Japan's urban mass rapid transport system is a fine example of what can be achieved with a high degree of discipline, politeness and rule-based behaviour.
USING the mass transit system in Tokyo is fascinating in many ways. It is probably the largest, the most complex and the most efficient system of urban mass transport anywhere in the world, catering to considerably more than 10 million commuters daily. It is estimated that more than 3 million people pass through just one metro station (Shinjuku) every day, while even somewhat smaller stations such as Ikebukoro are mind-boggling in the sheer force of humanity that rushes through them and negotiates the complicated passages between connecting lines.
The system is extremely intricate, for several reasons. One is the sheer size of the city in terms of geographical spread, and the associated need to reach far-flung areas as well as to ensure smooth travel and connectivity in the most congested parts. Another is the huge number of commuters involved, especially during peak hours. A third reason is that the existing system reflects the varying periodicity of installation of different lines, which were typically put into operation at different times. As a result, newer lines had to come up in ways that intersected and yet made allowances for the space already given to existing lines and stations.
In some cases this has even meant that new parts of stations have had to be constructed slightly apart from the original ones, making commuters weave through underground and overground streets and connecting passages in convoluted ways. To make everything even more convoluted, the lines are managed by different agencies, including the JR (Japan Rail) and the Tokyo Metro, and private companies that control privatised segments of particular lines.
Despite all this complexity, the system is awe-inspiring in its smoothness and the relative ease of travel even when frequent changes of line are required to reach a destination. Smart cards that are simply swiped at all entry and exit points are easy to procure and recharge. The absolute punctuality of trains is unbelievable and incredibly convenient.
Travelling on this very crowded system that works almost too perfectly gives rise to various other thoughts. The first, and probably the most important from our perspective, is how public transport is indicative of the state of development and degree of civilisation of a society. Most of the richest countries in the world, with high per capita incomes, have excellent, efficient and affordable systems of public transport. By contrast, poor and developing nations tend to have appalling and inadequate public transport systems in their cities. The rich and better-off groups can simply take to their private vehicles and ignore the problem, except insofar as it leads to massive traffic congestion. But it usually forces the poor to take recourse to ramshackle and often overpriced private transport. In many cities of the developing world, the poor still simply have to walk to work and elsewhere, no matter how long it takes.
Of course, there are exceptions on both sides of this argument. The United States is a prime example of inadequately developed public transport, in which even large metros suffer from excessive dependence on private vehicles. China, by contrast, had good public mass transit systems even before its recent dramatic rapid growth phase, and in its period of major economic expansion has made efficient mass transport a major priority in urban development. But, by and large, most countries fall into this pattern.
The result is that most developing countries that are experiencing rapid urbanisation are creating urban monstrosities of congestion, pollution and immense difficulty for commuters. Because these countries do not provide efficient, reliable and affordable means of transport, they generate incentives for private vehicles. At the same time, they do not disincentivise congestion on the streets through sufficiently high road taxes for cars and other such policies.
Perhaps, then, the following could also be taken as a measure of development, and it may well be a much better single indicator than per capita gross domestic product: the extent to which all urban residents in a society are able to access efficient mass transit systems. As more and more of the developing world's populations come to live in urban centres, this is necessarily an important indicator.
The second thought is how the nature of a mass transport system reflects the nature of the society, especially in extremely crowded conditions. The metro system of Tokyo relies on a high degree of discipline, politeness and rule-based behaviour. Indeed, given the huge numbers of commuters involved, the system would simply break down if all of these characteristics were not prevalent among the people using the system. People do not push, even during the very crowded rush hours; they wait in queues wherever necessary; they follow the rules about where to stand and how to move; in general, they make room for and assist older people and those with small children.
Some may argue that this simply reflects the general sense of obedience, courtesy and discipline that is said to characterise Japanese society as a whole. But it may be reflective of something else: the realisation that living, surviving and moving around in very crowded urban spaces necessarily requires a great sense of the other, an ability to recognise interdependence and deal with it in an accepting way without generating unnecessary conflict. This is not something that is currently widespread in much of the developing world. But it is a lesson that more and more people living in urban conglomerations in the developing world will have to learn.
But, of course, such courtesy and discipline are easier to generate when there is not great scarcity. In Tokyo, commuters know that if they miss one train the next will come quite soon, and so are able to wait without too much desperation. But in many other cities that is far from the case, and missing one train or bus may involve hours of waiting. So the fight to get into the first train or bus that comes along is that much more intense and violent, and people are much less willing to recognise the claims of others, especially those who are disadvantaged in various ways.
That brings on another thought: that the creation of efficient mass public transport systems requires, and generates, a greater degree of harmony among people. This is because, as commuters and, therefore, all citizens see that the costs of better behaviour are low and the benefits are significant, they are likely to realise that they will all be better off if they behave well with one another.
Quite apart from the expense of the infrastructure required, complicated mass transport systems require complicated signage and instructions to commuters, which is another reason why less developed countries are often less able to indulge in them. They require definite levels of functional literacy, which are typically much higher than the pathetic definitions of literacy that are prevalent in India, for example. This means that they require and assume significant levels of education among the mass of population: certainly universal elementary education, and ideally even more.
The final thought is how dependent successful modern mass transport systems are on the latest developments in information technology. The Tokyo mass transit system relies on extremely sophisticated software at many different levels: in organising the movements of trains, in determining the actual payments to be made by a commuter for a specific journey, for relating the payments to the different agencies managing particular parts of the system, in ensuring security, and so on.
This should be a source of optimism in other parts of the developing world, since, increasingly, access to such technology is much more widespread.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE