Content

2008 25 2008504500 24 230CNN 2009350 20105 18 6 30 (Share/Transport) 2010

Building Kaohsiung into a Green City

Kaohsiung City has been the most important city of heavy industries in Taiwan. In recent years, we have been actively advocating city re-development and the core concept of this movement is a "green ecology. Through tremendous efforts, the city's green environment has been gradually formed and because of this change, Kaohsiung City has been rated as the best in Taiwan for environmental competitiveness in the past two years; in particular, transformation in the city's transportation system has become the key to Kaohsiung's development into a green city. Over the past few years, Kaohsiung City has put tremendous efforts into the development of green transportation. In 2008, the Red and Orange lines of the Kaohsiung MRT system were launched into full operation, along with the 25 KMRT shuttle bus lines. In addition, the first public bicycle rental system was launched at the end of 2008. A total of 50 rental stations were set up to provide 4,500 bicycles. The bicycles are available to the public 24 hours a day, every day and the rental stations enable remote bicycle return service. To date, we have completed 230km of bicycle lanes, which makes Kaohsiung one of the top five cities in Asia most suited for bicycle riding, as rated by CNN. In 2009, Kaohsiung City replaced 350 old buses with low chassis and low-pollution buses to improve the quality of Kaohsiung City's bus service. In 2010, five of Asia's largest solar boats were launched on Love River, creating a tourism activity that produces zero pollution. Also, the "Kaohsiung Ecology Corridor" links the major cultural and natural sites, such as the Jhonggang Wetland, Banping Lake Wet land, Jhuoying Wetland, Neiweipi Kaohsiung Museum of Fine Arts Wetland Park and Jhongdu Wetland Park, into a network. At the end of the year 2010, the merging of Kaohsiung County and City will increase the land area of Kaohsiung City by 18times Therefore, to improve inter-district transportation, a transfer-based system will be developed to break the space barriers in the Greater Kaohsiung Area. For this system, we have planned a system of "Six regional transit centers,", which areas composed of "two major and four subsidiary" transit stations, linking the KMRT and shuttle bus terminals in Kaohsiung into a 30-minute access metropolitan circle. In pursuit of sustainable development, we will continue to promote the use of clean energy transportation, which will include expansion of the public bicycle system, promotion of electrical motorcycles and cars and the development of the light rail system. With vehicles that use clean energy, we will effectively achieve the goal of energy savings and carbon emission reduction, and with the idea of Share/Transport and promote of private transportation sharing, double the effect above mentioned . The First (2010) World Share/Transport Forum in Kaohsiung City makes Kaohsiung the initiating city of experience sharing on the subject of green transportation. Through experience sharing and discussions with internationally renowned experts and scholars, we will definitely learn to promote the "shared transport" mode and develop Kaohsiung into a model green city. I am looking forward to sharing the charm of the harbor and river of Kaohsiung City and the warm hospitality of Kaohsiung residents with our distinguished guests and scholars from around the world. I wish the conference great success and hope everyone has a fantastic and pleasant trip to Kaohsiung.

Chu Chen

Mayor Kaohsiung City Government

 Summary

2010
/ /

Eric Britton

2010 World Share Transport Forum at Kaohsiung

Transport sharing is an important if almost invisible worldwide trend, one that is already starting to reshape at least parts of some of our cities. It is a movement at the leading edge of our most successful (and wealthiest and livable) cities, but one which as yet is poorly understood. Energy saving and emission reduction has been a national policy of the Republic of China in Taiwan while vision of transport sharing and its action plans will help of achieving the goal of sustainability. The World Share/Transport Forum in Kaohsiung - the first of its kind is bringing together leading thinkers and share/transport practitioners and authorities from across Taiwan, Asia and the world, to examine the concept of shared transport (as opposed to individual ownership) from a multi-disciplinary perspective, with a strong international and Chinesespeaking contingent. The concept of shared transport is at once old and new, formal and informal, and one that is growing very fast. Something important is clearly going on, and the Kaohsiung event look at this carefully, in the hope of providing a broader strategic base for advancing not just the individual shared modes, but the sustainable transport agenda more broadly. The conference will delve into leading edge trends and accomplishments of specific shared transport modes and their applications in a series of workshop sessions, covering various forms of carsharing, ridesharing, bikesharing, taxisharing, street sharing and shared employer transport systems. Attention will be paid to the potential for important ICT applications for Share/Transport. Leading international experts are coming to Kaohsiung to contribute to the conference, from public agencies, universities, research teams, public service groups and operators from China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Singapore, the UK and the USA. A young Scholars/Future Leaders Program, of Jason Chang Fellows is running as a parallel event, we expect these brilliant young minds to contribute greatly to this event. Co-chair

Dr. Eric Britton

Founder of World Car Free Day Activity

Dr. S.K. Jason Chang,

Professor of National Taiwan UniversityExecutive Director

Program

Program

10

11

Program

12

13

Program

14

15

Program

16

17

Moderator / Speaker

Organizers
/
72010

Chu Chen. Mayor of Kaohsiung. Kaohsiung, Taiwan

Ms. Chen is the first elected female mayor of Kaohsiung. In order to develop Kaohsiung City as a livable and sustainable city, Mayor Chen has adopted the policy of linking mainline and shuttle buses for the Kaohsiung MRT and the High Speed Rail, purchasing new buses and weeding out old ones, adjusting bus routes, and establishing a public bicycle traffic network. She has been a strong supporter of the city's widely acclaimed annual Car Free Day celebration. In July of this year, Mayor Chen was awarded the first ranking in Taiwan's 2010 Chief Executive Satisfaction Survey.

Eric Britton / 2002

Managing Director of EcoPlan International, an independent advisory group in Paris specializing in providing counsel for government and business on policy and decision issues involving social-technical innovation and sustainable development, Eric Britton is serving Kaohsiung 2010 as Program Chairman, with responsibility for content development and international outreach and coordination.

/
2007 20 Dr. Wang is Director General of Kaohsiung Transportation Bureau since 2007, leading operational reform policies to improve the utilization rate of Kaohsiung public transit, and reduce the growth of private transport and greenhouse gas emissions, the most important environmental and traffic issues in Kaohsiung. Kent has more than 20 years of experience in transportation field, specializing in traffic engineering & control, intelligent transportation system, public transit management, and is also a registered traffic engineer in Taiwan.

/
1994 20064 BBMW(Bike+Bus+Metro+Walk) Jason S. K. Chang. Professor ,Civil Engineering in National Taiwan University Dr.Chang has served as Executive Director of Transportation Institute in Taiwan. Advisor to the Mayor and Taipei City Government since 1994. In April 2006, he created a program to train representatives from more than 80 cities for the first Car Free Day activities in China. He is now hard at work on and widely sharing his green transport theory of BBMW (Bike + Bus + Metro + Walk) in many cities across Asia.

18

 Guest
Speaker,Moderator,Expert Panel
/
Chang, Kuei-Lin (Taiwan), Director General, Department ofUrban and Housing Development, Council for Economic Planning & Development, Executive Yuan Master of Urban & Regional Planning, University of Pennsylvania, USA.Master of Transportation Engineering, Asian Institute of Technology Thailand. Specialty: National Spatial Planning, Urban Planning

Eric Britton / 2002

Managing Director of EcoPlan International, an independent advisory group in Paris specializing in providing counsel for government and business on policy and decision issues involving social-technical innovation and sustainable development, Eric Britton is serving Kaohsiung 2010 as Program Chairman, with responsibility for content development and international outreach and coordination.

/
1994 20064 BBMW(Bike+Bus+Metro+Walk) Jason S. K. Chang. Professor ,Civil Engineering in National Taiwan University Dr.Chang has served as Executive Director of Transportation Institute in Taiwan. Advisor to the Mayor and Taipei City Government since 1994. In April 2006, he created a program to train representatives from more than 80 cities for the first Car Free Day activities in China. He is now hard at work on and widely sharing his green transport theory of BBMW (Bike + Bus + Metro + Walk) in many cities across Asia.

Lewis Chen INVERS Asia /

Lewis Chen, General Manager,INVERS Asia, Singapore Lewis Chen is helping interested parties in Asian cities to setup and introduce car-sharing service to their community. He is now working on carsharing projects in China, Taiwan, Korea and Japan.

Michael Glotz-Richter /

Michael Glotz-Richter, Senior manager,Sustainable Mobility, Germany Michael Glotz-Richter responsible for the involvement in International pilot projects on sustainable transport and environmentally friendly mobility.

19

 Guest
Ali Clabburn <> /
2009304 Ali Clabburn ,Founder Managing Director, liftshare,UK He set up liftshare.com - a clever website which helps people find others travelling the same way as them so they can share their journey.

Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad Chulalongkorn /

Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad. Chulalongkorn University. Thailand He received his Doctoral Degree in Civil Engineering, majoring in Transportation Engineering, from the University of California at Berkeley, USA. He also assists several Thai authorities by conducting research projects regarding traffic safety and traffic mitigations involving ridesharing programs

Paul Minett /

Paul Minett Raspberry Paul Minett Co-Founder and CEO,Trip Convergence Ltd, New Zeeland Arguing that for more carpooling we need meeting places rather than databases, Mr. Minett has been making steady progress towards testing of this alternative mode. A recent report by the UC Davis Energy Efficiency Center estimated the energy saving potential and explored barriers to implementation. He is currently carrying out a feasibility study of flexible carpooling to transit stations in Seattle WA. The system of express carpooling will be launched under the brand name Raspberry Rideshare, and the service will be called the Raspberry Express.

/
Rory McMullan, Global South Mobility Management Consultant, UK Rory provides training and advice to professionals working in the workplace travel plan and travel behavior change fields. Rory is assisting Kaohsiung conference as Project Administrator, as well as leading the working group on Travel behavior/ Employer Shared Transport (EST) and the key contact for the Young Researchers program.

Takayuki Morikawa /

Morikawa His fields of international expertise covers transportation systems analysis, travel behavior analysis, and environmentally sustainable transport. He also planned the Car Day Free in Nagoya.

20

 /
Dr. Hsin-Wen Chang, Associate Professor in College of Tourism, Chung-Hua University, Taiwan Chang has been engaged for many years in researching tourism development and especially in bicycles as a mean of transportation and tourism. She established the first Smart Public Bike System (PBS) in university campus in Taiwan.

Dorothy Chan / 2007

She was appointed by the Hong Kong Government as a Member of the Advisory Council on Environment in 2007. The Council is to keep under review the state of the environment in Hong Kong; and advise the Government.

Bradley Schroeder ITDP /

10Schroeder Bradley Schroeder, Project manager, ITDP China Mr. Schroeder has 10 years experience in the bicycle industry with the last 2 years focused specifically on bicycle sharing. He implemented a public bike sharing program in Guangzhou, China.

Paul Barter /

Paul Barter, Assistant Professor, LKY School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore,Singapore His published research has focused on various dimensions of the interactions between urban transport policy and urban policy more widely. Geographically the work has focused on eastern Asia with a particular focus on Malaysia and Singapore.

Yutaka Matsubayashi KKG Geospatial Information /

14GISITS Yutaka Matsubayashi, Team Leader of Geospatial Information Project Team specializing in GIS and Road Management Project ,Japan He has been involved in road projects for 14 years. He has issued research papers regarding application of GIS and digital mapping information for road management and ITS on some professional publications.

/
ITS20 ITS Mark Hsiao, Vice president of Infoexplorer Co. Taiwan For the past 20 years, Mark Hsiao has been engaged with many large-scale ITS projects in Taiwan, APTS of Highway Bureau, and ICT applications research. By using advanced information and communication technologies, these systems significantly improve the efficiency of traffic operation and energy consumption.

21

 Guest
Faizan Jawed /
Faizan Jawed, (India) Architect-researcher-activist

Enrico Bonfatti Bergamo /

Enrico Bonfatti (Italy) Managing Editor, Nuova Mobilit, Bergamo

CarlosFelipe Pardo / 20022005

CarlosFelipe Pardo, Urban transport strategies ,Colombia He has worked in urban transport issues in Asia and Latin America since 2002 in work that has involved organizational, advocacy and policy-related activities.

/
J.J. Hong, Executive Director ,The Third Approach Corporation Taiwan.

/
Chi-chung, General manager ,Tung Li,Development Co,.Ltd, Taiwan

/
Lee-Yu Lin, Deputy Commissioner, Taipei Transportation Commission, Taipei City Government,Taiwan

/
David Ta-Wei Poo, (Taiwan)Chairman ,Mega Trans

/
John Sun, Chairman, THI Consultants,Inc, Taiwan

/
Kent Wang , Director General, Transportation Bureau of Kaohsiung City (Taiwan)

/
Cheng-Ming Feng (Taiwan) Professor , Institute of Traffic and Transportation, NTCU

/
Angela Zhang Hua (China). Ph.D candidate , Lanzhou University

/
Shy-Fang Liu ,(Taiwan)Adviser, Kaohsiung City Government

/
Guo Ji Lin, (Taiwan)Chief Secretary, Institute of Transportation. MOTC

Katherine Freund ITNAmerica / Katherine Freund,(USA)Founder and President ,ITN America /

Tan Ho-Chen (Taiwan),Chairman, Taiwan Ecological Engineering Development Foundation.

/
Gene Wu, (Taiwan)Cou ncilors ,Kaohsiung City

22

 /
Jun-Yi Liu, (Taiwan) Deputy chief, Environmental Protection Bureau Kaohsiung City Government

Jane Voodikon gochengdoo / Jane Voodikon ,(China)Co-founded, Chengdoo-magazine, website (www. gochengdoo.com), /
Tai-Hua Lin, (Taiwan),Adviser, Kaohsiung City Government

/
Kevin Hwang (Taiwan), Associate professor, Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science, NCKU

/
Ker-Tsung Lee, (Taiwan)Associate professor, Department of Transportation Technology and Management ,Feng Chia University

/
Jih-Hwa Wu, Chairman, Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corporation,Taiwan

/
Yung Hsiang Cheng, (Taiwan) Assistant professor, Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, NCKU

Sandeep Gandhi Sandeep Gandhi ,(India)public transport and NMT infrastructure expert /
Louis Wei,(Taiwan)Professor, Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science,NCKU

/
Jason Ni, (Taiwan). Manager,THI Consultants

/
Nan Zou ,(China)Professor ,School of Control Science and Engineering ,Shandong University

Tonny Setiono / Tonny Setiono, (Indonesia) /

Ying-Ming Wu, (Taiwan).President ,The Open University of Kaohsiung

/
Joe Wang (Taiwan)Deputy Account Manager,National Transit Program Office

23



Eric Britton /
-

2010-
71205() 1 770 1 0.00000000014285%

() ( ) 30 21 20

24

Sharing Strategy for a Small Planet

Eric Britton

We have a choice. We can look, learn and use it. Or we can continue as before. But it is a choice
France / Co-Chair of the World Share/Transport Forum
I appreciate this opportunity to share with you all a few words on why I think that the concept of more and better sharing of scarce resources of all kinds is an important concept for quality of life and social peace for everyone on this small and shrinking planet. And to talk with you as well briefly on why the transport sector gives us a great place to start both to do a lot more sharing -- and to learn about why we human beings like, or don't like, the idea of sharing things. Let's start with . . . ourselves. sell. But what exactly is the world in which we live today? Certainly a rather different one from that which was in place when all these basic habits and values originally took shape. In fact if we think about it, we have here a situation in which we have 21st century challenges, but are thus far stuck with 20th century mindsets. Let's think about that.

The world in 2010 The number game

Let me start by give you my best thoughts on a literal handful of numbers. They go like this: 7, 1, 20, 5, and (something like) 1. Let's have a look. The first number is 7. In fact it's actually 7 billion. The population of this planet sometime in the latter half of next year. That's a fact. You can count on it. A big number which is getting a lot bigger every day. The second number is simply 1, unity. That is the total number of planets we have to live on. Unlike the population explosion, this is a number that is not going to change, at least not in a positive sense. In fact many important things that we depend on for both life and quality of life are in diminishing supply on this small fixed planet: the quantity of fresh water, reserves of fossil fuel and natural resources, and of course many more. Moreover as a result of the combination of our ever-growing population and the ways in which we use these resources and interact with our environment, the planet is coming under severe pressures on many fronts. At its simplest if we put these two numbers together, we get a feel for the "fair share" of each person on the planet of the available resources. For me this morning, for example, this number would be something in the area of : .00000000014285 % of the planet's total offerings. Since I cannot really put my mind around the exact size of my share, I can at least understand from all those zeroes that my fair share is probably not being to be a very big one when it comes to many of these scarce resources and environmental impacts.

A love affair:
If we have them we love our cars (bicycles, tracks, boats, etc.). And if we have them we love the privacy they give us too. And our convenience. Our freedom of choice, to go where we want, when we want, and most of the time as fast as we want. But above all, we love . . . ourselves. Let's take the example of people and cars: the attitudes that many of us express when it comes to the idea of owning and operating our own car, that is to say our very own one or two personal tons of rubber, glass and steel which we will then drive on a public road. If you ask an American, Frenchman or pretty much anyone on this planet who may have a shot at owning a car and driving and parking it, while paying only a fraction of its total cost . . . And if you ask them what they think about our concept of sharing instead of owning cars for instance, they will explain to us patiently that Americans (or French or Chinese or . . . ) love their cars and that they are too individualistic to share. What is strange about this is that after working on these issues in more than thirty countries for as many years I have never had a response from reasonable non-specialists on this subject other than the above. We love our cars. We love our privacy. We love our freedom of choice. In such a world the idea of sharing transport in many ways looks like it is going to be a very hard

25

 20 20 20 80 5 () ( )

1 ( )

26

When we put these two numbers together, we can see that we are going to be forced one way or another to make a number of changes. And it is not going to be a matter of choice. One way or another things are going to change. Now these may either be changes that we decide to make, hopefully with a strategy and view of creating a happier and healthier planet and better lives for all. Or we can do what we have done thus far namely, continue to push blindly ahead, building higher walls, pulling up the ladders, changing nothing for as long as we can...and waiting for the future to happen to us. In sum, we have some hard choices to make. One way or the other. It looks like we have a problem here. But first let's continue to make our way down our little list to see if we can get some help. The third number is 20... but in this case it's actually twenty percent. This is approximately the relative importance of the transport or mobility sector in this greater whole. One way or another this number keeps cropping up: the sector's share of GHG emissions, fossil fuel consumption. overall resource take, investment requirements, and the long list goes on. Moreover, this is an especially troubling twenty percent because we can see that the amount of activity in our sector is expanding at sharply growing rates. The number of cars. The number of kilometers driven. The enormous quantities of fossil fuels needed and burned. Lost time in traffic. Increasing costs. Health impacts, and more. So we have what is already in itself an important slice of our too-small planet syndrome, but it is made worse yet by the fact that all of these down-sides are deteriorating at an accelerating rate. Some good news though before we come to our real traffic stopper number: There is one surprising thing about the transport sector that seems to have escaped the attention of the experts and the policy makers, one that it also holds out the key to the solution. And not only for the transport sector itself, but also if only we can get good at it -- it holds out some excellent lessons for the other sectors that make up our lives, that other eighty percent. We will have a look at this shortly The 5 is, in fact, more than five...trillion. What exactly is that? That is my personal rough threshold estimate of the number of major trips that are made

by individual citizens each year think of a work trip, medical visit, trip to find and carry water and firewood, soccer mom's taking the kids to their next organized sport session, and the like. There are more than five trillion of these taking place each year which gives us a feel for the dimensions of our challenge. A huge proportion of these trips are executed by people who are walking or using non-motorized transport. But if we recall that there are about one billion motor vehicles on the road, we can see that there are major challenges on all sides. Now what is interesting about these trips is that virtually all of them are decided and carried out in our pluralistic democratic societies by individuals, citizens acting on for their own reasons and in their own (if they are lucky) good time. The crux of the remedial policies in this sector in our pluralistic democratic societies is that they require of our leaders that they and we find ways of understanding and influencing many billions of mainly minute and personal decisions made by individual citizens and groups with very different views on the topic of how they are to get around in their daily lives. (This is a long way from, say, buying "clean fuel" garbage trucks or buses.) And finally that last 1. In fact in this case it's a bit more than one. You can see it for yourself. All you have to do is to walk out your door and find a spot next to a busy street or highway in Kaohsiung, LA, Delhi, Paris or your own city. Get comfortable and start to count the number of people you see in each passing vehicle. If it's a car, taxi, or truck the average is not much above one. If it's a bus, most buses in most places anyway, you will see that during much of the day there is lots of spare room (with of course the huge exceptions that you and we know about.) That of course is just a visual clue, but we also know that the statistics bear this out. What's the lesson? We need to get better at providing high standards of mobility, but the only way to do this is to use the infrastructure and the vehicles more effectively. And this is where the concept of share/transport comes in. . . *The remainder of this paper will be found in the Abstracts/Working paper section of the Kaohsiung 2010 website at www.kaohsiung.sharetransport.org

27


/
BBMW BBMW BBMW

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) ---BBMW (Missing Piece)---BBMWS

28

Why Share/Transport in Taiwan and Asia?

S.K. Jason Chang
Taiwan / Professor, National Taiwan University
Why NOT? Share/Transport: a missing piece for smart travel and sustainable mobility It has been recognized that motorization is expanding, while urbanization is taking place at a dramatically rapid pace in developing regions, particularly in Asia. We all know that getting more travelers onto public transport is the way to face the challenges caused by urbanization and motorization. It has also been recognized that cities would not be able to achieve green and sustainable mobility without an integration of bicycle, bus, metro and walking (BBMW). This BBMW policy is the main essence provided for our decision makers over the past 20 years. However, due to the complexity of urban infrastructure development, travelers normally have no choice, and are being forced to provide for their personal mobility by using private motorized vehicles. And, decision makers find it very difficult to make consistent decisions and take continuous action to achieve an integrated transport system with institutional barriers and incomplete information. Although various informal public transport and paratransit services have been provided in our Asian cities based on a deregulation trend, their safety, security, affordability, efficiency and reliability are still big concerns for passengers and public authorities. It is expected that sharing of time, space, and modes is also a way to internalize the external effects of all modes. Walking and all kinds of public transport are already implemented based on sharing. And, with an appropriate scheme, personal mobility is no longer just for private use, but would be shared with others in terms of emission reduction and energy efficiency. Sharing transport will have influence on not only the operation of all transport modes, but also urban planning and land use. When the sharing transport concept is implemented, policies and management schemes for the upper level of urban design to the bottom level of traffic and parking management will be significantly different from the current practices. Therefore, public sector involvement is crucial for the success of share/transport. There are necessary and important research and planning subjects for success of share/transport, such as internalization of external benefits generated by sharing, economic scales for sharing transport in different cities, instrumental incentives and behavior change for sharing transport, applications of ICT to enhance service reliability and efficiency, integration of share/transport with other public transport services and revisions of land use and urban planning for sharing transport. Now, it is necessary to bring in this missing piece, Share/Transport, and become a Bike Bus Metro Walk and Sharing (BBMWS) policy.

29


Lewis Chen / INVERS Asia Pte. Ltd.
1. 2. 3.

24 1. -24 2. 5-13

30

Car/sharing
Lewis Chen
Singapore / General Manager of INVERS Asia
Many people want to own a car to enjoy the convenience and the joy of driving but such benefits are becoming hard to realize in modern cities. As car ownership increases, driving is becoming a hassle when the roads are congested most of the time and people is spending lots of time to find parking spaces. This is becoming a common problem as many cities in Asiagrow and develop. As our cities are working hard to improve the public transport system to reduce the need of having a car for daily commuting, we also need to recognize that there will be occasions that driving a car is a better transport option. However owning a car for those moments of need do not make sense economically and environmentally. Carsharing services are introduced in many cities as a practical approach to bridge the gap between public and private transport. Carsharing can be implemented to complement the existing public transport system and give organizations and the public another transportation choice. Trip data are captured and processed automatically Vehicle can be placed in strategic locations that is convenient for the users To have transparency in the usage of assets (proper tracking) Can be used to supplement the existing fleet 2. For the Community Good transport options that bridges the gaps between public transport and private vehicles Reduces the pressure to have more parking spaces and to have more "green" space. Studies have shown that every 1 carsharing vehicle can help to reduce 5 to 13 vehicles. Encourages usages of public transport - unlike car owners when carsharing users are likely to continue to use public transport for their daily commuting. On occasions where using a private vehicle is more suitable they will drive a vehicle from carsharing service. When people starts to own a car, they are likely to use their own car more than public transport. The potential benefits that carsharing brings is usually in line with what most of the city government wants to achieve: 1. Encourage more people to use public transport 2. Develop a comprehensive transport system that meets the different needs of the community 3. To move daily commuting from private cars to public transport Ultimately, carsharing empowers people to rethink vehicle usage and helps to change the way to realize the benefits of driving without owning a car.

What is Carsharing and how it works?

Carsharing is "Pay-As-You-Drive" transportation service introduced in many modern cities to build a sustainable and environmental friendly urban community. The carsharing cars are distributed throughout the city in the office areas, housing estates and public transportation hubs. Through an automated self-service system, people can have access to a car when they need one 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It leverages on modern technology to complement the public transport system and enhances people's lifestyle needs. Benefits of Carsharing 1. For Organizations To have better utilization of assets. To have a higher efficiency in the work processes because of: Self-service operations - from reservation to vehicle collection and return is all managed by the system and it works 24 hours Authorization of usage can be controlled by the system

31

(Bremen)
Michael Glotz-Richter /
60% 24 Cambio 40 55 Cambio1990 6,000 202020,000 160 1,000-1,500 1,000 1,500-2,000 68 2010

32

Car-Sharing in Bremen its incorporation into municipal transport strategies

Michael Glotz-Richter
Germary / Senior manager of Sustainable Mobility.
The city of Bremen is a traditional harbour city in the north of Germany that has become well known for implementing sustainable transport plans. About 60% of all trips made by Bremen's citizens are made on foot, by bike or on collective transport. The city's urban development concept, its transport strategy and its Climate Protection Plan all share the strategic objective of further strengthening the environmentally friendly modes of transport. Bremen is also attempting to solve the problem of too many cars consuming its very limited street space. High levels of car ownership tend to create disharmony between the transport function on one hand and the ecological and social functions of public space on the other. Car-Sharing is an innovative, intelligent and market-based approach that allows access to a car without requiring ownership - leading to much more efficient transport patterns. From the customer's perspective, CarSharing is a simple and reliable system of having a "car on demand". Car-Sharing customers book cars by Internet or by telephone (24/7) and can access the cars at stations located all over the city at any time with a smart card and PIN. Cars can be booked for as little as one hour at a time or for as long as you want. The commercial Car-Sharing operator cambio has a variety of vehicles available at Bremen's approximately 40 Car-Sharing stations, ranging from smalls car up to vans and minibuses. As smaller cars are less expensive than larger ones and customers pay for their use both by time and by mileage, there is an incentive to drive less and to select smaller cars. Overall, Car-Sharing users: reduce their car use increase their use of Public Transport (local, regional and long-distance) cycle much more choose an appropriate-sized car for each journey have lower rates of car ownership Bremen, with its 550,000 inhabitants, is an internationally recognised showcase of Car-Sharing. Since its inception as a small club in 1990, Bremen's Car-Sharing service, cambio, has grown to approximately 6,000 customers. Bremen is the first city to have a politically-adopted municipal strategic plan on Car-Sharing; it incorporates Car-Sharing into urban development and transport strategies and has an established target of at least 20,000 Car-Sharing users by the year 2020. And there is evidence of revised mobility patterns in Bremen. The use of Public Transport has increased whereas statistics show a decline in the number of cars for the first time ever despite a small increase in population. As Car-Sharing optimises the use of every car, the need for parking spaces is reduced. In Bremen, a fleet of 160 Car-Sharing vehicles has replaced between 1,000 and 1,500 private cars. When compared to the cost of building underground parking spaces for 1,000 private cars, Car-Sharing has saved at least 15 -20 million Euros (or 600 - 800 million Taiwan Dollar). The strategic elements of the municipal CarSharing Action Plan of Bremen are: to further increase the number of on-street CarSharing stations, especially in densely populated inner city areas to strengthen the integration of Public Transport and Car-Sharing through joint offers and awareness raising about Car-Sharing among Public Transport users to improve public awareness of Car-Sharing in general through promotional activities and media campaigns to inform the business community about the potential of Car-Sharing as part of efficient fleet management in companies and administrations to integrate Car-Sharing in new developments from the outset as a measure to reduce the need for parking Bremen was selected as an 'Urban Best Practice' showcase to be presented at EXPO 2010 in Shanghai. The EXPO presentation is backed by a number of awareness-raising measures in Bremen, which will also be presented at the conference.

33

+
Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad / Chulalongkorn
1 2 3 1. 2. 3.

24 5

34

Ride/sharing + EmployerShare/Transport
Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad
Thailand / assistant professor in the Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty Engineering, Chulalongkorn University
This paper presents the situation and obstacles of ridesharing in Bangkok with the proposed strategies to make these programs successful. In this paper, ridesharing in Bangkok for daily commuting were separated into three main pooling groups, i.e., 1) carpool, the shared use of a personal car by the driver and one or more passengers to commute together, 2) buspool/vanpool, the shared use of a bus or a van by a large group of working community in an organization, and 3) school bus, a share use of an organized bus or a van for students in a particular school. The data for each pool group were collected through several methodologies such as surveys, in-depth interviews, experiments, questionnaires, etc. from pooling participants, organizers, policy makers, government officials, and other relevant stakeholders. These data suggest that some policies would be developed to encourage more actual ridesharing programs. Lastly, the paper summarizes strategic plans to encourage sustainable ridesharing programs for each type of ridesharing programs in Bangkok. gas emissions. However, the government needs to support the programs along with the recognition from the business organizations and local community. Although there have been several ongoing ridesharing programs in Bangkok and some attempts to promote them, no research papers have reviewed current situations in a comprehensive manner. This study herein is thus putting the whole pictures together with some policy recommendations. In Bangkok, common ridesharing programs can be classified by their distinct characteristics into three categories, i.e., 1) carpool, the informal shared use of a personal car by the driver and one or more passengers to commute together, 2) buspool or vanpool, the formal shared use of a bus or a van by a large group of working community in an organization, and 3) school bus, a share use of an organized bus or a van for students in a particular school. Since the forms and travel behaviors of these three categories are different by its nature and regulation, the following discussions are separated into three main sections.

Introduction
This paper reviews the situation of ridesharing programs in Bangkok, investigates their obstacles in implementation, and proposed the strategies to make these programs successful. Ridesharing is defined as the shared use of a vehicle by the driver and one or more passengers, usually for daily commuting. Ridesharing programs are done through encouraging commuters who simultaneously have the same trip origin-anddestination pairs, or share the same trip paths, to form a group and share the same vehicle for commuting. Today, ridesharing is considered to be one of popular programs to promote sustainable transportation in most urban areas around the world. Ridesharing programs would reduce travel costs and the need to build parking spaces, alleviate traffic congestion during peak hours, and save inefficient energy usage and reduce greenhouse

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows

Sections 2 to 4 describe the situations and obstacles of carpool, buspool or vanpool, and school bus in Bangkok, respectively. In each section, the reviews of current situations, research and analysis of data, and recommendations, are presented accordingly. Then, the fifth and final section contains concluding remarks as well as areas of further research.

35

+
Ali Clabburn / <>
1998GoogleFacebook w w w. liftshare.com 600 39 55000 Liftshare (ride-sharing) car-poolliftsharecar-share 50% 2~4 50 2.3 1.56 2 ppc 1.2 ppc

36

Ride/sharing + Employer Share/Transport

Ali Clabburn
UK / Founder Managing Director of liftshare
When I was at university the only way I could afford to get home was to share a car with someone. I set up a notice board in the student union to help me find a lift home. The notice board quickly became popular and every weekend there were lots of people offering and seeking lifts. In 1998, 2 weeks before Google was born and several years before many other social networking sites such as Facebook were launched, I set up the www.liftshare.com - a clever website which helps people find others travelling the same way as them so they can share their journey. What started in a university bedsit has grown steadily and we now run the UK's national network of over 600 rideshare schemes for communities and businesses. Membership just reached 390,000 and the system saves around 55,000 car trips every day - making it the most successful ride-share system in the world. I am passionate about sharing and believe that if we make better use of what we have then we can make huge reductions in the resources we need. Seeing the success of liftshare has given me hope that we can change behaviours and some simple, low cost solutions can enable sharing and play a very important part in minimising waste. Definition: Ride-sharing is when two or more people travel together by car for all or part of a journey. (N.B. There are many definitions of ride-sharing and other words used to describe the same or similar activity (car-pool, lift-share, car-share (UK)). The Theory: Our roads are congested. But they are congested with cars and not people. Most cars on the UK roads have just one person in them and there are millions of empty seats being driven around our roads. Research has shown that around 50% of drivers would consider sharing their car journey if they could find someone suitable to travel with. But most people do not know anyone who makes the same journey at the same time. Cars are often portrayed as the cause of all the congestion and pollution and it is true that a typical car with one person in it is very inefficient. However, as soon as a car has 2,3 or 4 people in it, it becomes a relatively low cost, low emitting and efficient way to travel. It can be more efficient to travel in a full car than by bus. Every year, for the last 50 years, the distance travelled by car has increased and the average number of people in each car in the UK fell. It fell from a peak of 2.30 to 1.56 people per car. This was caused by combination of rising incomes, falling motoring costs, more 2 income households and a general trend in human behaviour away from sharing towards individualism. The average car occupancy varies depending upon the type of trip being taken. Occupancy is highest (~2ppc)(People Per Car) for Holidays and Educational Travel and lowest for Commuting and business travel (1.2ppc). The theory is that by setting up an effective rideshare system and promoting it to the population it will be possible to encourage and enable many more people to find others travelling the same way as them so they can start sharing cars.

37


/
400 2002 1000

2010
916

38

How much does 'free parking' cost your business

Rory McMullan
UK / Sustainable Transport activist
Transport is often one of the biggest costs for businesses, but the full costs are often hidden. Parking provision for staff is one of the easier costs to measure, and in the UK the average direct cost to an employer of providing a free car-parking space is ?00 per year, but for many employers this cost is considerably higher. (Department for Transport - Making Smarter Choices Work 2002) This includes, maintenance, security, and lighting and if land purchase / lease values are included this rises to about ?000 per-space per year. How would my staff get to work if I don't provide enough parking? Even for the most remote workplaces there are far better alternatives than for each member of staff driving alone to the workplace every day, and Employer Share/Transport plans identify which solutions will work for your business and help to implement them. Providing a matching service for staff to share their car for the commute, called ride-sharing, is one of the most popular and effective solutions. Encouraging cycling and walking is suitable for businesses where a large percentage of staff live within a few miles of the workplace, and offering effective tele-working options are ideal for businesses with large numbers of office based staff. All of these transport solutions will save your business money, and they are also popular with staff, and a happier, healthier employee is a more productive employee. International experience shows us that a comprehensive share/transport plan will help make your business more efficient, help project an environmentally and socially responsible image, and help businesses attract and retain the best staff. Employer Share/Transport in Kaohsiung 2010 On September 16th the first World Share/Transport Forum will take place in Kaohsiung City, and one of the core topics will be Rideshare - Employer Share/ Transport plans. C a n E m p l o y e r S h a r e / Tr a n s p o r t p l a n s b e successful in Taiwan? What are the key elements that can be applied to the Taiwanese context? What is the cost of parking in Taiwanese cities? Do businesses in Taiwan have similar transport issues as in the UK, USA and Europe? These are just some of the questions we will discuss, and we are looking for Taiwanese employers to join us to debate them. For your business a workplace Share/Transport plan can: save money on the cost of providing and maintaining parking spaces solve problems caused by the ever-growing demand for parking cut mileage claims and other business travel costs reduce staff downtime spent travelling on business reduce the costs of running a fleet solve delivery and customer access problems caused by traffic congestion on and around your site improve your image with both customers and neighbours improve staff health and reduce absenteeism assist with recruitment and retention, for example by making staff journeys to work easier and cheaper and enhancing the image of your business as a responsible employer help meet shareholder demand for corporate social responsibility improvements, including meeting environmental targets. For your staff a share/transport plan can: provide benefits to a wider range of people by shifting from travel perks based on seniority to incentives for sustainable travel available to all staff, including those without access to a car ensure parking for those with most need of a vehicle such as those working out of hours, commuting from distance, or staff who are mobility impaired. help provide less stressful options for travel to work give opportunities to build healthy exercise into daily life reduce journey times to work reduce the cost of travel to work, or avoid the need to buy a car provide a better work-life balance through flexible working and less need to travel on business

39


/
(PBS) VelibBicing Call A BikeSmartBike BIXI 5701400 2002 20102600 2009 PBSPBS

40

Feasibility study of Public Bike Development ~ Taiwan Communities

Hsin-Wen Chang
Taiwan / Chair and Associate Professor, Department of Leisure and Recreation Management, CHU
Public Bike Schemes (PBS) have grown significantly in popularity over the last few years. Many major European cities including Velib in Paris, Lyon, Bicing in Barcelona, Call a bike in Munich, Berlin, SmartBike in Oslo, Stockholm, and Washington D.C. and BIXI in Montreal have launched extensive schemes that are helping to redefine the perception of cycling and create a new form of mainstream public transport for short distance urban journeys, and also become an tourist attraction. As Taiwan's national economy is growing and the GNP is increasing, the ownership of cars and motorcycles is popular in every household. There are 23 million people in the population, and 5.7 million cars and 14 million motorcycles. These figures demonstrate that motorcycles, owing to their convenience in parking and traveling, are the most favored travel mode for short distance trips in Taiwan. Fortunately, Taiwan is experiencing an increasing investment in, and popularity of cycling. Both central and local governments have been trying to stimulate the development of bicycle activities and recreational cycling since year 2002. By year 2010, 2600 km bike routes will be reached. Furthermore, Taipei, Tainan, and Kaohsiung have tried to develop city-wide public bicycle activities in year 2009. There is an important issue of cycling behavior in terms of public cycling demand and cycling facilities. The forthcoming Public Bike Schemes in Taiwan should consider the characteristics of users (demand side) and the PBS's location and quantities (supply side).

The feasibility study is focus on the management strategies:

1. Fare differential of public bike 2. Flexibility of public bike layout The author has set up a public bike experimental lab in Chung-Hua University which is the first university to provide public bikes in campus. The lab will have an experimental study to investigate the energy efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions of bicycle usage and public bike scheme in the future. Different types of study areas are implied in Hsinchu Technopolis including High Speed Rail Station area (recreational cycling and cycling commuting), old town city center (leisure cycling), and Science Industrial Park (cycling commuting). The research results will provide a set of valuable information for evaluating the efficiency of government resource allocation and an appropriate public bike policy for constructing public cycling facilities. The overall goal of this research is to provide suggestions of a reasonable public cycling policy for recreational cycling, cycling commuting and market segmentation in Taiwan.

41


/
504,500 70%

42

Kaohsiung City Public Bicycle

Yeh Chi-chung
Taiwan / General manager of Tung Li Development Co,.Ltd.
The rise of environmental awareness and healthy lifestyles has brought about growth in the trend of riding bicycles in Taiwan. In order to advocate bicycle riding and environmental protection, Kaohsiung City borrowed from the successful experiences of foreign countries and launched the nation's first "metropolitan network" based public bicycle leasing system. The system is composed of 50 stations and 4,500 bicycles. To use the bicycle rental service, a user only needs to insert an automatic bicycle rental membership card and a credit card to get a bicycle and return of the bicycle can be done at any of the 50 stations. The combined leisure and urban environmental care functions are a highlight of a city's advanced civic development. Kaohsiung city's public bicycle service covers 70% of the city's total area. Due to high public accessibility, convenience and media support, operations of the bicycle rental service have moved to a stage of stable growth. This success has also attracted cities from Japan, the Netherlands and Singapore to visit Taiwan and study Kaohsiung's public bicycle rental system. If a public bicycle is rented out for an estimated three hours per day and each bicycle runs 12 km per hour, the amount of carbon dioxide emissions reduced in a year is equal to the effect of approximately 440,000 trees per year.

43

 YouBike
/
97 11500 YouBikeone size fits all 9831099831199,484 11,270 1505,000

44

Taipei City Public Commuter Bicycle Rental System

Lee-Yu Lin
Taiwan / Deputy Commissioner, Taipei Transportation Commission, Taipei City Government
In order to encourage the use of public bicycles as a short-distance mode of transport accordance with the dedicated bike paths in Xinyi District to provide a last-mile transportation service, Taipei City Department of Transportation (DOT) began implementing the trial project of Taipei City Public Commuter Bicycle Rental System which is also called YouBike System in 2008. YouBike system was set up mainly in Xinyi District comprising of 500 public bicycles and 11 rental stations which surrounding Taipei City Hall, MRT Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall station and nearby residential area. The funds were partly supported by the Air Pollution Prevention Fund which is managed by Taipei City Department of Environmental Protection and partly come from the advertising income of the system during the operation period. YouBike system enjoys a number of excellent features, which are following: 1.RFID Technology: Each public bicycle has its own RFID tag. The entire rental process is managed using the RFID reader on the Parking Meter records the use and return of each bicycle. 2.One Size Fits All: The ingenious "one size fits all" design of this bicycle makes it easy for people of all ages and genders to ride. The step-through design is not only convenient but also safer as well. 3.Smart and Eco-Friendly Hub Generator: The hub-driven generator automatically lights up the front and rear lights when the bicycle is in motion. The rear light can even store up generated power to remain blinking even while you are stopped at a traffic light! 4.Safe and Convenient Integrated Bicycle Lock: The patented integrated bicycle lock cleverly stores the cable lock out of sight in the carry basket when not in use. Its ease of use helps you take care of the public bicycle. There are totally 199,484 rentals from its launched on March 11th 2009 to the end of August 2010. It means that on the average of 11,270 rentals per month. After almost one and half year operation, there is no bicycle stolen happened. Because of the success of this trial project, DOT plans to extension the system to other district of Taipei City and establish at least 150 rental stations and 5000 public bicycles in the next 3 years.

45


Dorothy Chan /
20%-60% 1100700 63492050 58400285 100057 90% 435016 180 16%

46

Taxi/Sharing, DRTS and Paratransit

Dorothy Chan
Hong Kong / Deputy Director, School of Professional and Continuing Education, University of Hong Kong
Transportation is responsible for 20-60% of carbon emissions in major cities. For most Asian cities, the dense population offers an excellent opportunity for mass transit but also provides the worse potential for traffic congestion. Hong Kong is a small city with an area of about 1 100 sq. km. It has a population of 7 million, about 6 349 persons per sq. km. Vehicle density is highest in Asian cities. There are 2 050 km of roads and 584 000 licensed vehicles which gives the city a daunting figure of 285 vehicles per km of road. Under the government policy to control the growth in private cars, private car ownership is about 57 per 1000 population. Ownership restraint through high first registration tax and annual licence fees have served to restrict the growth of private cars in Hong Kong. The major growth in trips is on public transport. 90 % of the daily commuter trips in Hong Kong are made on public transport with railways and buses being the major carriers. A mode unique to Hong Kong is the fleet of 4 350 16-seater public light buses. My topic explores the potential utilization of this mode for share transport in the city. It is a flexible, commuter- led transport service based on share use. A public light bus operator runs his vehicle along the streets and passengers will get on and off the small bus at any destinations along the route. There is no pre-determined routes, fares and timetable and the small bus operator can decide what to charge and where to operate. As routeing is flexible, the driver can change his route to avoid traffic congestion. It is a popular mode in Hong Kong and the small buses are carrying 1.8 million passengers a day, 16% market share. The potential risk with this mode of operation is that the small buses contribute to congestion with their irregular picking up and setting down activities. Integrated urban and transport planning helps to avoid the need to travel and reduce levels of car dependence. Hong Kong has distinct pockets of car free communities. These communities are conceived at the planning stage to provide low density housing with self-contained facilities. The main external transport links are provided by ferries and buses and within the community, golf carts provide internal transport to individual household. The potential for the future is that such developments may help to free up new space and including such measures as reallocation of road space in favour of sustainability. It is evident that cities are changing from centres of work and business to have a wider role. There are opportunities to reduce emissions through modal shift and effective mode sharing. Public support on sustainable transport policies will help to develop new cities for the future. The sharing of small buses in Hong Kong provides an illustration on the potential for share transport in the city. A key challenge for transportation planning is to give accessibility more emphasis. This requires a shift in emphasis, with strategies focused on providing livable streets with walking, cycling given priority over cars and with high level of integration with other modes.

47


/
DRTS DRTS DRTS 24 DRTS

48

Taxi/Sharing, DRTS and Paratransit

J.J. Hong
Taiwan / Executive Director ,The Third Approach Corporation of Sustainable Mobility.
Taxi, Taxi/Sharing, and DRTS definitely will be competitive modes of Share/ Transport. DRTS is an intermediate form of transport, somewhere between bus and taxi which covers a wide range of transport services, they provide transport on demand from passengers using fleets of vehicles scheduled to pick up and drop off people in accordance with their needs. The potential capacity of the existing Taxi, Taxi/Sharing, and DRTS could be bigger than the traditional bus and MRT in most major cities in Taiwan. Kaohsiung, for example, has more than 8,000 taxis in operation; they can easily carry 240,000 passengers per day, which is the double of MRT ridership. They could carry the same ridership in much better quality with lower cost. Taxi and DRTS are now quite different from it used to be, and are expected to be dramatically changed in the coming years due to the introduction of three new technologies and concepts, Telematics, mass customization, user participation. Telematics-based taxi or DRT establish the platform for a lot of new possibilities, innovative services as well as new business models. It then greatly enhanced the practice of mass customization in a much lower cost. User participations are also made possible in all stages of the service procedure. There are dozens of challenges in the development of the new Taxi and DRT services. We have learned a lot from the exploration here in the last 10 years. Integration of the existing operators and marketing of the new services will be the two most critical issues. We still have more to learn.

49


Paul Barter /

3020 30

50

Street/sharing. Integrating private/public/share mobility

Paul Barter
Singapore / Assistant Professor LKY School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore (NUS)

1.Public space dividend from slowspeed spaces

The innovation of 'shared space' design for streets and public space has created great excitement and changed thinking about the nature of streets and of road safety. Implementations so far have clearly demonstrated that we CAN expand our urban 'public realm' beyond older pedestrian spaces into space that was previously segregated and devoted to motorised traffic. I n o t h e r w o r d s , s o m e t r a ff i c s p a c e c a n b e reintegrated into the public realm via speed reductions. Many have been amazed to find that this can often be done without sacrificing the efficiency of the street in its mobility role. True shared spaces are one way to do this but there are several others, including 30 km per hour zones (or '20s plenty' zones), familiar traffic calming techniques, road diets, complete street treatments and parts of multiway boulevards. However, some enthusiasts for shared space design may have taken this idea a little further than it will stretch. We still need to recognise the limits of expanding the public realm. Many roads will remain true traffic spaces with high traffic speeds. It will not be possible or wise to abolish traffic lights altogether! Traffic space in which speeds cannot be reduced to about 30 km/h or less will still need to be designed with careful segregation of pedestrians (and low-speed cyclists) from traffic. Nevertheless, there is much room for debate over where the proper boundary should be between traffic space and low-speed public realm. This is not just a technical question but a question of priorities and values, and hence of politics. Communities in many cities are busy pushing to reclaim more streets to be included in the new shared parts of the public realm in which traffic and other uses of the street coexist at low speeds.

2. Getting the most from alliances between shared-vehicle services and public transport.
Public transport and vehicle sharing systems, such as car-sharing and bicycle-sharing, are natural allies in serving households that choose to own fewer car or no cars. Pioneering initiatives in European cities such as Zurich and Bremen have demonstrated that both public transport and carsharing industries can benefit from alliances, such as the bundling of season tickets for public transport with car-share memberships. In light of these successes, we might have expected many more such alliances to have emerged internationally. Unfortunately, the numbers remain rather small. Motivated by this observation, this presentation will discuss the institutional context for such alliances. Cooperation between public transport and shared vehicle industries does not necessarily happen 'naturally' or spontaneously. In fact, even with the desire to cooperate, it is difficult to achieve without a conducive institutional context. Arguably, the institutions, regulatory arrangements and industry structures on both sides matter. There are public transport arrangements which are conducive to alliances and those which are not. Similarly for car-sharing industry structures and regulatory arrangements. My investigation of this is a work in progress but the presentation will try to identify which arrangements are most promising, which are hopeless, and will try to offer some preliminary suggestions for reform.

51


Yutaka Matsubayashi / KKG Geospatial Information
Kokusai Kogyo GroupKKG 1947 KKG KKG KKG TDM GPS GIS GPS ITS ITS 3D GISITS Hybrid Eco-route 3D vs

52

Making Eco-Mobility Community Come True

Implementation of the Eco-Mobility Now and Future

Yutaka Matsubayashi
Japan / Team Leader of Geospatial Information Project Team specializing in GIS and Road Management Project

Kokusai Kogyo Group (KKG) is a leading technical engineering company in Japan, and also the pioneer of the industry since 1947, with global presence in Asia and Europe. With a strong commitment to the materialization of lowcarbon society, we are playing a significant role in green infrastructure business by leveraging its geospatial technology know-how and credentials in renewable energy.
In Japan, KKG is participating in various projects regarding eco-mobility. We are utilizing our know-how and experience in geospatial technologies to help the government to build a green community. In the forum, we would like to share some projects regarding eco-mobility : (Okinawa Prefecture) A case study of using real time traffic information to support the TDM for dealing with heavy traffics and also promoting tourism By driving a car with GPS, real time data of the road situation of the driving location is recorded. Through the calculation by GIS, speed and time required for travelling are obtained. The result will be then delivered to users handheld terminals in form of traffic information to facilitate the diversifying road usage to solve heavy traffic problem.

(I) Traffic Demand Management by utilizing probe information

(II) Implementation of Eco-Mobility in Sightseeing area

(Nara Prefecture) In Nara Prefecture, it is being promoted to use electric bicycle as a mean for sight-seeing. There is GPS logger installed to the bicycle, and the GPS logger will record the route of user. The data will then be used for analysis of road usage and the result will become input for road infrastructure improvement. In addition, the charging facilities for the electric bicycle are using solar power which adds further value to the ECO concept.

(III) Green ITS Service for Low-carbon Society

A new concept to make Eco-Mobility Community come true New ITS Service Utilizing our own geospatial data to create a 3D road map network. By adding the position of people and car and charging facilities, and simulation by GIS, it is possible to create a system which offers eco-drive ITS services such as : Advice information for charging for hybrid cars with consideration of charging facility location and remaining battery the car Eco-route which minimize CO2 emission Design of control for hybrid-engine (charging vs power feeding) information sharing based on the actual 3D road map (intersection or slope) Estimation of CO2 emission and reduction by the vehicle moving data (for logistic companies)

53


CarlosFelipe Pardo / GTZ (SUTP)

54

How to convince people to share?

CarlosFelipe Pardo
Colombia / Urban transport strategies
There are various challenges to transport sharing, one of them being the challenge to overcome people's perception of sharing as opposed to ownership. Especially in developing countries, ownership seems to be of great importance, and this is somehow specifically emphasized when owning cars. Owning an automobile now embodies in many cities a sense of status, power and possibly other characteristics of its owner that were not even dreamt of some decades ago. My presentation addresses these issues, analyzes its causes and possible reasons from a psychological perspective, looking forward to understand why ownership seems to have a stronger and more positive image than owning for many citizens. There may be a need to dig deeper on this issue since it may well be that ownership is actually compensating for deep personality issues of citizens which are not easily solved. I will also analyze whether and how sharing does work in other sectors different from transport and within transport itself, to find a pattern of those characteristics which may be useful to enhance the potential of sharing bicycles, cars and other modes of transport. I will also analyze different positive aspects of sharing in general that can be used as arguments to promote sharing in urban transport. Based on these issues, I will provide a general framework of how one can promote urban transport in general and, more specifically, sharing in urban transport. This will include defining an audience, having a diagnosis of the situation and then developing a series of messages (rational, affective, motor) that will be useful when promoting sharing. I will also present some general rules of how sharing should be promoted. My final reflection relates to the issue of the extent to which we can promote sharing as opposed to ownership without getting help from other sectors which should address the sharing/ownership problem in cities and in people, while outlining some of the potential "enemies" of urban transport sharing.

55


Enrico Bonfatti / Bergamo
ASUCASsociazioni per gli Usi Civici ASUC ASUC ASUC regole ASUC regole 0.62 regole AB C D regole

56

Looking for analogies from the past

Enrico Bonfatti
Italy / Managing Editor, Nuova Mobilit, Bergamo
The concepts of Share/Transport is something both old and new, since it makes me think to some middle-age customs to manage commons, some of them surviving in our era. In Northern Italy you can find some clues of those habits in what are known as ASUC (acronym for ASsociazioni per gli Usi Civici, Civic Use ASsociations) who are in charge for the management of often wide portions of land. Asuc are quite common in eastern Alps (legacy of Austro - Hungarian empire) and they are accountable for management of everything located on the land they own. So they decide what to do with trees and springs, how much land reserve to forest, and how much to graze and so on. ASUC are straight descendants of middle-age peasant associations that coped against their lords for land ownership. It is maybe useless to stress the point that where the land was privately owned by a lord its use was far from being efficient, being often left unexploited for a long time or suddenly stripped off of every resource that could serve the village for many years to come (i.e. cutting a whole forest to turn it into building raw materials and so leaving peasants without heating for the cold season). On the other hand lands subject to "regole" (litterally "rules" that peasants gave themselves to exploit what in this case was a shared resource) were more likely to be used at the right time for the right people. Even nowadays, where ASUC are alive and kicking, people living in villages often have considerable benefits such as the chance to buy at a very low price the right to cut trees to heat their home or even to have the chopped wood from the forest delivered straight on their doorstep. Sharing in transport in the 21st century has some analogies with these old waya. And some differences. It could be useful to explore both. Analogies: like "regole" allowed a far more efficient use of resources than the sheer private ownership, sharing in transport is more likely to exploit our mobility systems in a far better way than the current private car based model:

- Shared vehicles are more likely to be used for a larger amount of time than the private-owned ones (in the same way a shared land was more likely to be used in a more consistent way and less likely to be left unattended than a land owned by a single lord) - Private car based mobility systems benefit just a part of the population, which I suspect not to be the majority even in my highly car-dependent (0.62 cars/ inhabitant) country. The youngest, the oldest, the impaired, the poorest and many other people are strongly hindered in their mobility by this way of doing things while they could benefit a lot from a different, more sharing-based, transport design. In the same way the needs of peasants in the middle age were far better met by "regole" than by land's lord ownership.

57


regole regoleregole ITC

58

- A shared use of vehicles and public spaces would allow needs different from transport to be better fulfilled in the same way in a shared forest cutting just evergreen trees provided at the same time: a) shadow during summer and sun during winter, b) an high quality turf where small plants (blackberries, strawberries, bluberries etc) could easily grow c) sometime a good grassfield d) a fairly good amount of wood for heating. Cities are like private owned forests where every tree, not just evergreens, has been cut for heating or other purposes (=every small portion of public space is devoted to private motorized traffic) and no one is concerned about strawberries, turf and grassfield. - In a sharing-based mobility system there would be no or at least greatly reduced need to waste all that real estate in parking lots, no need to cope with other motorists to find a bay, no need to waste great gobs of money in transport, no need to waste all that time to earn the money you need to pay your car, in the same way peasants living under strong "regole" systems did not have either to cope one against each other or to devote a big share of their money (if any) or of their time to get something - often from the lord they fought - they could easily put their hands on in another way.

Differences

"Regole" were born in a period in which people could not conceive themselves as having a role in society different from the one they were stuck in at their birth. The lord was on one side; on the other one there were peasants, all of them bringing specific, different interests in the fight for resource's control. Today the roles are all but clear, we all became lords at least of ourselves -but at the same time (almost) all of us became (or continued to be) peasants and indeed to an extent slaves, since we often both suffer and benefit from our social framework. Transport design can be enlightening: my son can't walk alone to school because traffic is too dangerous for him? So I drive him to school. In that moment I am both a peasant (I suffer the impacts of the current mobility system on the quality of my life fulfilling a task that would be just my son's responsibility since he is old enough to find his way to and from school) and a lord (I add my share of hinders to other children walking to school and more generally to the autonomy of other people that do not want / cannot get around by car). So middle age's conflicting interests of different social groups have been displaced to a more intimate dimension and everyone must find what he thinks to be the right point of balance between them. Unfortunately one century of car design brought this balance too close to the "lord tip", common sense often makes people think their interests match with the middle age lord's ones. Tilting that balance toward the "peasant tip" is a major communication challenge. Another big difference between share/transport and "regole" is that "regole" set the rules for collective use of public resources while in the 21st century share/ transport we often have a collective use of private resources (i.e. private car sharing operator) made possible by recent ITC development. Are post-modernity and middle age joining to mock French Revolution? Or maybe we are trying, as we say in Italy, to rescue "the newborn that the Revolution got rid of with the dirty water"?

59


Faizan Jawed /
20 *11.3 1300100013 20092010 2010

20

60

Common Sense, Democracy & Sustainability in Transport Planning:Perspectives from India

Faizan Jawed
India / Architect-researcher-activist
India's growth story need not be reiterated. Since two decades, a 'New India' is being built at an accelerated pace - the India of glass-clad skyscrapers, malls & multiplexes, automobiles, highways, flyovers and many monstrosities of similar pomp. While one in every two children in the country is malnourished, great public wealth is being squandered at building resource intensive infrastructure that is of temporary* benefit for few. Out of the 1.13 billion people in India, only 13 million own cars, i.e. 13 in every 1000. While incomes in India are increasing and the number of cars growing rapidly (India was second only to China in the world tally of the rate of growth in the private automobile sector in the year 2009-10), there is more to mobility in India than what catches the eye. Informal shared transit, walking and cycling also happen to be the most important modes fulfilling the day-to-day transport needs of the poor and informal sections of society - the majority in India. Ironically, these practices are under attack in policies guiding development in the 'New India'. Development guided by these new policies, in practice, tends to formalize and universalize without considering context. Apart from building for the car, the prevailing idea that mass transit (in the form of Metro rail or High Capacity Bus Rapid Transit) is the way forward for all cities above a certain size, while banning, capping, systematically discouraging or extirpating indigenous forms of shared transport is neither prudent nor democratic. I do not want to come across as anti-public transport. That is the last position I could take. My contention is that the importance of the informal modes of shared transit is poorly understood and their study could shed important light on the correct approach to planning transport for a city that is sustainable, appropriate and democratic. It is not that the informal shared transport in India is unexceptionable. There are issues of overcrowding, lack of pollution control, absence of safety standards, etc. but these are issues that can be worked on and rectified. A precondition to rectification is taking cognizance that these systems are demand-driven, intrinsically appropriate and provide essential transport service needed by the masses. This is one issue that I think is overlooked while modern India plans its future urban transport despite being something that we should be burning midnight oil on understanding and improving. C l e a r l y, t h e r e i s a l o t t h a t c i t y - b u i l d i n g professionals, academics and activists need to learn from one another's experiences. This is what makes the World Share/Transport Forum: Kaohsiung 2010 special. Sharing is cool but I'd not just stop at that - it is indispensable for developing sustainable transport.

Informality is the defining feature of urban development in India.

In the last two decades of building of a gleaming 'New India', the informal sector in urban India has grown manifold. Informal systems in developing contexts can be seen as people's play at being ingenious - one has limited resources, how does one make best use of them. The limitation of resources results in informal systems employing reuse, recycle and sharing. Thus we see very creative ways of informal shared transit whose route, fare, frequency, etc. are all decided informally. And it works - a panoply of shared informal transit in the form of shared minivans and shared motorized 3-wheelers (all essentially compact vehicles that can reach narrow streets and run at desirable frequency) along with walking and cycling form the pith and core of transport system in mid- and small-sized cities in urban India. These also form an important part of the transport system in the larger metros where formal public transit is prevalent. These services are creative examples of people-planned shared transit and, most importantly, involve a high degree of cooperation between service providers and customers.

61

Young researcher/Future Leader cooperative program

20

Why this is important

There is, as it happens, often a significant "generational difference" concerning new thinking about transport policy and practice, and in most places decisions are still taken by those somewhat older professionals and politicians whose training and thinking were largely shaped in the suddenly far distant 20th century. With this in view, one of our goals in Kaohsiung 2010 is to bring in a select group of young professionals and graduate students, including those already working in the sector as well as those who are advancing their own training and research, in order to help close the significant generation gap in transport policy and practice. In addition to the usual transport, environment and sustainable transport interests and skills, we are eager to bring in some young people with backgrounds in the behavioral sciences, public health, community relations, the volunteer sector, government and media. This is important since one of the main causes of poor projects and policy in the sector in the past has been precisely because decisions were being taken from a far too narrow perspective and understanding of the fundamental issues and factors for success.

62

 profile
1. Charina Cabrido / Charina Cabrido. Environmental researcher, writer. Kathmandu, Nepal 2. / Yung-Hsiang Cheng. Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit. Taiwan 3. Sandeep Gandhi / Sandeep Gandhi. India. 4. Faizan Jawed / Faizan Jawed. Architect-researcher-activist. India 5. / Chih-Hsu Lin. Research Assistant. Taipei Taiwan 6. / Jason Ni. Taiwan. 7. Pallavi Pant / Pallavi Pant, Sustainability activist, India 8. Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad Chulalongkorn / Jittichai Rudjanakanoknad. Chulalongkorn University. Thailand 9. Jane Voodikon / Jane Voodikon. Concerned person and editor. Los Angeles and Chengdu, China. 10. / Hua Zhang, Lanzhou University, PR.China 11. / Chin-Hung Huang ,Associate Technical Specialist, Taoyuan County Government,Taiwan 12. / Chao-Fu Yeh Highway Public Transportation Development Office at the MOTC 13. / Milton Wang,Traffic Bureau, Kaohsiung City Government,Taiwan 14. / Ray Y.W Hung, Dept. of Transportation, Kaohsiung City Government ,Taiwan 15. / Casper Hsu,Dept. of Transportation, Kaohsiung City Government ,Taiwan 16. Andi Putra / Andi Putra, Urban transport planners in Ministry of Transportation, Republic of Indonesia. 17.Ashim Ratna / Ashim Ratna ,Kathmandu Engineering College, Kalimati, Kathmandu, Nepal

63


HostSponsors
/Host: Kaohsiung City Government Chinese Institute Transportation /Co-organizer: Civil Engineering ,National Taiwan University National Policy Research Center NSYSU NSTP-Energy National Science and Technology Program-Energy /Organizers: City Image PR Consulatnts Co., Ltd. /Thanks for Sponsors:

ISO 9001

()