Power to the pedestrian

The rich and powerful continue to enjoy special privileges and wield influence completely disproportionate to their numbers. They also appropriate a far bigger share of public expenditure than is justified.

POWER to the people, is a slogan now rarely heard. To many, all it means is electrification of homes! Yet, these four words have the force of history behind them. They connote a philosophy, a system of governance, which has swept across the globe, laying low many a king, feudal lord and dictator. Not all autocrats and despots have disappeared yet, but the idea of people’s power has certainly shaken them. 

Democracy is a necessary means of empowering people; however, to the extent it is restricted to voting, it is far from sufficient. Electoral democracy has many limitations — even drawbacks — especially when it degenerates into majoritarianism or unregulated licence. Oppression of the few by the many is, unfortunately, not an unknown by-product of democracy. Ironically, the reverse — small organised groups of hoodlums holding the majority to ransom (as in many bandhs and strikes) — is also facilitated by “democratic freedom” and encouraged by vote-bank politics. If empowerment of every individual is the goal, it is necessary to go beyond mere elections and ensure: participatory democracy; tolerance and encouragement of diversity in life-style and thought; decentralisation of political and economic power; and equitable access to information, communication and education. 

Decentralisation — through the creation of a third level of formal governance by constitutional amendments empowering panchayats and urban local bodies —and the Right to Information Act have, together, given a huge boost to grass-roots democracy and accountability. Potentially, these are revolutionary steps in truly transferring power to the people. Yet, the actual realisation of this is stymied by many obstacles and sometimes contradicted by other measures. The rich and powerful continue to enjoy special privileges and wield influence completely disproportionate to their numbers; they also appropriate a far bigger share of public expenditure than is justified. The plight of the pedestrian is a good metaphor for this. 

Political netas and corporate leaders are hardly ever seen walking in the streets of our cities (though a few do run on them during marathons). Therefore, pedestrians — mostly the ubiquitous but indefinable “common man” — get short shrift. Over the last few years, the motor car has been getting ever greater precedence over the pedestrian and the cyclist. Footpaths have been shrinking in a flurry of road-widening projects, and even existing cycle-lanes have disappeared. An attempt in Delhi to give precedence to cycles and buses through dedicated lanes (as part of a bus rapid transit system) has met tremendous resistance from motorists. Fortunately, following its success in Delhi, a “metro” (train) system is now being put in place in major cities. However, one is not sure if this is a genuine recognition of the dire need to create mass public transportation systems, or is merely the flavour of the day. 

The doubt about decision-makers’ serious commitment to efficient public mobility arises from the contrast between the hundreds of crores being spent on flyovers and road-expansion in cities, and the distinct miserliness and lethargy with regard to procurement of buses and facilities for pedestrians. The priority for cars at the cost of pedestrians is evidenced by the “free left turn” at traffic signals. While this facilitates the movement of vehicular traffic, the resulting continuous flow means that a pedestrian wanting to cross the road must either be capable of out-running Usain Bolt, or be a great believer in re-incarnation! Pedestrian over-bridges and skywalks would be solutions but these, unlike the proliferation of fly-overs, are a rarity. Escalators and lifts to help the aged or differently-abled to use overbridges — where they exist — are, of course, unaffordable, unlike fly-overs! Pedestrian subways are but few; in Delhi, the aspiring world-class city, they are so filthy and unsafe that no one uses them. This, but naturally, does not bother decision-makers. 

IN CONTRAST,in many cities around the world, the pedestrian is getting increasing importance — and space. In London — a second home to many of India’s rich and powerful — the width of the foot-paths on Oxford Street, for example, is probably double that of the road. Despite the very heavy traffic and constant congestion, no one even thinks of widening the road at the cost of the foot-path. In many other cities, particularly in Europe, large areas are “pedestrian-only” zones. The result, despite adverse weather for many months in the year, is far more walkers. Most people there walk to and from the nearest station or busstop. In contrast, our shrinking, uneven and often non-existent footpaths discourage walking. Those who do walk are often left with no option but to use the road — disrupting traffic and risking injury. Little wonder that Indians prefer to use a car even for short distances. On the other hand, London and Singapore, amongst other cities, levy steep congestion charges on cars entering designated parts of the city, thereby discouraging use of private transport while reducing pollution and traffic density. 

In most countries, public authorities and vehicle drivers respect pedestrian rights, giving walkers the right-of-way in many situations. In India, cars run on fuel power, but also on feudal power: they assume almost divine right-of-way everywhere. Government’s actions — through its investment policy, priorities and its disdain for pedestrians — reinforce this sense of superiority. Even in Mumbai, a city in which the offspring of the upper-classes too used to travel to school or college by bus or the “local” (train), the change is perceptible; driven, doubtless, by the neglect and decay of a public transport system trying hard to retain its legendary efficiency. 

To make “power to the people” beyond mere cliché, what better way than by empowering pedestrians? Here is an opportunity for the central and state governments to work closely with the third tier, the urban body, and initiate a major exercise in pedestrianisation; to put this in the same class, and with similar priority and resources, as building fly-overs or modernising airport terminals. Industry and civil society must play a major role in shaping this new societal architecture and life-style, one that is environment-friendly and empowering.

Related posts

  1. The Fallacy of Power The Satyam fiasco almost sent the stock market tumbling with...
  2. The Power of the Intangibles!!!! Only if we could align these intangibles strategically with the...
  3. The Power of “Spiritual Capitalism” Two successful social entrepreneurs demonstrate the impact of applying tech...
  4. How organisations can harness the power of Web 2.0 (NASSCOM Friday’s 2.0 – 33rd session) | View | Upload your own As part of...
  5. The Power of Being Online – Voice of the Customer Among various benefits internet offers to its users, “Voice of...



About the Author

If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Comments

Congratulations Kiran on a very well written article. You have articulated the needs of pedestrians so well. Our planners have to understand that it is a question of mobility for short distances, but our urban design, even the mass transport system is geared towards longer travel. They seem to think all roads are for travelling from point to point and the people living by the sides have no right to use them. Bulk of the movement even in large cities is for a short distance. Metro may be a solution to move people from one end to another or from the centre to the suburbs, so are cars. It forces a lifestyle change. All our urban design solutions are from mostly US consultants or from people who have worked under them or studied there. It may be worth while to copy the europeans. Now that our educated middle class is waking up, we should demand planning on a local basis and not one solution fits all.

Dear Umesh,
Thank you for your comment on my article, which was also posted on the Emerge blog. I don’t think it is an either/or issue between public transport and pedestrians. We certainly do need fast, efficient mass public transport systems, as I have mentioned in my article. My grouse is more about the over-emphasis on cars as a means of transportation, and the heavy investments being made on this as opposed to those for pedestrians and public transport.
Part of the problem does emanate, as you have pointed out, from faulty urban planning. We are yet caught up in the smoke-stack/factory age, when a separation of housing and work-space was desirable. This led to “dormitory suburbs”, particularly in the US, where the better-off lived. These concepts are rapidly changing, and walk-to-work should now be our goal. With industries like IT, and other service industries, becoming larger, this is both feasible and desirable. However, this needs a paradigm change in our planning – and thinking…..
With regards,
Kiran Karnik

Hi
My name is Vinit Nikumbh . I am an architect and currently engaged in pedestrian stuides in the city of Mumbai. I am working on a fellowship proposal for the helping pedestrians in Mumbai. I completely agree with you Kiran and Umesh . The apathy of the planners towards the pedestrian is a political, social and urban design issue. It has layers of meaning to it. But the truth remains that as far as 12 lakh people are killed in India every year by road accidents. I live and work in the city of Mumbai, here to the pedestrian has to constantly dodge cars and hawkers etc to make his way. I have been studying this topic over some time now. As a part of the fellowship program me I plan to study the problems of the pedestrians in detail, document it. And create a pedestrian smart code. This can be used to evaluate public infrastructure projects or existing areas for the degree of pedestrian friendliness.

Leave a comment

(required)

(required)