Around the world, strong evidence is now coming forward to suggest that spending money on road infrastructure within cities is a waste of money.
But in Karachi, the DHA is planning the Gizri Flyover, a multi-million-rupee project that will adversely affect the environment, worsen traffic and lead to social immobility. In Lahore, a recent newspaper article suggests that the chief minister has requested the authorities concerned to reconsider the plan, once scrapped after opposition from civil society groups, of widening the Canal Bank Road. In Islamabad, billions of rupees have been spent on road construction in the past few years. In none of these cities, meanwhile, is there a viable or minimally effective public transport system. Islamabad, in fact, is probably the only capital city in the world that does not have a public transport service.
In the decade-plus of its existence, the Lahore Traffic Engineering and Planning Agency has done nothing but build and remodel roads. The result is that traffic congestion is the worst ever. Of course, TEPA will blame the liberal car-financing market for the congestion, as if car leasing was a little-known secret in Pakistan these past few years. The fact is that TEPA and other transport agencies rely on the ridiculously outmoded "capacity vs. volume" argument. In their worlds, the "capacity" of a road network can be calculated. If the "volume" or usage of the road network increased beyond its capacity, the Pavlovian response is to start constructing new roads to meet the capacity.
The "Braess Paradox" establishes that additions to the capacity of a road network often results in increased congestion and longer travel times. The reason has to do with the complex effects of individual drivers all trying to optimise their routes. Likewise, there is the phenomenon of induced demand – or the "if you build it, they will come" effect. In short, fancy new roads encourage people to drive more miles, as well as seeding new sprawl-style development that shifts new users onto them. And the Braess paradox is not just an arcane bit of theory either.
In 2002, when the local government of Seoul, South Korea, was faced with the costs of maintaining a massive double-decker highway that had been paved over the Cheonggyecheon River, it decided to knock the entire structure down. Never mind the 160,000-plus cars that the road carried every day. The immediate result of the intervention was a beautiful new 1,000-acre park in the middle of the city as well as reduced traffic volumes. The closure of the highway convinced people to drive less, choose another route or opt for public transport. The park replaced the slum that had mushroomed under the highway. The mayor responsible for the billion-dollar economic turnaround in the middle of the city (the new park opened hundreds of business opportunities along the banks of the newly greened Cheonggyecheon) is now a major player in South Korea's national politics.
But in Karachi, the DHA is planning the Gizri Flyover, a multi-million-rupee project that will adversely affect the environment, worsen traffic and lead to social immobility. In Lahore, a recent newspaper article suggests that the chief minister has requested the authorities concerned to reconsider the plan, once scrapped after opposition from civil society groups, of widening the Canal Bank Road. In Islamabad, billions of rupees have been spent on road construction in the past few years. In none of these cities, meanwhile, is there a viable or minimally effective public transport system. Islamabad, in fact, is probably the only capital city in the world that does not have a public transport service.
In the decade-plus of its existence, the Lahore Traffic Engineering and Planning Agency has done nothing but build and remodel roads. The result is that traffic congestion is the worst ever. Of course, TEPA will blame the liberal car-financing market for the congestion, as if car leasing was a little-known secret in Pakistan these past few years. The fact is that TEPA and other transport agencies rely on the ridiculously outmoded "capacity vs. volume" argument. In their worlds, the "capacity" of a road network can be calculated. If the "volume" or usage of the road network increased beyond its capacity, the Pavlovian response is to start constructing new roads to meet the capacity.
The "Braess Paradox" establishes that additions to the capacity of a road network often results in increased congestion and longer travel times. The reason has to do with the complex effects of individual drivers all trying to optimise their routes. Likewise, there is the phenomenon of induced demand – or the "if you build it, they will come" effect. In short, fancy new roads encourage people to drive more miles, as well as seeding new sprawl-style development that shifts new users onto them. And the Braess paradox is not just an arcane bit of theory either.
In 2002, when the local government of Seoul, South Korea, was faced with the costs of maintaining a massive double-decker highway that had been paved over the Cheonggyecheon River, it decided to knock the entire structure down. Never mind the 160,000-plus cars that the road carried every day. The immediate result of the intervention was a beautiful new 1,000-acre park in the middle of the city as well as reduced traffic volumes. The closure of the highway convinced people to drive less, choose another route or opt for public transport. The park replaced the slum that had mushroomed under the highway. The mayor responsible for the billion-dollar economic turnaround in the middle of the city (the new park opened hundreds of business opportunities along the banks of the newly greened Cheonggyecheon) is now a major player in South Korea's national politics.
The Cheonggyecheon before
The Cheonggyecheon after
In 1974, after a long and contentious political battle, the-then governor of the US state of Oregon, Tom McCall, ordered the demolition of the four-lane freeway, known as Harbor Drive, on the western shore of the city of Portland. The state's Highway Department was against the demolition. In fact, it wanted to widen the thoroughfare. But on the first day Harbor Drive was closed to traffic, there wasn't a single ripple in the city's traffic flow. According to legend, one of the highway engineers who predicted a traffic catastrophe if the highway was brought down, called the governor's office to congratulate him on the success of the initiative. Today, the space taken by Harbor Drive has been replaced by the Tom McCall Waterfront Park, and is an integral reason why Portland, Oregon, which is now a cycle-friendly city, is celebrated as the most liveable of US cities.
Harbor Drive in 1964
Harbor Drive now
In 1989, the Loma Prieta earthquake damaged San Francisco's Embercadero Elevated Freeway that ran past the city's waterfront. This proved to be the catalyst city fathers needed to bring the structure down. Today, in place of the freeway, there is a waterfront boulevard with cycle trails, parks and public exhibitions.
In Bogota, Colombia, in just a three-year period, Enrique Penalosa placed a moratorium on public expenditure on roads and the automobile elite. Instead, he spent money on a Bus Rapid Transit public transport system, on walkways, on schools, libraries and museums. The result is that even a toddler, once on one of the ciclorutas, can navigate the city unmolested by traffic. Since the ciclorutas are linked to public recreational spaces, the young, old and handicapped, the rich and poor, all have access to the city on foot and on cycle. The areas padestrianised by Penalosa – including the city centre and some of the most violent neighbourhoods in Colombia – are now quiet and peaceful. Air quality has improved, there are dramatically fewer traffic accidents, property values have risen and, most important, the quality of life has improved.
Bogota's city center is now pedestrian friendly
Just last month, in New York City, the transport office decided to pedestrianise the Times Square area of Broadway, one of the most iconic shopping centres in the world. The result: immediate success, with no harm to traffic flows.
Broadway Now
There are plenty more examples, in Curitiba, Brazil, in Ahmedabad, in Johannesburg, of cities deciding to remove highways from city centres, of introducing public transport instead of spending money for roads that are used predominantly by the urban automobile elite.
In 2008-2009, the Government of Punjab allocated Rs10 billion more to bridge and underpass construction than it did to the health, public-health and education sectors combined. With less than 15 percent of the population using 1.8 million automobiles in Lahore, it's no wonder our children regularly contract respiratory diseases. And when you wonder why, or why there aren't any good hospitals or doctors to care for them, remember this: It's because we spend all our money on road development.
If we stopped wasting money on building expensive, polluting, socially destructive highways for the automobile inside our cities, we would have billions to spend on education, health, public transport and recreational facilities for millions of people. It is that simple. Stop spending money on building roads.
