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?
Mobilnost u gradovima sveta u razvoju je veoma specifičan izazov, zato što nasuprot zdravstvu, obrazovanju ili stambenim pitanjima, ona postaje gora što su društva bogatija. Očigledno neodrživi model. Mobilnost, kao većina drugih problema u državama u razvoju, više nego pitanje novca i tehnologije, pitanje je jednakosti, pravičnosti. Velika nejednakost u zemljama u razvoju čini teškim da se uvidi, na primer, da po pitanju prevoza napredan grad nije onaj gde čak i siromašni voze kola, nego onaj gde čak i bogati koriste javni prevoz. Ili bicikle. Na primer, u Amsterdamu više od 30 procenata stanovništva koristi bicikl uprkos činjenici da Holandija ima veći prihod po glavi stanovnika od SAD. Postoji sukob u zemljama u razvoju zbog novca, zbog državnih ulaganja. Ako se više novca ulaže u puteve, naravno, ostaje manje novca za stambena pitanja, za škole, bolnice, a postoji i sukob za prostor. Postoji sukob oko mesta između onih sa automobilima i onih bez njih. Većina nas danas prihvata da su privatno vlasništvo i tržišna ekonomija najbolji način upravljanja većinom društvenih resursa. Ali postoji problem u tome, a to je da je tržišnoj ekonomiji potrebna nejednakost prihoda kako bi funkcionisala. Neki moraju da zarađuju više novca, drugi manje. Neke kompanije uspevaju. Druge ne. Kakvoj se jednakosti onda možemo nadati danas sa tržišnom ekonomijom?
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.
Predložio bih dva načina, oba vezana za gradove. Prvi je jednakost u kvalitetu života, posebno dece. Sva deca bi trebala da imaju, osim očiglednog zdravlja i obrazovanja, pristup zelenim prostorima, sportskim ustanovama, bazenima, časovima muzičkog. Drugu vrstu jednakosti bismo mogli nazvati "demokratskom jednakošću". Prvi član svakog ustava kaže da su svi građani jednaki pred zakonom. To nije samo poezija. To je veoma snažan princip. Na primer, ako je to tačno, autobus sa 80-oro putnika ima pravo na 80 puta više prostora na putu nego automobil sa jednim putnikom.
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.
Toliko smo naviknuti na nejednakost, da je ponekad ona pred našim nosem i mi je ne vidimo. Pre manje od 100 godina žene nisu mogle da glasaju i to je delovalo normalno, na isti način kako danas deluje normalno videti autobus u saobraćaju. U stvari, kada sam postao gradonačelnik, primenom tog demokratskog principa da javno dobro nadmašuje lični interes, da autobus sa 100 ljudi ima pravo na 100 puta više prostora na putu od automobila, uveli smo sistem javnog prevoza zasnovan na posebnim trakama za autobuse. Nazvali smo ga TransMilenio, kako bi autobusi bili seksepilniji. I to je takođe prelep simbol demokratije, jer dok autobusi proleću pored skupih automobila zaglavljenih u gužvi, to je skoro slika i prilika demokratije na delu. U stvari, to nije samo pitanje pravičnosti. Za to nisu potrebni doktori nauka. Komisija sačinjena od dvanaestogodišnje dece bi u 20 minuta okrila da su najefikasniji način iskorišćavanja oskudnog prostora na putu posebne trake za autobuse. Autobusi nisu seksi, ali su oni jedini mogući način dovođenja sistema masivnog tranzita u sva područja gradova u razvoju koji brzo rastu. Oni takođe imaju veliki kapacitet. Na primer, ovaj sistem u Guangdžou prevozi više putnika u našem smeru nego sve podzemne linije u Kini, osim jedne u Pekingu, po znatno manjoj ceni.
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.
Borili smo se ne samo za prostor za autobuse, nego i za prostor za ljude i to je bilo još teže. Gradovi su ljudske naseobine, a mi ljudi smo pešaci. Kao što ribe treba da plivaju, ptice treba da lete ili jeleni treba da trče, mi treba da hodamo. Postoji zaista ogroman konflikt kada su u pitanju gradovi u državama u razvoju između pešaka i automobila. Ono što vidite je slika koja pokazuje nedostatak demokratije. Pokazuje da su ljudi koji pešače građani trećeg reda, dok su oni koji su u kolima građani prvog reda. Po pitanju saobraćajne infrastrukture ono što zaista čini razliku između naprednih i nazadnih gradova nisu autoputevi ili podzemne, već dobri trotoari. Ovde su napravili nadvožnjak, verovatno krajnje beskoristan, i zaboravili su da naprave trotoar. Ova situacija preovladava širom sveta. Više ni đaci nisu važniji od automobila.
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.
U mom gradu, Bogoti, vodili smo veoma tešku bitku kako bismo oduzeli prostor od automobila koji su se decenijama parkirali na trotoarima kako bismo napravili mesta za ljude, što bi trebalo da oslikava dostojanstvo ljudskih bića i da stvorimo prostor za zaštićene biciklističke staze. Kao prvo, pre toga sam imao crnu kosu. (Smeh) I zamalo su me smenili u procesu. Bila je to veoma teška bitka. Ali na kraju je bilo moguće da, nakon veoma teških bitaka, stvorimo grad koji oslikava neku dozu poštovanja ljudskog dostojanstva, koji pokazuje da su oni koji hodaju isto toliko bitni kao oni koji imaju automobile. Zaista, veoma važno ideološko i političko pitanje svugde je raspodela najvrednijeg resursa grada, a to je prostor na putu. Ispod grada bi se moglo naći ulje ili dijamanti i oni ne bi bili toliko vredni kao prostor na putu. Kako ga raspodeliti među pešacima, biciklima, javnim prevozom i automobilima? Ovo nije pitanje tehnologije i trebalo bi da se setimo da ni u jednom ustavu parkiranje nije ustavno pravo kada vršimo tu raspodelu.
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.
Takođe smo sagradili - i ovo je bilo pre 15 godina, pre nego što su postojale biciklističke staze u Njujorku ili Parizu ili Londonu, i to je takođe bila teška bitka - više nego 350 kilometara zaštićenih biciklističkih staza. Ne mislim da su te biciklističke staze sladak oblik arhitekture. One su pravo, baš kao i trotoari, osim ako verujemo da samo oni sa pristupom motornim vozilima imaju pravo na bezbedno kretanje, bez rizika da nastradaju. I baš kao i trake za autobuse, zaštićene biciklističke staze su takođe snažan simbol demokratije, jer one pokazuju da je građanin na biciklu od 30 dolara isto toliko bitan kao onaj u automobilu od 30 000 dolara.
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.
Živimo u jedinstvenom trenutku u istoriji. U sledećih 50 godina, više od polovine gradova koji će postojati 2060. godine će biti izgrađeni. U velikom broju gradova zemalja u razvoju više od 80 i 90 procenata gradova koji će postojati u 2060. biće sagrađeni u sledeće četiri ili u sledećih pet decenija.
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.
Ali to nije pitanje samo gradova zemalja u razvoju. U SAD na primer više od 70 miliona novih domova mora biti sagrađeno u sledećih 40 do 50 godina. To je više nego sve kuće koje danas postoje u Britaniji, Francuskoj i Kanadi zajedno. Verujem da naši gradovi danas imaju ozbiljne mane i da se drugačiji, bolji mogu sagraditi.
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.
Šta ne valja sa našim gradovima danas? Na primer, ako kažemo bilo kom trogodišnjem detetu koje tek uči da govori u bilo kom gradu na svetu danas: "Pazi, automobil," dete će uplašeno poskočiti i to s veoma dobrim razlogom, jer automobili svake godine prouzrokuju smrt više od 10 000 dece. Već 8 000 godina imamo gradove i naša deca su mogla da izlaze iz kuće i da se igraju. Čak do veoma skoro, pre 1900, nije bilo automobila. Automobili postoje manje od 100 godina. Potpuno su promenili gradove. 1900. na primer u SAD nikoga nisu ubili automobili. Samo 20 godina kasnije, između 1920. i 1930, skoro 200 000 ljudi su ubili automobili u SAD. Samo u 1925. skoro 7 000 dece u SAD su ubili automobili. Mogli bismo sagraditi drugačije gradove, gradove koji će veći prioritet davati ljudskim bićima nego automobilima, koji će pružati više javnog prostora ljudskim bićima nego automobilima, gradove koji pokazuju veliko poštovanje za one najranjivije građane, kao što su deca ili stariji.
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.
Predlažem vam nekoliko sastojaka za koje mislim da bi gradove načinili mnogo boljim i njihova implementacija bi bila veoma jednostavna u novim gradovima koji se tek stvaraju. Stotine kilometara zelenih površina koje presecaju grad u svim pravcima. Deca bi iz domova izlazila na bezbedan prostor. Mogli bi bezbedno prolaziti desetine kilometara bez ikakvog rizika, na predivnim zelenim površinama, nekoj vrsti autoputeva za bicikle. Zamolio bih vas da zamislite sledeće: grad u kome bi svaka druga ulica bila ulica isključivo za pešake i bicikliste. U novim gradovima koji će se tek izgraditi ovo ne bi bilo isuviše teško. Kada sam bio gradonačelnik Bogote u samo tri godine uspeli smo da stvorimo 70 kilometara, u jednom od najzbijenijih gradova na svetu, ovih biciklističkih autoputeva. I ovo menja način na koji ljudi žive, kreću se, uživaju u gradu. Na ovoj slici vidite da u jednom od veoma siromašnih naselja, imamo luksuznu pešačku i biciklističku ulicu, a automobili su još uvek u blatu. Naravno, voleo bih da popločam ovu ulicu i za automobile. Ali šta je ono što prvo radimo? Devedeset devet procenata ljudi u tim naseljima nema automobile. Ali, vidite, kada se grad tek stvara veoma je lako inkorporirati ovu vrstu infrastrukture. Grad onda raste oko nje. Ovo je naravno samo delić nečega što bi moglo da bude mnogo bolje samo ako bismo ga stvorili i to menja način života.
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.
Drugi sastojak koji bi doprineo mobilnosti tom velikom izazovu u zemljama u razvoju, na veoma jeftin i jednostavan način, bi bile stotine kilometara ulica samo za autobuse, autobuse, bicikle i pešake. Ovo bi ponovo bilo veoma jeftino rešenje ukoliko bi se primenilo od početka, jeftin, prijatan tranzit sa prirodnim svetlom.
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.
Ali nažalost, stvarnost nije toliko lepa kao u mojim snovima. Zbog privatnih poseda zemlje i visokih cena zemljišta, svi gradovi u zemljama u razvoju imaju veliki problem sa sirotinjskim naseljima. U mojoj državi Kolumbiji skoro polovina kuća u gradu su na početku bile ilegalna gradnja. I naravno veoma je teško imati masovni prevoz ili koristiti biciklove u takvom okruženju. Ali čak su i legalne zgrade postavljene na pogrešna mesta daleko od centara gradova gde je nemoguće omogućiti jeftin, čest javni prevoz. Kao osoba iz Latinske Amerike, a Latinska Amerika je najskorije uređen region na svetu, preporučio bih s poštovanjem, strasno, zemljama koje će tek proći proces urbanizacije - Latinska Amerika je sa 40 posto urbanosti 1950. došla na 80 posto u 2010. - preporučio bih azijskim i afričkim zemljama koje će tek proći proces urbanizacije, kao što su Indija, koja je sada tek 33 procenata urbanizovana, da njihove vlade pribave svo zemljište oko gradova. Na ovaj način, njihovi gradovi mogu da rastu u dobrom pravcu, sa dobrim prostorima, parkovima, zelenim površinama i autobuskim linijama.
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.
Gradovi koje ćemo izgraditi tokom sledećih 50 godina odrediće kvalitet života, pa čak i sreće milijardi ljudi u budućnosti. Koja neverovatna prilika za vođe i mnoge mlade lidere koji će doći, posebno u zemljama u razvoju. Oni mogu da omoguće mnogo srećnije živote milijardama u budućnosti. Siguran sam, optimističan sam, da će oni napraviti gradove boljim nego što su oni to u našim najambicioznijim snovima.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)