文章 Articles

Riding red tracks

On an epic journey through China, Andre Vltchek was stunned by the quality of public transport. Here, he argues socialist central planning is to thank – and that other countries should take note.

Article image

The “Asian Tigers” of the past, now grappling with shambolic infrastructure, are watching with envy and despair as mighty China builds the most advanced integrated-transportation network on earth. Tens of thousands of high-speed rail tracks (already the longest system in the world of its kind and growing), futuristic airports, immense motorway networks and environmentally sound mass-transit systems will soon serve all of the nation’s major cities.

For decades, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia – staunch allies of the west and enthusiastic consumers of all types of pro-market dogma – used all means of propaganda and intimidation to discredit socialist (and god-forbid Communist) central planning. To loud cheers from western media, they privatised everything from natural resources to public parks, allowing the automobile lobby to turn their cities into polluted urban sprawls, dotted with office buildings, malls and chain eateries, but severely lacking in parks, public spaces and cultural institutions. Old tram lines were paved over, rail tracks abandoned and sidewalks swallowed by developers.

To those willing to see the reality, it is evident such systems have failed. None of the “free market” south-east Asian countries, with the exception of Singapore (in which transport is planned and controlled by the state) has managed to construct decent cities for its citizens. Rather, as the Australian artist George Burchett said after visiting Jakarta: “The cities were built against the people.”

Despite many faults – unavoidable in a country of its size – China’s socialist model for planning and building inter-city and urban transportation systems could and should inspire the rest of Asia and the world, including much richer countries like Japan and the United States.

In August and September, 2010, I joined one of my best friends, the Chinese concert pianist Yuan Sheng, on a 4,500 kilometre-long journey through his country. Following one of his brilliant concerts at the Forbidden City Concert Hall in Beijing, we hit the road, travelling from the capital all the way to Huangshan. We drove his car, rode maglev and bullet trains, took cable cars, sailed on tiny riverboats and hiked over mountains.


The Shanghai metro. Image by Andre Vltchek.

Chinese culture and its current system never cease to impress me, and this journey was no exception. What astonished me most this time, however, was the scale and coherence of government efforts to build a giant, but also green, transport system, designed to move more than a billion people and billions of tonnes of goods. While many of the developing countries abandoned to market forces – Peru, Kenya, Indonesia – have experienced neglect, even determined obstruction, of public transportation, countries using socialist planning (in some cases with the participation of private companies) have registered tremendous progress. These countries include both Chile and China.

What could be more environmentally-friendly for an enormous city than wide sidewalks, modern and fast metro systems and buses that run on liquid natural gas? Now Beijing has it all. Eight subway lines, 220 kilometres of tracks and 147 operating stations move over 4 million passengers every day in relative comfort and at a fraction of the cost of equivalent cities – it is just two yuan (US$0.3) per ride. Tens of thousands of buses and trolleybuses cover the entire city almost free of charge: 0.40 yuan (US$0.06) per journey in a city with a higher per-capita income than many south-east Asian capitals charging five to 10 times more for a similar service. 

And Beijing is still building. New subway stations are joining the network at such speed that map-printers can hardly keep pace. By 2012, the length of the capital’s metro network will reach reach 420 kilometres. The capital is not the only city in the country to boast its underground rail system: eleven other Chinese cities already have operating subways and 20 more are ready to begin construction. Combined, they will give China, without any competition, the world’s largest mass-transit network. China is also experimenting with new and green modes of transport, including the mooted “super bus” – a catamaran-shaped street vehicle that straddles cars and is predicted to reduce traffic jams by 20% or even 30% in the most congested neighborhoods, though roll-out has been postponed.

For comparison, let us visit some countries in south-east Asia that, until recently, enjoyed a level of development equivalent to or higher than China.

Architect Hari Sungkari, who is secretary general of the Indonesian Society for Creative Industry and member of the Indonesian Railway Network Association, explains his country’s predicament: “During the Dutch colonial rule, around 12,000 kilometres of tracks were built across the Indonesian archipelago. In 1980, only 6,000 kilometres were functional. By 2000, that number had shrunk to 4,000 kilometres. The problem in this country is that the private sector and even the state insist on making transportation profitable, while in many other countries (including China) transportation is a service, not a money-making venture.”

Heading for what is expected to be “total gridlock” by 2012, staunchly capitalist Jakarta, with its 13 million inhabitants, lacks sidewalks, public parks and any acceptable mode of public transport. Its few outdated trains are overcrowded and dangerous – people often ride on top and all too frequently fall through rotten roofs to their deaths. So-called “bus-ways” are usually locally made vehicles equipped with only one door. A monorail project was scrapped in 2008 – but only after it had scarred the streets with metal and concrete pillars pointing towards the sky; another victim of endemic corruption.


Gridlock in Jakarta. Image by Andre Vltchek.

Significantly richer Thailand is not faring much better. Of course the country counts some of the best freeways in Asia (thanks to a powerful car lobby and manufacturers who gave Thailand the nickname “Detroit of south-east Asia”) but its dirty and hopelessly slow rail system is collapsing. No city outside of Bangkok has public transport and even the major urban centres of Chiang Mai and Hat Yai are fully reliant on private cars and scooters.

Even Malaysia, which aims to reach “first world status” in the near future, offers few options for moving around in comfort and safety outside of Kuala Lumpur. And the citizens of Kuala Lumpur too are vocal in their criticism of the city’s fragmented transit systems. Still, the Malaysian state, with at least some central planning and a determination to improve the life of ordinary citizens, has the second best public transportation system in south-east Asia (right after tiny and efficient Singapore). But it is in no sense a match for China.

Asked why China is so successful in providing public services for its citizens, while south-east Asia appears to serve only business and elite interests, professor Dadang M Maksoem, a former lecturer at Malaysian universities who now works for the government of West Java, in Indonesia, gets furious: “Very simple: they [China] have commitment to do the best for their nation, which we don’t have here anymore. How come, in this part of the world, governments can’t even provide decent public transportation? People are forced to buy their own motorcycles so they can transport themselves – having to risk their lives, having terrible accidents. Now there are traffic gridlocks everywhere. You can say that our system is stupid, idiotic, brain-dead, greedy. Just go on and fill the gap!”

Needless to say, in most Chinese cities scooters (or what they call “motorbikes” in south-east Asia) are banned, while well-paved bicycle-lanes are found even in small towns. There are hardly any bicycle lanes in south-east Asia, again with the exception of Singapore.

Beijing and Shanghai may be suffering from traffic jams due to the dramatic increase in private car ownership (a result of surging living standards) but China and its leaders are facing the difficulties head on, spending enormous sums of money to find and implement innovative and green solutions to transport and pollution problems. Prices are kept low to encourage people to take trains or other eco-friendly alternatives, rather than get into cars and onto highways. For instance, a second class ticket for the high-speed train between Beijing and Tianjin, which covers the distance of 117 kilometres in less than 30 minutes, costs around 53 yuan (US$8). To travel roughly the same distance on a marginally slower Japanese bullet train between Nagoya and Kyoto would be eight times more expensive.

While intra and inter-city trains are attracting passengers with low prices and efficiency, China’s enormous expressway network known as the National Trunk Highway System (NTHS) is doing all it can to discourage private cars from its sleek surfaces. Tolls are very high – the driver of a private sedan would have to spend over US$100 for a one-way journey between Beijing and Shanghai. During our trip, especially at night, our car – surrounded by trucks and long-distance buses – was often one of very few private vehicles travelling on the intercity highways.

As China constructs platforms, tracks bridges and tunnels at breakneck speed, south-east Asia (part of the world which until recently was similar to China in terms of income-levels and Human Development Index ranking) is choking in smog from dirty car and scooter engines. The region’s cities were long ago abandoned to private business interests and are gradually turning to enormous, California-style suburbs, though with dramatically lower incomes.

The west discouraged socialist central planning for decades in almost all corners of Asia. But it is this very model that is now saving the continent – and therefore the world. Were China to follow the example of the Philippines or Indonesia, it would lead to complete environmental collapse. As it is now, there is no doubt that the legendary Chinese dragon is still red and is flying much higher and much faster than anyone else in his neighborhood.

 

Andre Vltchek is a novelist, filmmaker, journalist and photographer based in east Africa and Asia. His latest book, about neo-colonialism in the South Pacific, is called Oceania.

Homepage image by Andre Vltchek shows the new Chinese bullet train

 

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
dengdeng

哈哈

我觉得大部分中国同胞看完作者这篇文章都要笑。当然他说的是真的,北京公交才4毛钱,高铁也的确很快很方便。但是作为中国人,我们没办法想象作者笔下的这些中国城市是“亲民”的。我想他大概是作为外国友人受到了很好的关照,只看到了中国公共交通的一部分,一定是没有在高峰期挤过公车地铁,没有经历过春运的惨烈,没有开车堵在北京的路上3个小时回不到家……

就从作者的第一段来说吧,
“上万公里的高速铁路” - 请看下图的上座率
http://news.sohu.com/20100722/n273684082.shtml

“具有未来感的机场” - 请看下图北京T3机场的超现代感
http://hb.qq.com/a/20101211/000884.htm

“庞大的公路网络” - 创世界堵塞记录
http://auto.hexun.com/2010-08-26/124717004.html

Ha-ha

I think most Chinese compatriots just have to laugh after reading this article. Of course what the author says is true, that taking public transportation in Beijing only costs 0.4 yuan, and fast high-speed rail is indeed very fast and convenient. But as Chinese, we can’t imagine that Chinese cities are "people-first" as depicted by the author. I think he was probably taken very good care of as a foreign friend and only saw a part of Chinese public transportation, and certainly hasn’t taken the subway during a peak time, hasn’t experienced the brutality of moving about during the spring festival season, and hasn’t been unable to get home after being stuck on a road in Beijing for three hours....

Just as the author’s first paragraph says,
"tens of thousands of (kilometers of) high-speed rail tracks" - please see the rate of empty seats in the image below
http://news.sohu.com/20100722/n273684082.shtml

"futuristic airports " - please see ultra-modern feel in the image below of the Beijing Capital International Airport’s Terminal 3
http://hb.qq.com/a/20101211/000884.htm

"immense (public) motorway networks" - achieving a world record for being jammed
http:// auto.hexun.com/2010-08-26/124717004.html

Default thumb avatar
alternativeview

中央计划的交通成功了,中国的汽车和飞机工业也会成功吗?

虽然中国政府关于自行车和铁路运输的作为值得称赞,但是作者没有提到中国政府也在汽车和飞机行业投资巨大。
由于全球一致同意减少温室气体排放很必要,一方面这些投资有犯下时代性错误,并且环境上不是可持续发展的风险;另一方面,这些汽车和飞机的市场会很大程度上局限在中国市场本身----因为两个最大的汽车和飞机市场,欧洲和北美,在低碳减排之路上,会比中国力度更大。

One central planning success. Will China's car and plane industry be a success?

Although what the state in China is doing concerning provision of rail and bicycle transport is to be applauded, the author fails to mention the huge investment in cars and airplanes which the government is also making.

Given the globally-agreed imperative for greenhouse gas emissions greatly to reduce, not only does that investment risk being anachronistic and environmentally unsustainable but the market for those cars and planes will be largely confined within China itself - Europe and North America, the largest markets for cars and planes, will have to make much deeper cuts in their carbon footprint than China.

Default thumb avatar
dengdeng

趋势

不过像中国人口这么多,恐怕能一次运输很多客流的有轨交通还是未来的大趋势。

城市里面地铁发展的还不够,如果足够方便的话,我不相信人们还宁愿开车在路上塞两个小时而不选择坐地铁。

而高铁又似乎发展的太快了,现阶段最需要坐火车的人坐不起高铁,仍然跑去挤长途巴士和普通列车,上座率那么低的高铁怎么发挥节能环保的作用?有轨交通又怎么起到疏散客运量的作用?

FT前不久曾经发表过一篇关于中国反思高铁建设的文章
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001035402/ce

Trends

But like so many others in China, I am afraid the next big future trend is to have a huge flow of people taking rail transportation.

The development of subways in urban areas is insufficient, and if it was convenient enough, I don’t believe people would still prefer driving on clogged roads for two hours to choosing to take the subway.

The development of high-speed rail seems to be too fast, and at this point those who are most in need to take trains can’t afford high-speed rail, and still run to crowded long-distance buses and regular rail services. How can such a low rate of high-speed rail ridership show that there’s a place for such transit in protecting the environment? And how can rail transportation play a role in thinning out passenger transit volume?

The Financial Times recently published an article about high-speed rail construction in China http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001035402/ce

Default thumb avatar
tdeanxx

中国:走向最优发展道路

最近,我也走访了中国并对其公共交通的迅猛发展感到十分惊讶。两年前我也曾访问过中国,在这两年时间里,中国东部沿海新建了一个世界级的高速铁路系统。在中国的西部城市成都,公交车已经不再使用难闻的柴油,转而使用清洁的天热气作为能源。中国正在向世界证明,一个由受过良好教育的有才华的官员们领导的中央政府,完全有能力制定出发展重要基础设施建设的政策,来为人民提供方便快捷的、不会对健康有害的上下班交通工具。中国领导人已经认识到正确规划和组织快速发展以及使用先进的信息与电脑技术的重要性,他们取得了极大的成功,让其他的亚洲国家甚至是美国都望尘莫及。如今,美国的基础设施系统崩塌;经济体由于大企业的政治影响而腐败,风雨飘摇中从巅峰跌落至谷底。与此同时,中国的经济正稳步地增长着。

China: Moving Along the Optimum Path

I, too, have travelled through China recently and was astounded by the speed of the development of public transport in China. In the two years since I last visited China, a world class high speed rail system has sprung up along the east coast and cities like Chengdu in western China have transitioned from smelly, diesel busses and taxis to clean natural gas powered vehicles. China is showing the world that a central government dedicated to the interests and well-being of the entire population, run by talented and well-educated bureaucrats, can create optimal policies to develop critical infrastructure that enables the people to get to and from work efficiently and without destroying their health in the process. The leaders of China have recognized the critical need to plan and organize rapid development and utilizing modern information and computer technologies, they are achieving amazing success, leaving other Asian nations, as well as the US, in their dust. While infrastructure in the US literally collapses in a heap and the economy, corrupted by giant corporations' political influence, lurches chaotically from boom to bust, China's economy surges smoothly forward.

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

糖衣炮弹者也

拿人钱财,替人消灾,可也。自己出钱,替人消灾,疑也。按照毛泽东同志之风格,此乃资产阶级的糖衣炮弹,好吃得很,直到“蛀牙”。这样来自西方的声音,现在大有越来越高值趋势,当局者窃喜也。

Sugar-coated bullets

It is understandable if you take people's money and help them ward off misfortune. It is suspicious if you give away your money and help people ward off misfortune. According to Mao Zedong’s style, the sugar-coated bullets of the bourgeoisie were delicious, until they led to “tooth decay.” This sort of Western voice is now increasingly seen in high-value trends, and this secretly pleases the authorities.

Default thumb avatar
aijalk

讽刺

这里有太多讽刺了。其一,这些所谓的“社会主义”的奇迹是建立在金融剩余的基础上的,这种剩余是由向富有的市场经济体出口创造的。你大可以称这是一个自由贸易的奇迹,在这样的条件下,即使中国的经济体和经济政策不像西方国家那样完全由市场驱动,他们也会放任中国进入他们的市场。这并不是说中国还不能够创造奇迹,只是这种奇迹是务实的而不是理想化的。而且,在创造经济剩余以帮助中国未来的融资方面,西方国家是值得推崇的。他们依靠市场经济政策实现了这些成果,而非社会主义。

简单地把中国经济体归结为“社会主义”是错误的,在中国,经济增长是由公民的企业家精神和国内外的私人投资带来的。同样的,简单地把西方国家经济体归结为“资本主义”也是错误的,许多西方国家的州政府给居民提供的福利远比中国现在能够提供的要多得多。维尔切先生,让我们现实一点吧!

Ironies

There are many ironies here. One is that these miracles of "socialism" are built on financial surpluses created by exporting to wealthy market led economies. One could more easily say it is a miracle of free trade, which western countries were willing to allow China to participate in even when its economy and economic policies were less market driven than theirs. This isn't to say that China hasn't accomplished miracles, but it has done that through pragmatism rather than ideology. And the west deserves credit for creating the economic surpluses that are helping to finance these investments in China's future. They did that through market led economic policies, not socialism.

It's a mistake to simplistically categorize China's economy as "socialist," where growth has been driven by its citizens' entrepreneurial spirit and by private investment, both domestic and foreign. It's just as much a mistake to simplistically call western economies "capitalist," where the state in many western countries provides far more generous services to its citizens than China currently does. Let's get real, Mr. Vitchek.