A proposal for regulatory principle for the cities transportation planning
There are many ways to tackle the problems of traffic congestion - here is a one that should be viewed as a win-win for everybody.
Without giving much introduction, let us say it loud first:
If there is a need to ban certain kind(s) of vehicle in the street, the first ones that should be made off limit are motorized private vehicles. The next group that should be in line for banning (if necessary) are all motorized vehicle. The next group that should be in line for banning (if necessary) are all vehicles - meaning that there should be some roads in the city where you can only walk - or ride bicycle.
Philosophy behind this proposal is very simple. Maximize the return from per square feet of the roads.
Many would like to focus on the fact that the principle sounds poor friendly, or unfriendly to rich (both of which seems to be simultaneously true), but the intention is not be unfriendly to some class or group. The incentive or logic behind this proposal is pure economics - society will get most return out of this policy. Don't agree? I would not blame you if you do not agree. So, let us analyze the issues:
1. Return
2. Job
3 Health
4. Social Interaction
5. Rationalize the rules
Economic return is very clear if you consider the per square feet usage of road in a very environmentally friendly way. Rickshaws don't pollute. Moreover, its public transport. So, the return is much higher.
From job creation perspective, it might seem logical that if every transport were private, then there will be more jobs. For example, instead of rickshaws, if everybody had a private car, each of those car would have a driver. But no, it does not work like that. When everybody does have a car, then everybody drives their own car. Hiring a driver for private car is a luxury which can be afforded only in a low income country. So, given the present circumstances, allowing more rickshaws to ply in a efficient way seems to be helpful for the labour market. However, the salary structure has to be fixed for rickshaws. I would like to have a rule like this "For every kilometre of roads, one pays the price 250 grams of rice - no matter what the price of rice is." The number 250 grams have been chosen somewhat arbitrarily. If we agree on this principle, actual amount can be decided with expert opinion that would both be sustainable and skewed towards greater economic benefit for the society.
With pushing the rickshaw pullers towards a bit in the direction of upper economic ladder, we would help those millions labours. Also, the proposed regulation will force many in the upper echelon to walk more (from the parking lot to office, to market, to parks, etc). There has to be increased infrastructural investment in walking space and bicycle tracks. Overall, this would push the health benchmark of the society upwards.
Social interaction - hopefully the proposed regulation will be helpful to bring the citizens out of their private zones and start talking to each other more often. More talk in public transports (both in mechanized and non-mechanized), more talk in walking tracks, more talk in parking lots and more talks in walk-only roads. This also has a apparent negative side, too. It might be adversely hampered by the negative law and order situation. But that is only if you assume the current status quo. If all these things proposed in this article happens, a parallel improvement of the law and order situation is only a pre-condition that is destined to happen. Together, both these would couple the social system in a way - it would be hard to degenerate again.
Lastly, but not the least, there is an immense need to rationalize the social norms that exists today. It is not sustainable that there will be kids in the road who will be selling things to other kids who are going to schools in a AC car to be taught by teachers who are paid more than the country's president or the prime minister. It is just absurd! It has to change. It is our choice whether we will change it in planned way or whether we should allow the law of the nature to take place result of which will be undoubtedly harsh for those of us who in the upper echelon of the society.
If you thought some of the ideas are worth of your reading time, please forward it to others. If you have an ear to the columnists in regular traditional media, please forward it to them. If you have an ear to the journalists and news editors of the electronic media, discuss it with them. Hope they would look at the suggestions and give due diligence.
Shuvo Nobo Borsho To All.
Innovation Line
Note: This is a freelance column, published mainly in different internet based forums. This column is open for contribution by the members of new generation, sometimes referred to as Gen 71. If you identify yourself as someone from that age-group and want to contribute to this column, please feel free to contact. Thanks to the group moderator for publishing the article.
Dear readers, also, if you thought the article was important enough so it should come under attention of the head of the government please forward the message to them. Email address for the Chief Advisor: feeedback@pmo.gov.bd_ or at http://www.cao.gov.bd/feedback
==============================================================
__._,_.___
Our Groups Alternative address:
http://bdnokia.com
To Access Our File Archive Center on the web, go to:
http://groups.google.com/group/nokia_club/
Our Wap Address is:
http://wap.BDNokia.Com
Visit Our Wap Portal's Sponsors Site:
http://www.DeshiHost.Com
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
