Reaching Maturity

We have expanded the reaches of our transportation system enough. Now it's time to increase the efficiency of this well-established transportation system. The next revolution in transportation will not be the frontier-dominating expansion, but rather the establishment of long-term management over what we've conquered.

In Defense of Connectivity

I will rarely advocate the construction of new roads — I'd have a long argument that there are enough inter-city roads in North America and Europe now to last us through all time. But the developing world is not so lucky.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Africa has put forward a plan to integrate Africa's hodgepodge of highways into a vast, transcontinental network spanning all but a few countries. It would require filling in a few gaps, and more than a few upgrades, but it could bring a new future to regional trade in Africa.

The legacy of colonial construction links the hinterlands with the ports, and nothing else. A higway network in Africa, like the interstates of the US, would provide mobility necessary for real economic growth.

Unfortunately I see a band of unrest stretching from DR Congo (which, incidentally, has fewer roads per person than any other African country — less paved road than the east-west length of the country) through CAR, Chad and Sudan that essentially isolates northwest and southeast Africa. Let's hope times change to make regional integration a possibility.

The Observer and the Decider

I stumbled upon the US's Transportation Research Board's website, and it struck my fancy that there are thousands of people employed in an industry that the governments of East Africa (see previous post) don't believe necessary: data collection.

The industry of transportation analysis appears more booming than I ever imagined. Data gathering, reports, and monthly conferences are all the endpoint of apparently substantial quantities of public investment.

We read numbers and ridership levels and five-year outlooks, but for what? The power of a study lies in the recommendation that it spurs — without the recommendation the study becomes impotent.

Of course the purpose of a study is to provide empirical evidence, but without further action all we have is words. Words spoken to millions are still just words.

None will know so much to do with evidence, as those that provide it in the first place. Thus the observer must also become the decider.

To be the most effective, the electorate should hand over the role of decisionmaking to the people that understand the situation best — the analysts. I think it should the analysts' decision to take action. But perhaps this is stepping out of the bounds of expectation.

Opening Economies?

An interesting development, which probably will amount to little, is the East African Community's decision to upgrade and expand to a vast multi-national rail network. (A big shift is the conversion to standard gauge, from metre gauge which is common throughout the region. Necessary? On the "probably" side.)

It is most interesting because the economic and social centers of Kenya, Tanzania, and so forth are centralized along colonial railroads; Nairobi proudly admits its origins as a railway station.

If history dictates, an infrastructure upgrade of this sort could stimulate increased regional trade. The original system was built to give the British access to the Nile and to bring goods out of the colonies to the motherland. A regional network could promote growth within the region, as well as providing new infrastructure to greater portions of each country.

I'm skeptical as to whether it ever gets built. Rumour has it the plan is to build across the deserts of northern Kenya — not the most economically viable location. I remain excited all the same.

Totalitarian Legacy

Is there a peculiarity about democratically-questionable governments that raises the propensity for transit investment?

I'm no advocate of 'dictatorships'. But since Chavez came to power, Venezuela has seen the construction of three new light-rail systems, and a huge reinvestment in the national rail network for both freight and passengers. I'd argue that these moves vindicate some wrongs — the investments made domestically today will linger longer than policy points.

Iran has four metros under construction as we speak (so they say) and an extensive system in Tehran built since the Ayatollah came to power. We all know China, so of course transit development should come as no surprise. But how many in the western would consider transit a symbol of pride for a city?

I can imagine using this point against transit — that in the Western World, we have cars and don't need "cattle class" transportation. I suppose it comes down to a matter of preference. Cars will still be around after these regimes are gone.

But the infrastructure will remain, and nobody loses out when that's the case. It's one positive legacy each of these regimes will leave.

On Expenditure

I am baffled by the sheer amount of public motivation and effort required to stop construction of a highway — and that the same amount of effort is required to start a transit initiative.

Consider the Spadina Expressway in Toronto, or Robert Moses's various plans for cross-Manhattan expressways. That these plans required momentum to stop — to prevent them from being built — is a testament to the blind motivation of urban planners of recent decades.

That transit takes such great initiative to start, and is subject to further public scrutiny than highway construction, is undoubtedly because the public will not only fund construction and maintenance (as is with roads) but also operation of transit infrastructure.

Nevertheless we should consider ridership first. But if we think a highway through greenfields will provoke new development, why shouldn't transit do the same?