Another European Mobility Week (EMW) has passed us by and who can say they noticed? In a week that celebrated Arthur’s Day, Culture Night and saw the return of thousands of students to College, EMW barely got a look in. If last Saturday’s Irish Times article is anything to go by, it isn’t too surprising (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2010/0918/1224279140550.html ). The Botanic Gardens Sculpture in Context exhibition and a Kevin Thornton free workshop on biodegradable waste hardly seem like the biggest efforts or contribution to ensure the success of the week.
Since it began in 2002, EMW has steadily grown throughout Europe. 2,083 cities participated in European Mobility Week this year, with campaigns also being organised in a few other non-European countries – Japan, Colombia, Brazil and Taiwan. Its theme “travel smarter, live better” encapsulates its raison d’être: to encourage public awareness of the detrimental impact that increased motorised traffic is having on the urban environment.
More than half of the global population now lives in urban environments and most big cities are the same. People complain about the reliability of public transport: infrequent bus services, inadequate cycle paths and a Metro line that doesn’t exist or accommodate where I need to go. A feature of 21st century living is the need for immediate satisfaction. Convenience is king. Cars are just one example of this philosophy of consumerism. Despite congestion, pollution and other safety risks, people can’t be enticed from them.
European Mobility Week is intended to challenge this. It offers a unique opportunity for politicians to test innovative transport policies and present them to citizens, to promote alternative forms of travel and show the town/city in another light thanks to reduced motorised traffic within restricted areas. There wasn’t a trace of this in Dublin. It seems as though the Dublin bikes campaign, rather than acting as a catalyst for further improvement, is used to absolve us from the realisation that that campaign was just one of many measures needed to change our relationship with public transport.
Once again, EMW 2010 seems like another opportunity missed.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The Power of the Message
How do you convince individuals to alter their behaviour? What’s the best way to engage people on an issue they probably don’t care about, but definitely should? Why does public support for several important global events only ever amount to a flash in the pan?
These questions are at the root of an interesting environmental article in The Guardian. Its basic premise is that the climate movement’s approach to climate change risks alienating the average X Factor fan, annoyed by “the yearly cycle of petitions and celebrity endorsements” among other things. Here’s an extract:
“In the months since then, I've become convinced that the movement for a cleaner, fairer future needs to change if it's going to succeed. Whilst the fiasco in Copenhagen wasn't catastrophic and the slanders hurled at climate scientists proved groundless, these events did expose a worryingly shallow level of support for action on climate change. It revealed a public opinion which was fed up with being preached at and frustrated at not listened to enough by campaigners. The movement itself hasn't done nearly enough to reach out beyond the "usual suspects" and to connect with the concerns and aspirations of ordinary people.”
This article is objectionable for a number of reasons. Not only is it full of unhelpful and dull truisms (“It’s time for us to change direction, rather than meandering down same tired path”), it is incredibly disingenuous to the environmental lobby (the climate movement has to have the courage to connect, reach out and build for the long-term, not just the next big media event). This presents the climate movement as if it were some whiny, attention seeking, drama-queen on The Hills, concerned only to enhance its profile at carefully choreographed photo ops. This is ridiculous and unfair. The method of communicating the environmental message is not the problem. Environmental groups have been overwhelmingly clear about what needs to be done to tackle climate change – in a nutshell, people need to drastically alter their way of living, from the cars they buy to the food they eat to the hobbies they enjoy.
Another factor which has halted progress is the fact that carrying out meaningful change requires political leadership, rather than pandering to focus groups. It means taking on powerful special interests and upsetting the status quo. Very few leaders are willing to rock the boat at a national level, let alone make waves on the global scene. That is the reason for piecemeal environmental reform, rather than the author’s flimsy suggestion that the problem lies with the climate movement’s message.
A parallel can be drawn with Africa and poverty relief. This time our focus is Live 8. Anti-poverty wrist bands were the rage, some of the biggest names in music performed (Sting even sang ‘we’ll be watching you’ with extra gusto) and politicians agreed ‘something must be done’. Five years on and little has changed. The disparity between the rhetoric of 2005 and subsequent efforts to tackle poverty highlights how ephemeral these concerts truly were. Disheartening as this is, the fault lies with Joe the plumber for not choosing to pursue or pressurise politicians. Messages advocating poverty relief and campaigns for environmental reform are ubiquitous and convincing. The call to arms is regularly made, but it is apathy that is preventing a reply.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/15/green-movement-approach
These questions are at the root of an interesting environmental article in The Guardian. Its basic premise is that the climate movement’s approach to climate change risks alienating the average X Factor fan, annoyed by “the yearly cycle of petitions and celebrity endorsements” among other things. Here’s an extract:
“In the months since then, I've become convinced that the movement for a cleaner, fairer future needs to change if it's going to succeed. Whilst the fiasco in Copenhagen wasn't catastrophic and the slanders hurled at climate scientists proved groundless, these events did expose a worryingly shallow level of support for action on climate change. It revealed a public opinion which was fed up with being preached at and frustrated at not listened to enough by campaigners. The movement itself hasn't done nearly enough to reach out beyond the "usual suspects" and to connect with the concerns and aspirations of ordinary people.”
This article is objectionable for a number of reasons. Not only is it full of unhelpful and dull truisms (“It’s time for us to change direction, rather than meandering down same tired path”), it is incredibly disingenuous to the environmental lobby (the climate movement has to have the courage to connect, reach out and build for the long-term, not just the next big media event). This presents the climate movement as if it were some whiny, attention seeking, drama-queen on The Hills, concerned only to enhance its profile at carefully choreographed photo ops. This is ridiculous and unfair. The method of communicating the environmental message is not the problem. Environmental groups have been overwhelmingly clear about what needs to be done to tackle climate change – in a nutshell, people need to drastically alter their way of living, from the cars they buy to the food they eat to the hobbies they enjoy.
Another factor which has halted progress is the fact that carrying out meaningful change requires political leadership, rather than pandering to focus groups. It means taking on powerful special interests and upsetting the status quo. Very few leaders are willing to rock the boat at a national level, let alone make waves on the global scene. That is the reason for piecemeal environmental reform, rather than the author’s flimsy suggestion that the problem lies with the climate movement’s message.
A parallel can be drawn with Africa and poverty relief. This time our focus is Live 8. Anti-poverty wrist bands were the rage, some of the biggest names in music performed (Sting even sang ‘we’ll be watching you’ with extra gusto) and politicians agreed ‘something must be done’. Five years on and little has changed. The disparity between the rhetoric of 2005 and subsequent efforts to tackle poverty highlights how ephemeral these concerts truly were. Disheartening as this is, the fault lies with Joe the plumber for not choosing to pursue or pressurise politicians. Messages advocating poverty relief and campaigns for environmental reform are ubiquitous and convincing. The call to arms is regularly made, but it is apathy that is preventing a reply.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/15/green-movement-approach
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Dublin Convention Centre
From the Verizon Building in New York to the bulbous Bolwoningen Houses in the Netherlands and onto the Fang Yuan Building in the Liaoning Province of China, ugly buildings are common to every city. Dublin is definitely no exception, with such gems as Hawkins House, the Central Bank, any number of buildings at the top of O'Connell Street, Bus Aras, UCD in general – a Mecca for lovers of concrete and uninspiring architecture – attesting to this. A lack of imagination, taste and financial constraints probably account for most of these outcomes.
So, it is against this backdrop that the Dublin Convention Centre was unveiled last week, marking the end of a 13-year journey to its place on the North Wall.
A part from the cheap-looking granite cladding on the front, this building is a welcome addition to Dublin’s architecture scene, especially around the IFSC.
For more information about the building itself, here’s a useful Irish Times article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2010/0907/1224278353643.html
So, it is against this backdrop that the Dublin Convention Centre was unveiled last week, marking the end of a 13-year journey to its place on the North Wall.
A part from the cheap-looking granite cladding on the front, this building is a welcome addition to Dublin’s architecture scene, especially around the IFSC.
For more information about the building itself, here’s a useful Irish Times article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2010/0907/1224278353643.html
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Jury's still out
It’s 2005. You’re a swashbuckling property developer. €54 million an acre. €379m altogether for a high profile 6.85-acres in D4 must seem like a bargain, a great investment. Sure, isn’t it the golden days of the acre? The Baron of Ballsbridge, Sean Dunne, certainly thought so. Skip ahead five years. 2010. You’re barely solvent. You have nothing built yet and experts estimate the site’s worth is now €100m. O tempora, O mores!
For a man who invited 44 of his friends on a two-week Mediterranean wedding cruise on the yacht Christina O, whose wealth was so conspicuous during the good times and who gets angry at what he calls ‘the Irish disease’ – jealousy and begrudgery – it’s hard to sympathise with his current predicament. Hubris, recklessness and a lack of foresight contributed to his downfall.
But it’s not all bad news for Dunne. Although there seems to be little appetite for large projects now, Dublin City Council approved his revised plans to construct residential, hotel and retail scheme at the Jurys/Berkeley Court site in Ballsbridge. The scaled-down, mixed-use application includes permission for a 15-storey tower, a 135-bedroom hotel and a range of apartments, shops and offices. A previous application to build to a 37-storey tower, sculpted like a diamond with a 232-bedroom hotel, a new cultural quarter and an embassy quarter had been rejected by An Bord Pleanála citing issues of bulk and over development.
Dunne has not disguised his desire to develop the location along the lines of London’s Knightsbridge, but with considerable opposition against this move (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0810/1224276470257.html ), it will be interesting to see whether his luck will turn.
For a man who invited 44 of his friends on a two-week Mediterranean wedding cruise on the yacht Christina O, whose wealth was so conspicuous during the good times and who gets angry at what he calls ‘the Irish disease’ – jealousy and begrudgery – it’s hard to sympathise with his current predicament. Hubris, recklessness and a lack of foresight contributed to his downfall.
But it’s not all bad news for Dunne. Although there seems to be little appetite for large projects now, Dublin City Council approved his revised plans to construct residential, hotel and retail scheme at the Jurys/Berkeley Court site in Ballsbridge. The scaled-down, mixed-use application includes permission for a 15-storey tower, a 135-bedroom hotel and a range of apartments, shops and offices. A previous application to build to a 37-storey tower, sculpted like a diamond with a 232-bedroom hotel, a new cultural quarter and an embassy quarter had been rejected by An Bord Pleanála citing issues of bulk and over development.
Dunne has not disguised his desire to develop the location along the lines of London’s Knightsbridge, but with considerable opposition against this move (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0810/1224276470257.html ), it will be interesting to see whether his luck will turn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)