in place, nothing will be forthcoming.
Providing pedestrian street and cycling path above the ground is a place for humanity in making. Our cities are losing their humanity now. We witnessed the reduction of places for social integration. We do not bother to see vehicles be given priority when it comes to resource allocation for infrastructure development, perhaps because we are part of it. We forget that only minority of us owning cars but majority relies on other mode of transportations. Thereby, designing a ecomobility city is talking about restoring humanity and life to the city. Try to imagine a 24 feet 2 lanes 100 feet length street can accommodate approximately 14 cars compared to 100 bicycles or more. With same construction cost but higher turn over of people, will the businesses prefer cyclists over the drivers? I presume yes. It is also about fundamental right of the mass as walking and cycling is cheap and affordable.
With the environmental degradation is real and the need for paradigm shift in planning our cities, do we bold enough to have ecomobility as top priority? I presume we have a choice, the political one.
No comments:
Post a Comment