MyOOPS開放式課程
請加入會員以使用更多個人化功能
來自全球頂尖大學的開放式課程,現在由世界各國的數千名義工志工為您翻譯成中文。請免費享用!
課程來源:TED
     

 

Enrique Peñalosa 談為何公車體現了民主實踐

Enrique Peñalosa: Why buses represent democracy in action

 

Photo of three lions hunting on the Serengeti.

講者:Enrique Peñalosa

2013年9月演講,2013年12月在TEDCity2.0上線

 

翻譯:洪曉慧

編輯:朱學恒

簡繁轉換:洪曉慧

後制:洪曉慧

字幕影片後制:謝旻均

 

影片請按此下載

MAC及手持裝置版本請按此下載

閱讀中文字幕純文字版本

 

關於這場演講

Enrique Peñalosa認為:「一個先進的城市並非連窮人都使用汽車的地方,而是連有錢人都使用公共交通工具的地方。」在這場鼓舞人心的演講中,波哥大前市長分享了他用來改變哥倫比亞首都交通狀況的策略,並提出建設未來智慧城市的思考方向。

 

關於Enrique Peñalosa

Enrique Peñalosa於1998至2000年擔任哥倫比亞波哥大市市長。他主張未來城市應具有永續性及機動性。

 

為什麼要聽他演講

Enrique Peñalosa認為城市交通並非便利性及經濟問題,而是對每位居民的公正、公平性問題。1998至2001年,他於他的城市-哥倫比亞波哥大-擔任市長,他自豪地表示,在那段期間,建設了超過350公里自行車道。

 

Peñalosa目前擔任城市策略顧問,建議世界各國城市的政府官員如何建設永續發展城市,不僅能生存於未來,也能蓬勃發展。他是交通與政策發展研究所董事會主席,這是推動全球交通之永續性及公平性的組織。

 

Enrique Peñalosa的英語網上資料

Web: Enrique Penalosa

Twitter: @EnriquePenalosa

Facebook: Enrique Penalosa

Web: ITDP

 

[TED科技‧娛樂‧設計]

已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄(繁體)(簡體)。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

 

Enrique Peñalosa 談為何公車體現了民主實踐

 

在發展中國家的城市裡,流動性是相當獨特的挑戰,因為它不同於健康、教育或居住。當社會更加富裕時,它往往變得更糟,顯然並非可持續發展模式。流動性,如同大多數發展中國家遭遇的其他問題,不僅是資金或科技問題,而是平等、公平性問題。發展中國家裡極度不平等的情況使我們很難察覺,例如在交通方面,進步的城市並非連窮人都使用汽車的地方,而是連有錢人都使用公共交通工具的地方。或自行車:例如在阿姆斯特丹,超過30%人口使用自行車,儘管事實上荷蘭國民平均所得高於美國。發展中國家的城市存在衝突,為了經費、為了政府投資。如果較多經費投資在道路上,當然投資在住所、學校、醫院的經費就會減少。有車與無車階級間也存在空間使用衝突。現今大多數人接受私有財產和市場經濟是管理多數社會資源的最佳方式,然而,隨之而來的問題是,市場經濟需藉由收入不平等運作。有些人賺得多,有些人賺得少;有些公司蒸蒸日上,有些公司倒閉。那麼,在市場經濟條件下,現今我們期待的是什麼樣的平等?

 

我提出兩種看法,兩者都與城市息息相關。其一是生活上的平等,尤其對兒童來說。除了健康和教育之外,所有兒童都應擁有享受綠地、體育設施、泳池、音樂課程的權力。第二種平等即所謂的「民主式平等」。每個憲法國家第一條規定都是法律之前人人平等。這並非詩句,而是強而有力的原則。舉例來說,如果確實如此,載有80名乘客的公車有權獲得比單人駕駛的汽車多80倍的道路空間。

 

我們太習慣不平等,有時它就在眼前,我們卻視而不見。不到100年前,女性沒有投票權,這似乎十分正常,正如今天看見一輛公車陷在車陣中。事實上,當我成為市長時,運用這條民主原則:公眾利益凌駕於私人利益之上,一輛載有100人的公車有權獲得比一輛汽車多100倍的道路空間。我們實施以公車專用道為基礎的大眾運輸系統,稱之為TransMilenio(穿越千禧),為了讓公車顯得更性感。它也是相當美妙的民主象徵-當公車飛馳而過,昂貴的汽車陷在車陣中。這幾乎可說是民主獲得實現的畫面。事實上這不僅是公平性問題。不需要博士,一群12歲孩童就能在20分鐘內找出使用有限道路空間最有效的方法,即設立公車專用道。事實上公車並不性感,但在迅速發展的城市中,它們是提供大量運輸唯一可能的工具。它們也有很大的容量,例如這個位於廣州的系統,運送的乘客比中國所有地鐵路線更多,除了北京某條地鐵線。只需要地鐵龐大經費的一小部分。

 

我們不僅為公車爭取空間,也為行人爭取空間。這更加困難。城市是人類棲息地,人類是步行動物,就像魚需要游泳,或鳥需要飛行,或鹿需要奔跑,我們需要步行。當我們談到發展中國家城市行人與車輛的關係,其中存在相當大的衝突。你看見這是一張顯示不夠民主的圖片,它顯示行人是三等公民,汽車駕駛者是一等公民。以交通基礎設施而言,進步與落後城市的真正差別不在於高速公路或地鐵,而在於人行道的品質。他們在這裡建了一座高架橋,或許沒什麼作用,而他們忘了修築人行道。這種現象普遍存在於世界各地,甚至連學童的重要性都比不上汽車。

 

在我的城市波哥大,為了奪回汽車佔用的空間,我們進行了一場相當艱辛的抗爭。有些車在人行道上停了數十年。藉由替行人奪回空間反映人類尊嚴,並捍衛自行車空間。先說明一下,之前我的頭髮是黑的(笑聲)。過程中,我幾乎遭到彈劾,這是一場相當艱辛的戰役。然而,這是一個可能性。最終,艱苦的戰役結束後,創造一個反映人類尊嚴的城市,顯示行人與有車階級同樣重要。事實上,任何地方均存在的重要意識形態和政治議題是:如何分配城市最寶貴的資源,即道路空間。或許城市底下能找到石油或鑽石,但不會比道路空間更珍貴。如何將它分配給行人、自行車、大眾運輸工具及汽車?這並非技術性問題。當我們進行分配時應該記住,沒有任何憲法表明停車是一項憲法權利。

 

我們也建造了-這是15年前的事,在紐約、巴黎、倫敦出現自行車道之前。那也是相當艱苦的抗爭。建造了超過350公里的自行車道。我認為自行車道並非一項可愛的建築特色,它是一項權利,如同人行道。除非我們認為只有使用動力交通工具的人有權享有安全、機動性,不需遭受致命風險。如同公車專用道,自行車道也是強而有力的民主象徵,因為它顯示,駕駛30美元自行車的市民與駕駛3萬美元汽車的市民一樣重要。

 

我們生活在歷史上的特殊時期。到2060年仍然存在的城市中,一半以上將於未來50年當中建立。在許多發展中國家,到2060年仍然存在的城市中,百分之八、九十將於未來四、五十年當中建立。

 

但這不僅是發展中國家城市的問題。例如在美國,未來四、五十年間將建造超過7000萬間新屋,比目前英國、法國、加拿大所有房屋總和還多。我認為現今城市存在嚴重缺陷,我們可建造不同的、更好的城市。

 

現今城市有哪些問題?好,例如,如果我們對世上任何城市中還不太會說話的三歲孩童說:「小心,有車。」孩子會嚇得跳起來。原因顯而易見,因為世上每年有超過一萬名兒童死於車禍。城市的出現已有8000年歷史,孩童可走出家門玩耍,事實上,距今不久前,直到1900年,汽車並不存在。汽車的出現不到100年,它們使城市完全改觀。例如1900年,美國沒有任何人死於車禍。僅僅20年後,1920至1930年間,美國將近有20萬人死於車禍。光是1925年,美國將近有7000名兒童死於車禍。因此我們可創造不同的城市,給予人類而非汽車優先權的城市,給予人類而非汽車更多公共空間的城市,給予最脆弱的市民-例如孩童或年長者-極大尊重的城市。

 

我將提出幾項我認為能使城市變得更美好的要素,在新建城市中相當簡單易行。數百公里綠色街道縱橫交錯於城市中,孩童可走出家門,徜徉於安全空間。他們可在數十公里安全、沒有風險的綠色街道中行走,類似自行車道。我邀請各位想像一下以下畫面:一座每條街道都專為行人和自行車設計的城市,在即將興建的新城市中這並非難事。我擔任波哥大市長時,僅僅三年間,我們已建造了70公里,在世上人口最稠密的城市之一建造這些自行車道。這改變了人們生活、行動、享受城市的方式。在這張圖片中,你看見在一個非常貧困的社區中,我們擁有豪華的行人、自行車專用道,汽車仍行駛於泥地上。當然,我很樂意鋪好這條車用道路,但首要之務是什麼?在這些街區中,99%居民沒有汽車。但你知道,一座城市剛開始建設時,很容易將這類基礎設施納入,然後以此為中心建立整座城市。當然,這只是使城市更美好的初步構想。如果我們著手創建它,將改變我們的生活方式。

 

第二項要素是解決流動性問題。在發展中國家這是非常艱難的挑戰。一個成本相當低廉且簡單易行的方法是,將數百公里道路打造成公車、自行車、行人專用道。這同樣是成本相當低廉的解決方案,如果從頭打造成本低廉、擁有自然陽光的美好交通路線。

 

但不幸的是,現實不如我想像中美好。由於土地私有及高地價因素,所有發展中國家的城市都有貧民窟這個難題。在我的國家哥倫比亞,城市中幾乎一半房屋最初是違建。當然,在這種環境中很難實施大眾運輸或使用自行車。但即使合法的開發,也位於錯誤的地點。在離市中心相當遠的地方,無法提供低成本、高效率的公共運輸。身為拉丁美洲人,拉丁美洲是近年來世上依規劃開發的區域之一。我衷心且熱心地建議所有尚未城市化的國家-拉丁美洲由1950年的40%城市化,增長到2010年的80%城市化-我建議亞洲及非洲尚未城市化的國家-例如印度,目前僅33%城市化-政府應取得城市周圍所有土地,如此城市才能在適當區域發展,擁有適當空間:公園、綠色街道、公車專用道。

 

未來50年,我們著手打造的城市將決定未來數十億人的生活品質,甚至幸福感。這是領導者及未來年輕領袖的絕佳機會,尤其對發展中國家來說。他們可為未來數十億人創造更幸福的生活。我堅信不移、充滿樂觀,他們將使城市比我們夢想中更美好。

 

(掌聲)

 

以下為系統擷取之英文原文

About this Talk

An advanced city is not one where even the poor use cars, but rather one where even the rich use public transport," argues Enrique Peñalosa. In this spirited talk, the former mayor of Bogotá shares some of the tactics he used to change the transportation dynamic in the Colombian capital... and suggests ways to think about building smart cities of the future.

About the Speaker

Enrique Peñalosa was the mayor of Bogotá, Colombia, between 1998 and 2000. He advocates for sustainability and mobility in the cities of the future. Full bio

Transcript

Mobility in developing world cities is a very peculiar challenge, because different from health or education or housing, it tends to get worse as societies become richer. Clearly, a unsustainable model. Mobility, as most other developing country problems, more than a matter of money or technology, is a matter of equality, equity. The great inequality in developing countries makes it difficult to see, for example, that in terms of transport, an advanced city is not one where even the poor use cars, but rather one where even the rich use public transport. Or bicycles: For example, in Amsterdam, more than 30 percent of the population uses bicycles, despite the fact that the Netherlands has a higher income per capita than the United States. There is a conflict in developing world cities for money, for government investment. If more money is invested in highways, of course there is less money for housing, for schools, for hospitals, and also there is a conflict for space. There is a conflict for space between those with cars and those without them. Most of us accept today that private property and a market economy is the best way to manage most of society's resources. However, there is a problem with that, that market economy needs inequality of income in order to work. Some people must make more money, some others less. Some companies succeed. Others fail. Then what kind of equality can we hope for today with a market economy?

I would propose two kinds which both have much to do with cities. The first one is equality of quality of life, especially for children, that all children should have, beyond the obvious health and education, access to green spaces, to sports facilities, to swimming pools, to music lessons. And the second kind of equality is one which we could call "democratic equality." The first article in every constitution states that all citizens are equal before the law. That is not just poetry. It's a very powerful principle. For example, if that is true, a bus with 80 passengers has a right to 80 times more road space than a car with one.

We have been so used to inequality, sometimes, that it's before our noses and we do not see it. Less than 100 years ago, women could not vote, and it seemed normal, in the same way that it seems normal today to see a bus in traffic. In fact, when I became mayor, applying that democratic principle that public good prevails over private interest, that a bus with 100 people has a right to 100 times more road space than a car, we implemented a mass transit system based on buses in exclusive lanes. We called it TransMilenio, in order to make buses sexier. And one thing is that it is also a very beautiful democratic symbol, because as buses zoom by, expensive cars stuck in traffic, it clearly is almost a picture of democracy at work. In fact, it's not just a matter of equity. It doesn't take Ph.D.'s. A committee of 12-year-old children would find out in 20 minutes that the most efficient way to use scarce road space is with exclusive lanes for buses. In fact, buses are not sexy, but they are the only possible means to bring mass transit to all areas of fast growing developing cities. They also have great capacity. For example, this system in Guangzhou is moving more passengers our direction than all subway lines in China, except for one line in Beijing, at a fraction of the cost.

We fought not just for space for buses, but we fought for space for people, and that was even more difficult. Cities are human habitats, and we humans are pedestrians. Just as fish need to swim or birds need to fly or deer need to run, we need to walk. There is a really enormous conflict, when we are talking about developing country cities, between pedestrians and cars. Here, what you see is a picture that shows insufficient democracy. What this shows is that people who walk are third-class citizens while those who go in cars are first-class citizens. In terms of transport infrastructure, what really makes a difference between advanced and backward cities is not highways or subways but quality sidewalks. Here they made a flyover, probably very useless, and they forgot to make a sidewalk. This is prevailing all over the world. Not even schoolchildren are more important than cars.

In my city of Bogotá, we fought a very difficult battle in order to take space from cars, which had been parking on sidewalks for decades, in order to make space for people that should reflect dignity of human beings, and to make space for protected bikeways. First of all, I had black hair before that. (Laughter) And I was almost impeached in the process. It is a very difficult battle. However, it was possible, finally, after very difficult battles, to make a city that would reflect some respect for human dignity, that would show that those who walk are equally important to those who have cars. Indeed, a very important ideological and political issue anywhere is how to distribute that most valuable resource of a city, which is road space. A city could find oil or diamonds underground and it would not be so valuable as road space. How to distribute it between pedestrians, bicycles, public transport and cars? This is not a technological issue, and we should remember that in no constitution parking is a constitutional right when we make that distribution.

We also built, and this was 15 years ago, before there were bikeways in New York or in Paris or in London, it was a very difficult battle as well, more than 350 kilometers of protected bicycle ways. I don't think protected bicycle ways are a cute architectural feature. They are a right, just as sidewalks are, unless we believe that only those with access to a motor vehicle have a right to safe mobility, without the risk of getting killed. And just as busways are, protected bikeways also are a powerful symbol of democracy, because they show that a citizen on a $30 bicycle is equally important to one in a $30,000 car.

And we are living in a unique moment in history. In the next 50 years, more than half of those cities which will exist in the year 2060 will be built. In many developing country cities, more than 80 and 90 percent of the city which will exist in 2060 will be built over the next four or five decades.

But this is not just a matter for developing country cities. In the United States, for example, more than 70 million new homes must be built over the next 40 or 50 years. That's more than all the homes that today exist in Britain, France and Canada put together. And I believe that our cities today have severe flaws, and that different, better ones could be built.

What is wrong with our cities today? Well, for example, if we tell any three-year-old child who is barely learning to speak in any city in the world today, "Watch out, a car," the child will jump in fright, and with a very good reason, because there are more than 10,000 children who are killed by cars every year in the world. We have had cities for 8,000 years, and children could walk out of home and play. In fact, only very recently, towards 1900, there were no cars. Cars have been here for really less than 100 years. They completely changed cities. In 1900, for example, nobody was killed by cars in the United States. Only 20 years later, between 1920 and 1930, almost 200,000 people were killed by cars in the United States. Only in 1925, almost 7,000 children were killed by cars in the United States. So we could make different cities, cities that will give more priority to human beings than to cars, that will give more public space to human beings than to cars, cities which show great respect for those most vulnerable citizens, such as children or the elderly.

I will propose to you a couple of ingredients which I think would make cities much better, and it would be very simple to implement them in the new cities which are only being created. Hundreds of kilometers of greenways criss-crossing cities in all directions. Children will walk out of homes into safe spaces. They could go for dozens of kilometers safely without any risk in wonderful greenways, sort of bicycle highways, and I would invite you to imagine the following: a city in which every other street would be a street only for pedestrians and bicycles. In new cities which are going to be built, this would not be particularly difficult. When I was mayor of Bogotá, in only three years, we were able to create 70 kilometers, in one of the most dense cities in the world, of these bicycle highways. And this changes the way people live, move, enjoy the city. In this picture, you see in one of the very poor neighborhoods, we have a luxury pedestrian bicycle street, and the cars still in the mud. Of course, I would love to pave this street for cars. But what do we do first? Ninety-nine percent of the people in those neighborhoods don't have cars. But you see, when a city is only being created, it's very easy to incorporate this kind of infrastructure. Then the city grows around it. And of course this is just a glimpse of something which could be much better if we just create it, and it changes the way of life.

And the second ingredient, which would solve mobility, that very difficult challenge in developing countries, in a very low-cost and simple way, would be to have hundreds of kilometers of streets only for buses, buses and bicycles and pedestrians. This would be, again, a very low-cost solution if implemented from the start, low cost, pleasant transit with natural sunlight.

But unfortunately, reality is not as good as my dreams. Because of private property of land and high land prices, all developing country cities have a large problem of slums. In my country of Colombia, almost half the homes in cities initially were illegal developments. And of course it's very difficult to have mass transit or to use bicycles in such environments. But even legal developments have also been located in the wrong places, very far from the city centers where it's impossible to provide low-cost, high-frequency public transport. As a Latin American, and Latin America was the most recently organized region in the world, I would recommend, respectfully, passionately, to those countries which are yet to urbanize -- Latin America went from 40 percent urban in 1950 to 80 percent urban in 2010 -- I would recommend Asian and African countries which are yet to urbanize, such as India which is only 33 percent urban now, that governments should acquire all land around cities. In this way, their cities could grow in the right places with the right spaces, with the parks, with the greenways, with the busways.

The cities we are going to build over the next 50 years will determine quality of life and even happiness for billions of people towards the future. What a fantastic opportunity for leaders and many young leaders to come, especially in the developing countries. They can create a much happier life for billions towards the future. I am sure, I am optimistic, that they will make cities better than our most ambitious dreams.

(Applause)


留下您對本課程的評論
標題:
您目前為非會員,留言名稱將顯示「匿名非會員」
只能進行20字留言

留言內容:

驗證碼請輸入3 + 0 =

標籤

現有標籤:1
新增標籤:


有關本課程的討論

目前暫無評論,快來留言吧!

Creative Commons授權條款 本站一切著作係採用 Creative Commons 授權條款授權。
協助推廣單位: