Summarizing discussions

Brenda Pérez <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.politics.activism.carfree-network
Message-ID <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAOA13/oQ0m1Fm/lAv0YRrekCkAAAEAAAAHDKC3OkncVNt1dCEk6rcVsBAAAAAA==@ciudadhumana.org>
Trying to summarize some of the important discussions of the last days, I’ll
point out some of my opinions: 

 

About the network’s name: I believe having the word “carfree” in the
network’s name gives an accurate idea about what we don’t want. But it’s not
clear about what we want and how we want to do it. Nevertheless, I think
changing the name is not an alternative. We could have a slogan or something
that focus attention in proximity and livability. 

About the kind of cities that should host carfree conferences: Sure it’s
nice to have the conferences in carfree spaces and towns. That gives
strength to our ideals. But as I said in the closure of our conference in
Bogotá: the conference has to be an instrument by which people who knows
more that the 101 carfree could illustrate those that have not a clue. This
could lead the movement to be more than just a reunion of the same. 

About what the objectives of the network are: do we only want to share
carfree good practices? Wouldn’t be great to share some bad practices? Or
help cities “where the car is a king”, as Agustín says, to even hear about
our idea of what development is?

About what the main focus of conferences should be: Although I agree with
the idea of spotlighting on urban planning issues more that in transport
shift, the reason for it wouldn’t be that “we already have lots of
sustainable transport conferences”. There is an entrenched ethnocentric
thought underlying that reason. Here in Latin America we perhaps have two or
three important conferences that are all crammed with public transport and
BRT topics. Just recently bike and pedestrian issues got into scene. Land
use and urban planning have been mentioned by Lloyd and some other heroic
people a few times. The main assistants are always transport engineers and
technicians. No citizens pass by. We’re not tired -as you are- of
sustainable transport conferences. Please have this in mind. Otherwise,
don’t call yourself world carfree network. Again, proximity is more an idea
of alternative development than sustainable transport, and I find that much
more valuable, but I also believe promoting bike and pedestrian mobility and
claiming for proximity planning is a double way strategy, and different
people have to be reached (citizens and decision-makers, respectively). 

About the idea of compromising city halls in developing permanent carfree
projects in each conference: Great! We tried to do it for the conference in
Bogotá, but we hadn’t enough time and budget… 

 

Finally I’d like to clarify that if I’m being so critical to the network is
because I believe that our ideals must be spread out mainly in places where
is harder to accomplish it… and also because I sometime get tired of
discussions that get nowhere.  

 

Regards, 

 

Brenda Pérez

 



[carfree_network] list guidelines and unsubscribe information are found at http://www.worldcarfree.net/listservs/. Send messages for the entire list to carfree_network-3hfIC0tI0F+k/GrYEfjPQuG/[email protected] Send replies to individuals off-list.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.