We Aren't Worthy: Taipei Plays Host to Velo-city Global

Between Feb 27th and March 1st Taipei will play host to the worldwide Velo-city conference; a conference designed by the European Cyclists' Federation to promote the integration of the bicycle into the modern city infrastructure. 

According to the ECF, the purpose is to:

• Raise the status of cycling and to promote recognition of the benefits of cycling for both individuals and society as a whole.
• Encourage consideration of cyclists’ needs in Europe in all aspects of transport planning and management, environment, safety and health, and promote cycle-friendly conditions throughout Europe.
• Support member groups on matters of national and international importance relating to the aims of the ECF.
• Undertake research on matters relating to cycling, transportation, environment and safety.
• Enhance the information and advice available to member groups and thus assist in their activities nationally and internationally.
• Promote the exchange of information and expertise between member organisations.
• Provide information and expertise in order to raise the awareness of specific groups: international bodies and institutions, politicians, planners, manufacturers/trade groups, bicycle holiday agents/tourism authorities, environmental and transport groups with regard to cycling and its benefits and needs

Of course, the ECF is no longer contained to just Europe as it has become a global proponent of lobby for progressive bicycle policy. 

Then why choose Taiwan? 

On the one hand, I see this as an incredibly welcome and opportune time to hold Velo-city in Taiwan. There is a continued interest in bicycles on all levels from riders, private enterprise and policymakers. In the face of an unprecedented turnover in government over the past two years in the executive, legislative and municipalities largely in favor of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), along with the inception and emergence of a more progressive New Power Party, (NPP) it may not be business as usual in terms of bicycle infrastructure development, which has overwhelmingly favored superfluous recreation over transportation and utility. These projects increase the visibility of cycling but do precious little to reduce the reliance on motorized transportation and merely increase their carbon footprint by spreading slick lanes asphalt in an attempt to shift people from the swimming pools and basketball courts to the bike lanes. Both parties made inroads promoting Taiwan centered policies, especially the NPP, which supports policies promoting sustainability and energy independence.

There has been some positive increase in ridership of the various metropolitan public bicycle programs, but from this rider's perspective, most of the riders appear to be students who would be using mass transportation anyway as opposed to a personal motor vehicle. 

I am less optimistic when I read how this event is being imagined locally: 

The Taipei Times reports: 

Taipei Deputy Mayor Chou Li-fang (周麗芳) said.
The event is to feature eight select bicycle trails, each having a different theme, including hot springs, waterfront parks, culture, historic buildings and art, Chou said. 

She said that Taipei is to join the list of previous host cities, such as London, Copenhagen, Milan, Italy and Vienna, Austria, which would boost the city’s international profile. 

Chou said that Taipei made strenuous efforts to work with the central government and the private sector to secure its 2013 bid to host the event. 

By winning the bid, it justified Taiwan’s status as a “bicycle kingdom,” Taipei’s efforts to promote cycling and its bicycle trails, as well as Taipei’s status as an international city.

We often see Taiwan so hungry for international validation, citizens and leaders are tone deaf to the criticism or suggestions provided by international experts. 

The purpose of this event and the mission of the ECF is not to justify a city's or a nation's status as a success in integrating the bicycle into the city infrastructure or to boost a city's profile for tourism. The purpose is to exchange information, learn and improve upon the status quo. 

Taiwan still faces two major problems that threaten the future development of building a "bicycle kingdom". 

The first is the lack of cycling infrastructure in the cities and areas where people actually live and work. The ability to substitute the car or scooter for the bicycle in a viable manner between home and the office is severely limited by the lack of a comprehensive and connected system of safe bicycle corridors throughout the city, the lack of safe and viable bicycle storage facilities, the lack of support for commuting cyclists in businesses and the lack of space given to the bicycle. 

The second major problem is with the pernicious air pollution that regularly chokes our cities and drives the PM2.5 air pollution index into the danger zone. I have personally lost several cycling days this year due to unhealthy levels of pollution. I didn't have an asthma problem before cycling in Taiwan. The PM2.5 index used in Taiwan has been adjusted to Taiwan's own index, which shifts the entire spectrum of air quality rightward so that levels that would be deemed unhealthy in most countries, will still be deemed healthy or moderate by Taiwan's standards. Tackling the problem of air quality will be paramount to securing a future that is safe for cycling in Taiwan. 

My hope is that the foreign experts will find time to freely roam Taiwan by bicycle and provide our politicians and city planners with harsh critical and constructive feedback on how we can implement solutions. We don't need any more gland handing. 

Taiwan is not ready to feel it has ascended to the pinnacle of bicycle transportation and political leaders need to admit that we have a long way to go to make the changes needed to stand along side Copenhagen and Vancouver as equals in infrastructure development. But will anybody listen? 

European Cyclists' Federation Director Questions Taiwan's Commitment to Cycling

A reader spotted this ad in Florida

In a report from Taiwan Focus, Kevin Mayne, the director of a major European cycling advocacy group leveled some needed criticism of Taiwan's commitment to incorporating cycling into the transportation grid despite Taiwan's recent claims of being a "bicycle kingdom" and a "cycling paradise". 

According to the report:

"Taipei, March 20 (CNA) Taiwan needs to lower its speed limits and allocate more space for cyclists if it hopes to achieve its aim of transforming into a "cycling island," a foreign expert said Wednesday."

Mayne's observations and recommendations came amid the opening of the 2013 Taipei Cycle bicycle expo in Nangang.

Mayne's stinging criticism underscores what many cyclists in Taiwan have understood for a long time. The solutions are there, but the political will is not.

Mayne, whose federation consists of national cycling organizations throughout Europe, said speed limits in Taiwan are too high for cars and scooters to coexist with cyclists.
Cities friendly toward cyclists usually have speed limits of below 30 kilometers per hour, he said, citing German and Dutch cities as examples. 

He said lowering speed limits is also a "cheap" solution to building Taiwan into a cycling paradise, as nothing needs to be built. "What you need is political will and enforcement," he added. 

Mayne also advised cities in Taiwan to allocate more space for cyclists and to take bolder steps to improve the environment for them, citing New York, Paris, London and Vienna as examples of cities that are currently doing so and upon which Taiwan could model itself.
He said the bike-sharing system in Paris, for example, offered 15,000 bikes when it was first launched, while Taipei's bike-sharing system, Youbike, currently offers only 1500. 

Mayne's observations are welcome words to cycling advocates as he knowingly, or not, shines a light on the fact that much of Taiwan's trouble in realizing its own ad copy comes from the fact that cycling and cycling infrastructure is often deployed by opportunistic politicians to score cheap points or direct public funds into politically advantageous locations. There is no wide-spread commitment to cycling beyond tourism. Much of what has been built is simply for show with little concern for function.

The rebuttal from Giant's King Liu may serve to best exemplify what is wrong with Taiwan's cycling infrastructure.

Meanwhile, King Liu, chairman of Taiwan's bicycle titan Giant, pointed out that the government invested NT$3 billion (US$100.85 million) to build 2,088 km of dedicated bike lanes around the country between 1999 and 2011. 

The government plans to invest a further NT$1.2 billion to build more bike lanes in the next four years, he went on. 

Giant cooperated with the Taipei city government in 2009 to launch the Youbike, which is now used by over 20,000 people every day, a number that is expected to increase when the program is expanded this year, he added.

The focus is always on the abstraction of numbers and never on how these projects will benefit the society and the community. Liu does not detail how those lanes are expected to be used.

In practice, many/most of those kilometers exist on the fringe of the cities and are allocated for leisure cycling, and thus they do little to reduce carbon emissions or reduce the use of motorized traffic. Most of those lanes are completely divorced from the transportation grid that connects home and work. Cars. busses and scooters are not being replaced by bicycles in Taiwan.

In many ways Liu highlights why Taiwan's priorities are not in-line with Mayne's vision of urban cycling. The goal is not really to promote bicycle infrastructure, but rather to dole out tax dollars to townships and sell more Giant bikes (the more expensive ones the better).

As a nation with access to domestic bicycle production, the glad handing over kilometers and tax dollars spent should be replaced by a sense of shame and missed opportunity.... unless you are in the business of constructing all those kilometers of bike lanes.

Taipei Times Letter: Blowing Smoke Against Better Bike Policies

Today's Taipei Times has a juicy letter from one Cilliers Landman that dips into several topics, not the least of which is government spending for bicycle infrastructure.

Landman writes:

In your editorial of April 17, you chose a valid topic to comment about. More people should ride bicycles, not only for recreation, but also to work. Unfortunately, you couldn’t help yourself and had to blame somebody for that not happening. So you went after the Taipei City Government. It’s all their fault.

Don’t you realize that Taiwan will never be Holland or Denmark? People here will never ride their bicycles to work en masse. Should the city government spend money on things like bike lanes and other bicycle-friendly facilities that few, if any, would use, you would be too happy to criticize such spending as a waste of money.

And isn’t it interesting that during the DPP administration, when their policies were ruining Taiwan economically and the president and his wife were stealing millions of dollars from the public, you were right there supporting them?

Mr. Landman is blowing lots of smoke and seems to hardly have the facts or the context of Taiwan's economic or political history at hand to form much of an educated opinion that reaches beyond the screen of partisan talking points.

The bulk of Landman's letter deals primarily with Ma's recent decision to partially revoke the oil subsidies that have artificially capped oil prices at an unsustainable level in the hopes of fueling economic growth. This is a policy that had remained steadily in place since the days of single party authoritarian rule, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could more easily transfer and inject cash into its various industrial monopolies without the hassle of democratic oversight. Landman somehow pins these long-standing policies on the Chen Shui-bian administration, which was characterized as a weak executive branch facing an overwhelming opposition majority in the legislature.

Landman also erroneously believes the Chen administration stole public funds and ruined the economy. Chen was not jailed for misappropriating any public funds and despite a global economic crisis, Taiwan  experienced sustained economic growth from 2002 until 2008, when Taiwan's economy stagnated and even shrunk. Ah... but I digress.

What I really want to point out here is that the local and central governments do play a significant role in how bicycles are integrated into the transportation grid. For decades Taiwanese commuted to work on bicycles and pedicabs. It is not an alien concept to adopt. Whether Taiwanese will ride bicycles to work en masse can be greatly aided by a government that takes cycling seriously rather than an elitist pastime of leisure. The Dunhua Rd. bike lane debacle is ripe for criticism as it was a disastrous waste of NT$60 million of public money (I pay taxes too) on a project that was hastily designed and completed with the aim of blatant political grandstanding and spreading largesse to the valuable constituency of construction contractors without the consultation of cyclists.

Projects like Dunhua Rd. and other ill conceived bike lane projects that consume public funds to benefit only a small minority of recreational riders in the name of "tourism" only serve to sour the public appetite for real, functional bike lanes that provide returns for everyone in the form of a cleaner, less congested environment. This practice should really be characterized as a scandalous misappropriation of public funds that voters and people like Mr. Landman should be concerned about.

These policies fall right in the lap of the Ma administration, which enjoys the benefits of controlling both the executive and legislative... and probably even the judicial branches in government.  Even KMT politicians see that towing the party line may not be in our or their best interests.