If someone were to tell you that your city will introduce a transport system that will congest roads, will contribute towards worsening air quality, will be responsible for many road traffic-related deaths and will cater to only 3% of the population, what will your reaction be? I am sure you will laugh or get angry or even become speechless, right? You would surely not support this kind of system. Unfortunately, we are not only doing it day in and day out, but are also supporting the car-centric model of development. The result is that we get streets clogged with traffic, clouded with smog, blaring with honking while all we want is that everyone – rich or poor, young or old, men or women – should be able to use the streets to walk, cycle and use public transport without any fear of safety or security.
So where are we going wrong? There are two fundamental mistakes that our cities have continued to make when it comes to planning mobility. Let me do a deep-dive on them:
Cars are the main mode of transport
City engineers continue to think that everyone in our cities moves by car. This is completely wrong! The mobility pattern of a developing country like India is entirely different from that of many high-income countries with high rates of car ownership. The 2011 census, for the first time, captured how Indians travel to work. The data for the non-agricultural workers provided some interesting insights. Walking is the predominant transport mode with about 23% mode share, followed by cycling at 13% and buses at 11%. In comparison, usage of private transport stands at 13% for two-wheelers and at a mere 3% for cars. It is clear that only 3% Indians use cars to travel to work. However, a quick look at our city roads reveals that almost 97% of the road infrastructure is dedicated to these 3% users. Let that sink in: 97% of road infrastructure dedicated for only 3% of people!
More road will remove congestion
Road widening, flyovers, underpass are often perceived as a solution to congestion, even when we have examples galore, of cities remaining congested even after investing huge sums of money on widening roads. This means that something is definitely wrong with this approach. Jean-Baptiste Say had stated long ago that “supply creates its own demand”. This is applicable for transport planning as well. This concept means that as roads are built, there will be more motor vehicles. Say’s law may have been formulated more than a century and half back, yet our city engineers and planners fail to understand this fundamental concept that building more flyovers, underpasses and widening roads will not reduce traffic. In fact, on the contrary, it will only contribute to more traffic.
What cities need is a a diverse transport ecosystem, comprising active mobility like walking and cycling, public transport and shared mobility options. High levels of car ownership involve huge economic and environmental costs to society. These are the costs that high-income countries are now trying to recover by promoting sustainable modes of transport.
Health and disease have often shaped our cities. The current COVID crisis has hit cities hard. However, it has also given an opportunity to innovate because as cities shuffle between lockdowns and recoveries, the question emerges – can cities fundamentally change the way they plan for their transport? Yes, they can – provided they can leapfrog over unsustainable models of car-centric development and invest in more equitable and environment-friendly transport pathways.
Countries like India have a fantastic opportunity because we are still at lower levels of urbanisation. This means that the bulk of urban infrastructure is yet to be built. A good start, therefore, would be to realize that cars are just a mode of transport and not a very efficient mode. This is why, we must push for more active, shared and clean transportation systems.
Also Published in Times of India