The Mayor Who Wowed the World: Bogata's Enrique Pelosa's War on Cars

[Pooka Fey]

The Mayor Who Wowed the World: Bogata's Enrique Pelosa's War on Cars
by Charles Montgomery, The Tyee
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2006/06/23/Mayor/index.html



<snip>
If you think the problems facing the world's exploding cities are insurmountable then you need to spend a few hours on a bike alongside the former mayor of Bogota. That's how I spent Thursday afternoon, and it left me with new hope for the global south, not to mention the bloated 'burbs of Greater Vancouver. Enrique Peñalosa presided over the transition of a city that the world--and many residents--had given up on. Bogota had lost itself in slums, chaos, violence, and traffic. ...

Peñalosa explained the philosophy behind this war--and Bogota's transformation--earlier Thursday during a plenary lecture at the World Urban Forum. He began with a sobering reminder to the mayors of developing world cities: "If you base progress on per capita income, then the developing world will not catch up with rich countries for the next three or four hundred years. The difference between our incomes is growing all the time. So we can't define our progress in terms of income, because that will guarantee our failure. We need to find another measure of success." The measure he came up with was shockingly simple. Happiness. "And what are our needs for happiness?" he asked. "We need to walk, just as birds need to fly. We need to be around other people. We need beauty. We need contact with nature. And most of all, we need not to be excluded. We need to feel some sort of equality."...

The problem in Bogota was that most people didn't have access to the public space that is supposed to make such happy things happen. The wealthy had turned city sidewalks into parking lots for cars. Public parks had been fenced off, essentially privatized by neighbours. And for years, the government had been blowing its budgets on highways and road improvements, with the encouragement of Japan's international development agency, which was apparently in the business of creating new markets for Japan's carmakers. So while the wealthy in Bogota could spend their weekends in country clubs or private gardens, the poor had little but jammed streets and televisions to occupy their leisure time. Peñalosa resolved to establish a balance.

Peñalosa's official War on Cars began when he ordered the sidewalks cleared of cars. That triggered a movement to impeach him--unsuccessful, since it was in fact illegal for people to park on the sidewalks. He then launched a system which banned 40 percent of vehicles from the roads during rush hour. Peñalosa convinced his city council to raise the tax on gasoline, and used half the revenues to fund a rapid bus system that now serves more than 500,000 citizens. After Bogota's first wildly popular "Car-Free Day" in 2000, residents voted in a referendum to make the event an annual affair. Most powerfully, the city was transformed from a place of hopelessness to one of civic pride.
<snip>

[Redstone]

1. Good for him. I'll bet the city is a better place for it.

Redstone

[NNadir]

2. That is one damn fine mayor. I love the bicycle.

The bicycle can be, with a little help, an important transportation device. It's clean, efficient and good for you.

One of the great losses to the world was when the Chinese began to abandon their bicycle culture for the American car culture rather than have it the other way around.

[Pooka Fey]

5. I liked this idea from the original article quite a bit:

"I observed the first rule of Colombian cycling: never break a sweat."

My number 1 excuse for not riding my bike the 3 miles to work was that I would be too sweaty by the time I got there, and there's no shower. The above quote was like a light bulb going on: OHHHHHH...you mean I don't need to ride to work in the same manner that I rode when I used to race mountain bikes?! (many moons ago).

"The second rule: establish a critical mass of riders, and you don't really need to pay attention to traffic lights."

Not quite sure how this would play here with all the aggressive drivers and the high SUV saturation, but I like the idea of safety in numbers. That's my number 1 reason why I avoided riding my bike to work; the high likelihood that I would die en route.

[NNadir]

8. I used to use my bicycle exclusively for transportation in LA.

This was back in the 1970's. The danger of being hit by cars was definitely the worst part of it.

Being sweaty was the second worse part of it. I wore deodorant, and washed up as best I could in sinks.

I did have several accidents, but the worst were my own fault and didn't involve cars. The one that did involve a car left me in a coma for three days.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I've often wondered about "Standard of Living" indexes, which are

likely skewed to corporate, industrial and capitalist standards and luxuries, all about products and NOT about happiness and contentment. If people can buy expensive cars, or new cars, if they can buy new clothes on a whim, if they have the latest appliances and access to corporate-controlled entertainment (movies, rock concerts, shopping malls), and can stuff themselves with more food than they need, and can afford expensive medical specialists, and expensive vacations to luxury resorts, etc., etc., and live amidst a developed infrastructure (running water, and lots of it for spa tubs and long showers) reliable electricity that rarely fails, big supermarkets, superhighways to drive their fancy cars on, and all that the well-off expect from major cities, they are probably considered to have a high standard of living. But are they happy? Couldn't a peasant in Andes, who has adequate land to grow food, and a close, loving family and community, and a rich spiritual tradition, and beautiful natural surroundings, but perhaps does NOT have piped water into his dwelling or electricity, or a telephone, be much happier than the rich folk in their urban luxury? How is contentment factored into "standard of living"? I really don't know. But I'll bet it isn't factored in at all.

I know that rich children can be utterly miserable amidst luxury. Their lives are overregulated and enervated, and they actually suffer from abundance--too many toys and gadgets, too much designer clothing, whatever they "want," too much fuss made over them, too much jealousy and competition, too much pressure from parents. They may never get to "run free" --to feel their own independence in an environment--or to just be wildly creative, the way children naturally are. And they may not feel loved at all.

I think ITEM #1 in happiness is closeness to nature: trees, flowers, grass, dirt, free flowing water. Penalosa sure has the right idea. Well, maybe that #1 has to be premised on adequate--but not at all necessarily luxury--food, shelter and clothing--and positive human contact. And #2 would be meaningful work, paid or not paid (as long as there was adequate income for basic necessities). With these things, you could lead a good, happy life. Medical care (if you need it), help in emergencies, intellectual development, dignity and the sense that you belong to a just society--or at least have a good community around you--would also come into it. Being free of cars, I think, would be a very great benefit to people in urban areas. This would enhance your natural surroundings, and your ability to enjoy them, and promotes community, as well as personal health. How many of these things would even come into a "standard of living" index, or would be adequately valued?

[Pooka Fey]

4. Yes! There is an exploration of this also found on EnergyBulletin

If you're happy and you know it -- think again
by UNNATI GANDHI
Globe and Mail Update
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060629.whappiness0629/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home

<snip>
Princeton University researchers have found that the link between a higher income and an elevated sense of well-being is greatly exaggerated and mostly an illusion. In fact, economist Alan Krueger and psychologist and Nobel laureate in economics Daniel Kahneman have found, using a newly developed analytical technique, that people with above-average incomes do not necessarily spend more time doing things they enjoy....

Until now, most surveys on happiness asked how people felt about their overall well-being. The answers were almost always “vast exaggerations.” What the Princeton researchers and their colleagues found using the “Day Reconstruction Method” was that when it came to how people experienced the moment-to-moment experiences in their daily lives, income was hardly a factor. Their method creates an “enjoyment scale” requiring people to record the previous day's activities in a short diary form and describe the feelings they attributed to them.

“People, regardless of their income, are happier when they're socializing than when they're doing work around the house. They're happier when they're doing active leisure-type activities than when they're watching TV.” What Prof. Krueger found surprising was that those with higher incomes tended to devote more of their free time to tasks involving tension and stress - such as work, shopping, childcare and exercise. In the article to be published in today's issue of the journal Science, the authors write that if people continue to think a higher income will make them happier, it may lead to “a misallocation of time,” with people going to such lengths as accepting longer commutes (among the worst moments of the day, Prof. Krueger notes) for higher-paying jobs and sacrificing time spent socializing with friends (among the best moments of the day).
<snip>

(emphasis mine)

[NJCher]

6. standard of living

I loved this article!! And isn't it mindboggling how the U.S. is being so left behind in the energy revolution? When I saw Al Gore's graphics on that in An Inconvenient Truth, I felt so bad that I was in a country where it's NOT HAPPENING! One day the idiots in this country are going to wake up and realize the primitive state in which they live.

PeacePatriot, that was such a thought provoking and interesting post. I do so love a PeacePatriot post and look for them throughout my travels on DU. It always boggles my mind that people cannot seem to break out of the standard "American dream" model that is being sold to them as a measure of success. Even posters here fail to do it. Just the other day, a poster commented on how Rush Limbaugh was such a success. How can anyone who has been through what, four (?) failed marriages or relationships and who needs drugs to get through the day be deemed a success? My guess is this poster was looking only at the Pillsbury Pillboy's notoriety and his wealth.




Cher

[NJCher]

7. re "breaking a sweat"

Let's not forget the many other versions of the bicycle! I would love to ride a bike more myself but in the suburbs of NJ as they stand now, it would truly be risking one's life.

But if there were bike lanes made available, I and many others would use them. A recumbent bike, in particular, would suit me.

See the Wikipedia article "bicycle" for many different types of bicycles.




Cher