City’s problem isn't congestion; problem is the way we approach to solve the congestion!

Majority of city's problems can be solved by simply restructuring policies, but physical infrastructure is more lucrative an option for many.

You can pump millions of dollars in augmenting and upgrading city infrastructure, of course you should, but city in its functionality will still remain a mess and increasingly convoluted unless you pause and think that what has been wrong with our planning approach, why it is that our planning solutions always seem to lag far behind the pace of growth, is it revenue constraints? No! Is it land constraint? No! It is nothing but common sense deficit. It’s simple, if it doesn’t work go back to the drawing board, put you approach up-side-down or whatever, something different need to be introduced; at least as an experiment.

Our conventional planning approach borrowed from industrial age has remained more or less the same since decades, that is to put it crudely "Planning means addition", more people - let’s make more housing, more congestion - let’s make more flyovers, more heat let’s put more air conditioners and so on.

Buildinganother affordable housing is not a problem but it’s also not the solution. Building another flyover will of course ease the traffic for sometime but it is also not the solution which cities are looking for. The single largest criteria of a livable city can be effortlessness of any city, but effort seems to be the mandate of our city life. 

Have we ever considered why such sheer number of people are heading to metropolis in the first place apart from recreational purposes, it’s not because metropolis provide better employment opportunities, it’s because we simply fail to provide livelihood opportunity in small towns and villages. Can we suggest something to calm down this vary pace of regional population flux, instead of simply focusing on making another housing colony here in every metropolis, can we propose something which will help people earn their livelihood in the place of their choice not only in the place where they often come to struggle and survive.

Have we ever considered before making another flyover that why so many people and car out there on the roads in the first place, is it really necessary in this so called wired era for every single individual to commute to work to accomplish a job, is it that being physically present at a specified location every work weekday is of such monumental importance in a time of century were everyone claim to be virtually connected to everyone and having access to the resources of whole world on their finger tip. Considering this can we suggest something to reduce the very need or frequency of people to come to streets, people who commute to work 5-6 days a week or 24 to 40 hour a week. 

Why people have to waste a substantial portion of their productive lifetime commuting on city roads or tracks, commuting long hours to work mostly doing nothing, may be listening to music or playing video game on their tab, why to commute to work unless they work in a factory like production environment.

You see we are so caught up in the debate of public transport vs. private transit vs. walkability that no one is willing to ask this fundamental question why does every one of you have to commute almost every day for the purpose of work choking almost every street of city, why have we created such system or business environment or society in general. We simply can’t seem to think of any other possibility than expanding infrastructure trying to meet the pressure of self imposed need of commuting for work.

Whether travelling through private or public transport or walking to work, it’s still a waste of precious time, energy and resources. Can you even imaging the lost opportunity cost of millions of people spending several hours commuting to work-home-work almost every day of their productive like. After decades of industrialization is it still so important even today for 200 employees of a random organization to agglomerate everyday at a specific place called office at a specific time to accomplish some work, majority of which can be done from anywhere in the world, majority of which on majority of days does not fundamentally demand physical presence of worker or employee in office. Can’t we instead of simply expanding the city and transport network think of reducing the number and frequency of trip to work? Can’t we think of increasing the share of recreational trip and reducing the work trip instead of aggressively focusing on increasing the share of public transport?

This conventional additive approach of planning is a vicious cycle of inefficiency perceived as virtuous cycle and promoted relentlessly without delving deep into the roots of problem and without pausing and questioning the inertia of planning process. Instead of this additive approach, a supplementary approach of planning is needed for fostering and supporting equitable growth across the region, and at the same time conventional planning wisdom which is dear to many, needto be questioned!

There used to be character and stories associated with every city street in good old time!

Contemporary Déjà vu streets - the price of mechanization, optimization and efficiency. 

Though green, well groomed, with cool informative signage and everything in place, contemporary city streets lack something, possibly lack of identity, lack of character may be! Every street looks the same more or less, you see from streets of your housing society to the neighborhood to city arteries, apart from little exceptions of some filth some beautification. What has gone wrong with the planners, landscape architects and urban designers today. You should first visualize the impactful streets of historic cities and meandering streets of untouched villages and then have a look at today's super functional streets, speed corridors rather, these are impressive indeed with all its robustness, but these are not impactful, at all, not something leaving lasting impression on our mind, not something to be remembered, not something to be praised by our future generations. Functional but industrial. Templates of supposedly best practices. But we forget that best practices lose their significance the moment we start, duplicating, imposing and transposing them. some of the mass public housing are the best example of how best practices can go wrong. 

Is it that there is no incentive left today at all to plan or design a street with character, is it that cities, public administrations and private clients lack fund (a myth) or we are robbed of imagination, is it that there are some big loopholes and ambiguity in the planning and design guidelines giving planners and designers an excuse not to be creative, is it that we have become so much efficiency oriented that we forgot we are not machines, is it that land is so scarce (a myth again) that we cant afford to have luxury of building streets with a memorable character, is it that after reading all those wonderful street characteristics in school we finally resort to the super efficient mechanized street templates, has it something to do with our optimized geometric city grid and complex infrastructure requirements, is it our drafting software to blame which has almost replaced our dear drawing boards, is it that scope of creativity is increasing being confined to the pedestrian and bicycle streets only, is it that urban designers role has been limited to the extent mentioned in their design guide book which either don't exist or is too vague for the cities of developing countries or too standardized for developed country? You see those bizarre public sculptures and momentous in the streets at places, those are nothing but helpless reactions of creative urban souls who are not being able to create a place called street in the way it should be, due to much propagated and regularized contemporary templates of streets. 

Can we dare to show some creativity amidst this long list of incentives and loopholes for "not to be creative". Can we as a planner, urban designers and landscape experts show them our humane side keeping cities monetary limitations (A myth) aside for a while. Can we design a street with an innate quality of "place" where you would often want to spend your time or something which you would like to appreciate while you driving back home?

Why urban infrastructure O&M system needs increased autonomy?

An exemplary case of PPP project - surface transport !

Though there are already provisions which suggests autonomy in O&M contracts to certain extent at present, but apparently there is further need of functional, financial and decision making autonomy in operation and maintenance (O&M)plan including concerned O&M agency, regarding any given infrastructure project, specially were public safety is a concern, an autonomy to the extent beyond conventional scopes of O&M contracts.

Why this thought even worth consideration and review? Because lack of autonomy can restrict O&M agencies to take prompt critical decisions or can encourage them to unnecessarily prolong, manipulate or ignore some of the important decisions and actions demanding urgency and which are vital for health of project and safety of users and which might otherwise get delayed caught in the complexity of paperwork. For instance, an expressway O&M agency can escape from taking responsibility of mishaps and causalities blaming it to faulty road design by the original infrastructure design agency involved, while design agency can shy away from responsibility saying safe operation of system is in scope of O&M agency or may be it is due to bad maintenance, meanwhile life of commuters would be constantly at stake. But with higher level of autonomy O&M agency can take vital decisions and actions on their own like- post functional design modification in case of expressway, infrastructure retrofit, conducting safety audit and associated changes, life safety installations and safety enforcement measures which can prevent those traffic accidents for example. Also autonomy comes with implied accountability, so now the O&M agency while enjoying the autonomy will also feel a sense of responsibility both morally and legally towards minimizing and preventing those expressway mishaps and can be held accountable in case  such events occur and their performance can also be linked to their monetary gain/ penalty provisions, credit rating ranking, pre-mature termination of contract etc. hence creating a scope of active, innovative and higher performance standards in this new O&M environment.  

There has to be increased level of autonomy for O&M agencies to innovate and to take certain fiscal decisions on their own, which might be vital for public safety and absorption of unperceived growth, autonomy of technology integration to leverage technological opportunities which might have been unavailable at the time of conception and design of project, autonomy to conduct required design changes and retrofit based on peculiar first hand regional experiences gained in course of operation. Of course this strengthened decisive power of should come with certain administrative supervision and stakeholder’s say.

This allocation of autonomy seems justifiable because no one else knows the actual functional and fiscal health of said project, regional and local constraints and infrastructure gaps etc. better than those who are operating and maintaining the said project and assets 24X7 and are in constant contact of end users, knowing it better than even those who originally conceived and built the project. Autonomy if constrained or hampered or for namesake, specially at policy and post functional level, scope of O&M assumes a mechanical and procedural significance and restrict itself only to the often under-perceived operational efficiency and safety level just to the rigid, predefined performance standard with little scope for innovation in terms of physical infrastructure modification, procedural and strategic retrofit and scope of maintenance remains only limited to restoring the degraded infrastructure to its somewhat originally perceived state. O&M will have to be much more than the established notion of routine work as prescribed in the O&M manual or as described in present scope of contract. A wholesome O&M process specially in urban and regional infrastructure projects has to be a dynamic process, a learning experience, continually reinventing itself as per dynamic regional growth, absorbing economic changes and technological advancement, streamlined to the long term vision of regional growth. 

Historic City of Varanasi and tourism heat map along the edge of river Ganges.

Image Source: Google Earth & Sightsmap

What planners of urban environment can learn from online environment?

Radical possibilities if they get it right!

The single largest advantage of online environment over urban environment is that online environment is spontaneously morphing and mutating. It’s a spontaneous collaborative environment with user generated content, individually conceived collective community efforts, within a larger set of easy to understand rules with basic governance and minimal intervention. Best part is that it all comes unasked. All you need to do is to create an online platform intuitive and sticky enough to appeal to masses, leaving rest up to user’s creativity. Users are motivated and willing enough to spend their own time and money and whatever it takes to contribute to this global phenomenon, mostly unasked mostly free, they are even willing to pay for it in some cases, be it social or professional networking platform (Sharing/ Facebook/ Twitter/ Linkedin) or cloud environment (Storage/ Backup) or virtual collaborative tools (Building/ Sharing/ Docs), open source programming environment (Building Blocks/ Learning/ Sharing) or just a platform to share their own piece of mind or simply converse (blogs/Forums). Amazingly this ever-thriving virtual environment with apparently intangible inputs even gets translated into tangible outputs. A self-sustainable virtual community environment with little bit of nuisance andchaos which can be managed and currently being managed through series of governing and control instruments! Wonderful!

Let’s talk about urban environment a bit, parallel to online environment. Let’s identify the obvious constraints and major differences. Urban environment is tangible in nature, things like - raw material, physical infrastructure, resource intensive, capital and labor intensive and then there are governance and management issues since resources are limited and stakes are high. Let’s see some common somewhat overlapping traits; both urban and online environment needs basic physical infrastructure in place some of which are common as well (Power, Water, transport VS Telecom infrastructure/ Wi-max/ Wi-Fi etc. with common later part), both environment require serious manpower to build, sustain and grow, they both demand control and security, both need a heterogeneous mix of business models as well and so on. What comes to mind now? What you are thinking right now absolutely makes sense - with so much of similarities while having “people” and “community” at center stage in both cases, why haven’t we explored the mutual learning possibilities and why we haven’t been able to translate the online functional learning experience into building of physical community called “City”.

Can we do it? Think so; at least we can give it a try! By establishing a logical, statistical, mathematical and philosophical co-relation between the two, leaving possibility to weave the city fabric and its functionality further in future! This analogy of physical (urban) and virtual (online) environment presents a model of self-evolving self-sustainable community further translated into urban community where every member of community is contributing to build the “physical environment”, though they are already doing it “Socially” well at present. Can we give a community or region enough flexibility to shape its own environment, customizable up to their personal needs and choices without hampering the public interest, with basic infrastructure built in place to start with, a set of basic rules to play with, some basic building blocks to kick-start, with flexibility to select platform and tools of their choices to build, with a governing, supportive and helping hand, watchful eyes as well as security and rescue mechanism in place, with some kind of layered public, community and personal finance model and so on, all this flexibility within a controlled and transparent environment. Reinforced by supervisory control and incentive instruments! Building with a vision of “sustainable community” and “fairness ofopportunity” at center stage! Fortunately we have analytical tools, informative resources and accumulated experience of mankind today which can help extract and derive and establish useful correlation between the urban and online environment paving a way for better and sustainable future!

The only sustainable retrofit whether it’s a product or city environment

To leave scope for future retrofits in the moment you conceive the idea of product or vision of a city.

Today you realize after 5 or 20 or 30 years that this product or system or infrastructure which you had planned back then with the most sophisticated tools and technology available at that time, with the best brains at disposal and the best hands available, that robust system of past desperately needs a technology overhaul and efficiency retrofit today, just to validate its contemporary relevance and to drag itself for few more miles in the tomorrow, but it would have been quite difficult for you to confront and accept this apparently unpleasant fact that this product, infrastructure, system or even strategy which you claim to be the most advanced and avant-garde today is very soon going to be outdated, very soon indeed!! Acknowledge it or not, that’s how it works, especially when technology, planning and policy is concerned only thing which remains eternal is aesthetics and nostalgia associated with such technology, possibly that’s why many people still prefer analog watch over digital one, that’s totally a personal choice.

Change is not only an integral law of nature but equally a law of technology, inevitable like growth of humanity, because humanity is curious and that’s why innovation and hence need to replace and retrofit old technology. Problem with the contemporary approach of planning and product design is that we tend to conceive and create a system or product which is 100% complete in its form and design “today” leaving no scope for future integration except few exceptions, even knowing that need for retrofit is waiting only at the next turn of system or product life-cycle  You see those overly stuffed embedded products, jam packed conduits, circuits and channels, overcrowded service corridors, saturated underground utility trench, suffocating right of ways (ROW), chaotic narrow streets, thousands of unventilated unlit city rooms and residences, all of this have two things in common, one, is the shear lack of vision and second, ignorance to change. Change which is inevitable, but we are happy and content with what we have planned today, who cares for tomorrow? Meanwhile, you enjoy all the attention and praise because of your new product and system. They might even have bagged few awards for best innovation and work in the field, but it all doesn't really matter if that product or vision fails in next couple of years. The single largest criteria of product or planning judgment and evaluation has to be sustainability, which means your product or system or vision have to have an inbuilt scope for absorption of future technology and efficiency integration for sustainability, to keep up with future pace of life and lifestyle.

Lets talk something about "sustainability" here. The word "sustainability" has been exploited much in recent years  increasingly assuming a very narrow meaning just revolving around "anything green". Lets keep in mind that being or doing green is just a piece of sustainability. Sustainability is much more, it is vastly inclusive a phenomenon, it is about the whole life cycle of product or system or plan. if you make a greenest product on earth which has a life span or tech-viability span or people-acceptance span of one or two year that is not sustainable when compared to a product which is though not so green in its DNA but which has a larger life span or acceptance span of may be half a decade or so or more. All the resources  which has gone into making of that short lived green product goes to vain at the end of its functional or acceptance span but the similar resources  which has been consumed in making that not so green product with a much longer life span seems more sustainable an option.  Using 5 most "greenest" products of same use one after another in just five years is much less sustainable than using 1 single "not so green" product for 5 years.

Now today you realize that environmental laws have become more stringent, people have become more educated, aware and choosy  technology has become more and more complex and sophisticated, every coming tomorrow product or system of yesterday is becoming obsolete, what to do. We can’t really plan for something which has not been invented yet, but we can always try to leave some scope for future integration, for the time when it is invented. It might add to few percent of capital or man hour but it’s worth giving a thought. Acknowledging the need for future retrofit and leaving some scope for it today will make our life easy tomorrow, products more relevant and cities more sustainable.   

For those who are very fond of Urban Axis…

Diluting significance of urban Axis due to land constraint and transit retrofits?? 

At times you see someone being possessive or rather poetic about linearity of city architecture and geometry of urban fabric, being very peculiar about alignment of streets and visual axis, there is fair chance that he or she is an Architect and if you see someone rather sentimental or defensive about all this affair of axis and orientation, there is strong probability that you are interacting with an Urban Designer. Of course laymen also appreciate the beauty of carefully planned urban fabric and thoughtful positioning of landmark structures and public plazas etc. knowingly or unknowingly, they even travel faraway lands to witness the glory and charm of historic cities and as well as modern metropolitan cities and certainly formulas of urban patterns and  axis have great contribution in the making of a wonderful city as proven historically.

Let’s try to understand the quantum shift in the approach of city planning and redevelopment from couple of centuries back till today not to speak of future trend and try to analyze the “still un-deviated” intellectual affection for urban geometry specially axis call it inertia or stubbornness or whatever. All this in the light of mounting pressure of traffic; growing, busy and occupied population, all this in a city which is struggling everyday just to survive functionally that very day while managing the damage and backlog of many yesterdays. In a city which is going on a path very different than what perceived originally because of its changing priorities and unperceived growth, specifically in terms of transit requirements.

When Lutyen Delhi was perceived originally no one would have imagined that this very city is going to grow so much so soon that one day it will need a mass rapid transit system (MRTS) or may be more, like integrated transport system as we call it, no one thought that it will need “flyovers”? subways?? Underground transport!! Are you kidding? Elevated tracks, No way!! PRT?? What is that?? Such would have been the response of architects, Urban Designers and Planners of that time, someone go ask them, if you will, hire a time machine may be? And hence they planned wonderful avenues, boulevards, most importantly urban Axis what started as a core of city. Of course that’s the beauty and heritage of the city one can be proud of, but as city expanded the firmness and geometry of those axis and alignments got diluted, which was due to the race, race of providing accommodation and business to the exponentially growing population but still without recognizing the latent growth potential of the city otherwise they wouldn’t have planned low and medium rise land use in South Delhi and similar spatial positions at the present intermediate ring of city which they can’t really afford to! Now the focus shifted from axis to pockets, loosely arranged urban pockets, based on affordability and all. This diluting axial or otherwise geometry is also due to retrofitting, retrofitting of transit systems and development interventions and traffic management measures, like flyovers, underpass, subways, elevated tract, underground tunnel etc.

We were discussing axis, so let’s stick to the subject for a while. That colonial urban axis emerged from the need to showcase the extravagant luxury and prove their capacity, knowledge, authority and aesthetic or otherwise, while rest of the city fabric which emerged in recent decades was driven by the necessity to handle growth, priorities were different and will be different. The colonial axis was bliss to experience, still it is, while today’s axis in other parts of city is apparently agonizing an experience for many most of the time, waiting in a traffic queue today’s urban axis gives a view of more than mile long array of crawling vehicles bumper to bumper, again and again, everyday. Array of flashy car tail lights in the mirage of heat emerging from vehicles!   You can’t associate this axis with a very pleasant experience. What about aesthetic urban experience of thousands of those commuting in tens of mile underground tunnel or organic and maneuvering elevated MRT network? They don’t really come to witness the extraordinary experience which is historically associated with planned urban fabric.

Feelings attached to traditional values and formulas of what an ideal urban fabric should be have remained same while the needs and urban technologies have moved ahead. People tend to approach and appreciate modern cities and metropolis on the historically benchmarked cities and hence this disappointment. These contemporary cities demand a totally new approach of planning for preserving and nurturing its aesthetic beauty. What we seem to have achieved very convincingly historically, since centuries and beyond seems to be a big challenge today. It’s time to shed the nostalgia and comfort of proven urban design formulas and get back to drawing sheet to create new age aesthetics for new age cities in the light of new transit, growth and lifestyle needs and in the light of emerging and unexpected urban technologies and unexplored land use strategies. Though you can’t really design or plan for some urban technology or strategy which has not been invented or explored yet, but we can always keep some margin and scope today itself for future integration and urban retrofit which seem to be inevitable a phenomenon. Only one thing which is definite here is the growth, so let’s plan for growth. At least let’s try to acknowledge inevitability of growth today itself, for a better urban future, its aesthetics and character.

All said and done, fact remains that there is something really magical about the urban axis and it has repeatedly proven its worth and guess that quantum of our future city planning strategies and spatial arrangement will still revolve around it.          

“This post is dedicated to friend “Poppy” who really enjoy studying and analyzing urban axis across the world and has the habit to relate everything with the Axis phenomenon and seems he is having really good time deliberating about it with friend “Roomy”, only if he gets time free from study, if at all"

Said to be the most photographed in the world…

Golden Gate Bridge

View Larger Map

View Larger Map

When “Traffic Merging Ahead” on every alternate road, clashes are bound to happen

Bad transport infrastructure and poor road designs leading to conflicts on road.

No one wants to get into argument or fight on the fine morning office hour or while on the way back home, really!! Everyone has some plan for the day ahead, and they really can’t afford to waste time here on road arguing for nothing. But what to do with these urban roads that make these people susceptible to conflict and road rage due to design which lack consistency and continuity. It’s ironical that in the same alignment of road where mile long vehicle queue is witnessed also has a part of stretch like super smooth expressway, either right in the middle of metropolis or connecting neighboring cities, districts and states leading to gridlock. It’s like speedy route to gridlock. So 70-90 % of the whole journey stretch you can cover in 20-30% of journey time, spending rest of the journey in gridlocked section travelling in snail’s speed. Journey on that reaming 10-30% stretch becomes more frustrating because you have just witnessed a test of speed on the expressway like road stretch back on the journey.

Things become worse when variety of vehicles start competing for the lanes with suddenly reduced carriageway near bottlenecks at every few hundred meter due to variety of reasons like poor road design, bad road geometry, old narrow bridge, recent construction and maintenance works, frequent vehicle breakdown, faulty or unrealistic traffic signals (it’s unbelievable that there are also around less than 10 seconds of green signal assigned for some stretches at some busy road junctions) etc. at least similar is the case in many developing countries.

This induced conflict is result of lack of cohesiveness and isolated accountability among different agencies and consultations hired at different point of time, for revamping urban transit stretches and systems. In Urban scenarios, Road stretches cannot planned and designed in isolation, hence no question of isolated accountability, like trunk routes cannot be designed in isolation without  considering feeder traffic flow. What is happening here in bottleneck situations is that vehicles are allowed to reach the bottleneck at high speed which encourages quickly accumulated high volume traffic at bottleneck, and then the real struggle begins, people ruthlessly competing for limited lanes!! It’s a painful experience of struggle for daily commuters, not because of slow speed but due to immense psychological pressure and tiresome drive to negotiate that rude, ruthless competing traffic while trying to protect their asset and peace of mind. No wonder it also leads to frequent road rage incidents. Even if bottleneck situation is unavoidable there has to be smooth transition from high speed stretch to the bottleneck point, which can only be done through proper road design, sensible signage and its highly visible locations, commuter education, manual or automatic traffic assistance and guidance, strengthening alternate route, staggered office timing, land use restructuring, etc.

Planner’s Dilemma – A case of developing nation.

Choked Public Drain, Whose fault? 

Repeatedly choked public drains, is it due to under capacity drainage Infrastructure, an unplanned network, inadequately planned disposal system, underestimated growth, unexpected demand, immigration externalities, over exploitation of resources, lack of vision, out dated technology, inefficient management, uneducated population, citizens with low or no sense of public responsibility, lack of willingness, lack of database for timely assessment, no early warning system, underreported occurrence, over hyped issues,  diverted attention, prevalence of corruption, discrete tax structure for usage of public infrastructure, lack of maintenance, insufficient funds, absence of relevant law, loophole in policies, or may be implementation failure?

Drainage/ sewage disposal issue is just an example to illustrate; there are innumerable examples and issues like this in an urban setting whether its inadequate water supply, transport chaos, interrupted and poor power supply etc, and innumerable reason for the each of these issues.  It’s a very common phenomenon in towns and metropolitan cities of developing nations, but what’s the solution.

After some time of tolerance people start losing their patience due to public infrastructure system failure like this, then some hue and cry, some demonstration, followed by media coverage, then suddenly public agencies wake up, some blame game, then some investigation committee, followed by months long survey, then few months of compilation, then some kind of outcome and recommendations, by that time people already start losing their interest in the subject, by that time there are  other hyped issues to deal with, and this show goes on. Somewhere in this cycle of events planner or some planning consultancy firm gets introduced to assess the situation and resolve the issue. Do you wonder how much or how little a planner can help to resolve the situation at least bringing down the scale of chaos.

Do you see how many vulnerable points can be there in the value chain of any system as we saw in the blocked drain example? More the number of elements more the chances of failure of system.  A system with a long operational or value chain can only work efficiently, if all the possible elements of interest work efficiently individually and cohesively together as well. When an urban planner or similar is approached by public/ private agency to resolve such development or redevelopment issues, they expect an out of box magical solution. Planners can of course suggest a wonderful infrastructure solution at some reasonable cost; they can propose some implementation and regulatory strategies as well, but one has to understand that a “multifaceted urban issue” needs an “inclusive solution”. Planners need to be empowered to have a say on any or rather every element which might affect the proper functioning of any urban or regional system, even if it’s an aspect which is tangential to the core system but which can impact the system in future. Planners have to address or at least talk about each and every tangential aspect of any core issue while suggesting a solution blueprint for development redevelopment projects. For example, one might argue how a drainage problem can be related to education of citizen, they can always say while problem like this demands infrastructure solution why to talk about education? Let’s consider this.  No matter how well you plan the infrastructure, if there are uneducated users, infrastructure is not going to work as the way it was perceived and planned. Even simply being educated is not enough, there has to be education with a sense of responsibility, a sense of citizenship.

What a planner can do in this situation for example. A planner has to talk about the relevance of educated citizens in proper functioning of the public infrastructure in its strategy report; he can go to the extent proposing restructuring of school curriculum, so that users become responsible enough toward public infrastructure while they are still in school. suppose If people are educated and responsible as well but still not using public infrastructure as intended there might be flaw in signage design or placement, planners need to talk about that in its development report, they might need to talk about the role of education through technological infusion to masses through different communication channels before they are about to introduce a new technology in public domain along with ways of infusion. Similarly they need to propose some short to long term strategic inputs for all the ancillary aspects revolving around the core public system or infrastructure issue no matter how distinct they appear.

Why such vast gap exists in statistical interpretation of a single fact?

Statistics considers raw data while people tend to value associated sentiments.

If you are going for a primary survey with a standard template of closed ended questionnaires or some kind of table to be filled with numbers you might not be doing real justice to the survey. You might have a reasonable amount of data at end of the day to conclude your assignment or research, but you won’t be able to do the realistic assessment of the situation. You might fulfill the acceptable standards of data gathering; you might even publish the result and can even bag an award or two, but if the very people who got surveyed are not being able to relate to the statistical conclusion, or if they do not validate it, all the efforts of data collection and analysis goes to vain.

You will be surprised to realize that still at many instances the situation shown of paper and the actual situation experienced by the population is drastically different, though data for situation analysis was gathered from the same population or community. Then why this vast gap of interpreted and locally experienced situation exists? Why this constant apparent difference of opinion between government’s point of view and what media and NGO’s showcase about the city, region or community etc. There are few possible reasons, first is that statistics is very flexible domain, though outcome seems very impactful there is enough scope to mould or influence the direction of outcome, still staying within legally of intellectually acceptable limit. The kind of data you select to gather, variety of assumptions you take into consideration, mode and tool of statistical analysis you choose to go with, time span considered for analysis, selection and heterogeneity of sample itself, there are so many such variables that one can interpret and influence the outcome in any possible direction depending on the purpose or intention. Larger the data set, greater the flexibility of interpretation.

Government being a powerful entity with ample manpower and resources has generally upper hand when it comes to data collection and interpretation and usually less probability of misrepresentation, but again it depends on what they want to prove or convey. Media and NGO who generally lack enough data due to manpower constraint to prove a fact applicable to a larger domain generally tend to rely on emotional values attached to the subject or region and sentiments of population or communities to prove their point. They generally choose small set of data though having high perceived or emotional value and exploit the associated sentiments. On one hand there is ample scope of playing with data and on the other hand equally or more or less scope to play with people’s emotions and sentiments but ultimately both leads to distortion of fact. And this show of constant blame and justification goes on and on. Actual fact seems to lose the significance while this argument is on, later no one really bothers to reach to the actual fact.

Unless statistics as a knowledge stream would device a method and make it a mandate to consider or quantify and incorporate the emotional and sentimental values attached to the subject of research and aspirations of communities to the extent possible along with some kind of post analytic appraisal and indigenous validation method, data representation would remain deceptive and at the mercy of decision making individuals or groups. Meanwhile we as a layman can mitigate this doubt of data misrepresentation by keeping a questioning, skeptical or neutral attitude towards impactful data being presented day to day from both government end as well as media and social welfare representative’s end, without being panicked, without arriving at immediate conclusion, cross verifying the fact from different sources, applying our own head and intuition, knowing and reminding them that their job is to inform us not to instigate or incite us. You are capable enough to judge yourself; all you need is a fair amount of fair data and statistics or simply a fair representation.

By : Anoop Jha

Compulsory flexi hour provision for a smooth and sober city transit

City transit infrastructure without institutional control and public policy in not going to work!

Traffic Calming
Strategies 

In a buzzing city of developing countries where people are rushing everyday to reach their regular destinations like offices, institutions etc., desperately trying to reach before cut-off times assigned by the administration of these respective organizations, traffic chaos is bound to happen leading to traffic law violation, travel anxiety, road rage, minor or major accidents etc. By applying a cut off time for reaching work place, institutions etc. people are forced to become ignorant to each other’s convenient and safety while on road, because each one of them has something at stake, their job, their carrier, their salary, marks, etc. People are in hurry because if they won’t reach office or institutions before time they will be considered undisciplined employee, students and so on, they will be bullied and can be subjected to monetary penalty and disciplinary actions. No one wants to go through that pain.

Organizational independence in a city environment is apparently a productive model, but at times leads to chaos. In lack of public stake in private organizations in those policy levels which are likely to affect city functionality, many private institutions tend to have monopolistic and dictatorship approach at their internal policy level, like assigning cutoff time to reach work place leading to city transport problems. City governing institutions have to have some control or say over those functional elements of city wide organizations, primarily for offices and other work places, which directly affect the transit health of a city. Excluding the critical and lifeline works, there has to be a city wide blanket flexible timing system for work places, which provision should be made compulsory for a sober and responsible transit behavior of any city.

Flexible timing strategies might include a reasonable buffer time to reach work place, possibility to occasionally work from home, different office timing for different zones of city, etc. based on rigorous analysis of transit data pattern and land use analysis. Public institutions will have to work hand in hand with private organization, stakeholders and communities for this purpose. Cities and organization also need to increasingly focus their policies towards target oriented work rather than judging work done by the time spent at work place. More the flexibility provided at anchor destinations within city, smoother will be the traffic and this is not possible without the timely and sensible planning intervention at functional level of city wide organizations and transport system.  

By : Anoop Jha