Here we are, it’s 2019, but how did all this look a dozen years ago? In this broad-based overview article published in 2006, Professor Lee Chapman of the School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Science at University of Birmingham, reviews the impact of various modes of transport with respect to climate change inducing greenhouse gas emissions and discusses ways in which society can adapt to reduce the impacts. Let’s take a look and see what has changed, what has been done, and what has been learned..
This paper reviews the impact of various modes of transport with respect to climate change inducing greenhouse gas emissions and discusses ways in which society can adapt to reduce the impacts.
Credit: Simphewe Nkwali (Eco-Mobiliy Johannesburg
* * * COLLABORATIVE THINKING EXERCISE (DRAFT 1) * * *
– Government of the people, by the people, for the people
Please have a look and, if interested, may we have your thoughts about these and other impact areas that in your view need to be taken into consideration in order to have a full and shared understanding of these impacts of the proposed and latest SDS Penang Transport Master Plan.
We need to be clear about this. The objective here is not to criticize or belittle the State’s efforts at improving the short-comings and potential of today’s transportation arrangements in Penang. Rather the goal is to provide open citizen feedback to their proposals to all levels of government, civil society and the public at large. As President Abraham Lincoln put it at a hard moment for history in America: “Government of the people, by the people, for the people”. Your responses are welcome here or to email@example.com. Thank you.
ON A SCALE OF 0-10: please show us your views concerning how the proposals, measures and their potential set out in the SDS PTMP do in the following legitimate areas of citizen interest and concern. Some of these are quite specialized as you will see as your work your way down the list, but don’t let that bother you. Just share your views with the items that strike your attention. With a careful eye to both long and short term impacts (say in the coming three years, 2018-2020).
* * * For latest version of SDS MP : http://pgmasterplan.penang.gov.my — See below the listing of the principal infrastructure projects proposed by the plan.
Reinventing mobility in the era of disruption and creativity
Arthur D. Little has just released the third edition of its Future of Mobility study, including an updated version of its Urban Mobility Index, which ranks 100 global cities based on the maturity, innovativeness and performance of their urban mobility systems. The study, “The Future of Mobility 3.0 Reinventing mobility in the era of disruption and creativity”, was launched at the UITP Asia-Pacific Assembly in Taipei.
Arthur D. Little highlights what is holding cities back, and, together with its partner the UITP – the International Association of Public Transport – identifies three strategic directions for cities to better shape the future of urban mobility. The study also describes 25 imperatives to consider when defining sustainable urban mobility policies and case studies of cities demonstrating good practice.
This report is a good read and test ground for your own ideas. A copy of the study can be downloaded from https://bit.ly/2qrDDH4 . Now let’s see if we can get you started.
The mobility/growth paradigm (or the mobility complex)
– By John Whitelegg, extract from his book MOBILITY. A New Urban Design and Transport Planning Philosophy for a Sustainable Future, Chapters 2 and 3. For more on the New Mobility Master Class program click here – https://goo.gl/BB2pPE
Mobility is most commonly measured, if at all, as total distance travelled per annum per capita in kilometres and/or total distance travelled per day per capita. There are other important dimensions e.g. number of trips made per day or number of destinations that can be accessed by different modes of transport in a defined unit of time but these are not generally measured in a systematic way or included in data sets. Usually mobility is not defined. It has become a rather vague concept associated with quality of life or progress and it is invoked as a “good thing” and something that should be increased. This is very clear in most national transport policies and at the European level where major transport policies and funding mechanisms are increasingly framed.
A recent EU research and development document (European Commission 2013a) begins with the main heading “Mobility for growth.” It does not define mobility. The document is an undiluted manifesto accepting and promoting the growth of mobility and advocating the importance of this growth for the success of wider economic policy objectives, asserting the unquestioned importance of endless economic growth and ignoring the voluminous literature on the impossibility of endless economic growth and of ecological and resource limits to growth (Douthwaite, 1992, Schneidewind, 2014).
Some very interesting things and lively discussions going on in Malta when it comes to their transport master plan for 2025 that we all might learn from. Here is a first set of references to open up the topic: