This article by Dr. Eswaran Subrahmanian, one of our  Distinguished Research Fellows has also been published as an interview by DNA (can be accessed as of 3rd March, 2010).

People die jumping out of the windows; exit doors are locked; the fire engine does not have long enough ladders; pedestrian onlookers and car-based onlookers prevent rescue vehicles to get to the scene. A fire in Bangalore building, terrorist attack in Mumbai, another attack in Pune and on it goes. Are Indian cities or towns prepared for handling such emergencies? The resounding answer is no! Our own investigation of several Malls in Bangalore confirmed that many exit doors were locked and a simple assessment made it clear that a small fire incident could lead to major casualties. The Carlton Fire was just the tip of an iceberg of the kind of damage that we could observe in other buildings or areas in the city.

(Click on the image to enlarge)

After every incident, our officials insist that they have all the emergency plans laid out on paper. Yet, inadequate responses are seen over and over. It is almost as if we do not want to learn and ask how we can do better to save lives and property. Are we doomed to assume that this is the nature of doing business in Indian cities, so that we accept this risk as an act of God and hence nothing can be done?

A fundamental issue in emergency and disaster management is that we must have the assets required, placed at the right place for them to be available, and have trained people, not some dusty procedures in a bureaucrat’s office. We need a command and control structure that can be created on demand to be able to mobilize people and resources, along with citizen volunteers, to take control of the situation immediately to facilitate other services. None of these facilities are in place, few practice drills are done, and the buildings are not inspected for safety violations. No one is really responsible, and the community is not able to mobilize itself and often presents an obstacle in itself. If these practices are not designed and executed in a training and learning mode by the civic bodies of the society, we are doomed to have many more Carlton Towers and even worse things ahead. How do we proceed and who should be responsible?

The responsibility is always put squarely on the shoulder of the building owner and with a broad brush, the local government entities. Government entities have different scopes of authority and generally haven’t coordinated with each other in planning and training for these problems. As in Mumbai, in Bangalore the authorities did not know who was in charge and who should take action first and when. The public does not co-operate as it blocks streets and the car drivers run ahead of ambulances to get ahead, not giving way to emergency vehicles. The tragedy of the commons is enacted everyday and is visible in the forms of deaths, injury and damage to property. Our IT firms are busy building security systems for somewhere else, designing other building management systems with sprinklers, but we cannot assure safety and security our buildings here. Apparently our corporate friends and civic personnel value their own lives less than those they serve abroad. This raises the question of whether we are only capable of building things to foreign customers’ needs and specifications, but have very little respect and understanding of our needs here in India. Internalizing the understanding of public space and good by all is one of the first steps towards this effort.

The solutions for addressing many of these problems are relatively simple if only we are willing to cooperate and acknowledge deficiencies of the current system to address them. One can use common sense in reviewing and enforcing fire code procedures in buildings in the city. For example, doors in malls and most buildings open inwards in India; elsewhere they open outwards. The simple reason is that the crowd will rush out and a door opening inward will lead to aggravating a potential stampede. Fire escape routes in a building can have doors that allow you to go to the fire stairwell and exit freely, yet not to be able to walk into any floor from the fire stairwell without some control. This is at the building level. Technologies to serve maps to the responders of all buildings in the city with details of fire escapes and fire extinguishers that can be retrieved over a cell phone are available. Bangalore’s sister city, San Francisco, is embarking on such a project of creating a database of all major buildings in the city through a co-operative council with representation from all walks of society for use in emergency and disaster management. As “IT City”, it is time we use technology wisely to enhance the safety of the citizens of this city.

Many information technology aids can be created and used for monitoring and simulation of events, social behavior, training using games and mock scenarios, to manage logistics and inventory of assets integrated with latest communication technology including cell phones to educate, communicate, to manage crowds and traffic. The possibilities are endless but it requires co-operation from a diversity of citizens, corporations, all parts of government in a long and sustained effort using multiple means to create a safe city. The problem is not solvable piecemeal without the right assets, training and civic responsibility in spite of all well meaning documents. The IT city should be committed as a civic duty to being an exemplar for India; to show how people of the city, working with technology, policies and practices, can make all of our lives safer and better.

After writing yesterday’s post on psychology and climate change at my blog semeiotica, I stumbled upon this article from the journal Ecological Economics entitled, “The art of the cognitive war to save the planet”.

The article details the proposition that our adaptive capacity–to respond to environmental feedback–to learn–is structured by the double bind, a concept coined by Gregory Bateson. A double bind is when an individual receives conflicting messages (intransitivity of preferences?) that disallows action on their part because responding to either message means being in conflict with the other. Wikipedia has a more detailed description here, but Bateson’s articulation of the concept can be found in Steps to an Ecology of Mind (2000, University of Chicago Press).

The author’s argument is that sustainability, or human-environment interactions that respond dynamically to each other, is constrained because beliefs about oneself and the community are increasingly biased towards individual level sustainability for two reasons. First, individual safety is increasingly linked to individual performance. Second, alienation from environmental feedback loops means that an amplification of uncertainty is taking place resulting many more belief ‘nodes’ about systems level relationships. This amplification results in greater propensity for conflict to develop between an individual’s assessment of the environment/system and their own well-being.

The task they outline is manifold–having many forms and elements. It means developing a shared cognitive base from which to develop mental models for collective action. The goal of a shared cognitive base is to help connect system level safety ideals to individual level belief nodes They argue that to do this requires “simple messages with the potential to shape individual belief systems”. Excessive information is to be avoided, while everyone should have access to the building blocks of conceptual blends that synthesize complex information.

The authors, Antal and Hukkinen, argue that more direct and influential injunctions should be exchanged to help reframe the context towards systems-individual linkages–not just individual. Thus an injunction, “Become a vegetarian” becomes the positive injunctive norm, “Become a vegetarian to maintain the status quo” and then makes more sense in terms of promoting sustainable behavior when coupled with a positive injunctive future norm, “Become a vegetarian so our civilization can survive.” This tactic seems similar to one described in the book Nudge (Thaler and Sunstein, Penguin Books, 2009) where they describe some forms of social nudges based on experiments in judgment and decision making.

Thaler and Sunstein describe how some forms of social nudges unfold. These include:

1. Increasing compliance when one is informed that others are complying–i.e. drawing public attention to what others are doing.
2. Emphasize the positive injunctive norm encourages behavior that helps maintain the commons. (e.g. “Please don’t do this in order to keep it this way.”)
3. Show what the norm actually is, as opposed the the perceived norm.
4. Small encouragements or discouragements can maintain or induce new norms.

The example of the positive injunctive norm seems to be what Antal and Hukkinen are advocating, but with a touch more bite.

Their case lies in creating cognitively accessible links between systems status and individual experience. An example of this might be an electricity brownout linked to CO2 accumulation or perhaps a full blackout each time species diversity is degraded.

Their conclusion that ICT services are needed to help these links form is predictable. Systems like smart grids, early warning systems, and other membership and signaling tools are appropriate, but the burning question is how to implement them in society where the tools themselves do not reflect the normative values.

One scenario I had after reading this is a case where an electrical power generation company that is responsible for supplying the city creates more direct informational links with its consumers. Neighborhoods in the city already experience frequent and irregular cuts in supply. Engineers, particularly in energy, tend to focus on maintaining supply based on certain assumptions. Sometimes we don’t always know what those assumptions are. Smart grids have been identified as a solution bridging consumption and supply (albeit from a supply perspective), but what if there was a more jugaad solution?

I am hereby coining the term Ener-geets™ to describe a form of information transfer between energy consumers and energy suppliers. Let’s say consumption is pretty high. It’s hot. Everyone has fans running, AND the big cricket match is on. Power suppliers have decisions to make in order to maintain a consistent supply, but what if they could provide realtime feedback to their customers that threshold levels were being reached and if their behavior didn’t change, they might loose the ability to follow the cricket match to its conclusion.

Cut the normal means of feedback out for the time being (an energy bill or brownout) and allow the power operator to send a message, perhaps in the form a tweet (from Twitter), to everyone following those tweets. Potential overshoots to the grid capacity could be avoided. But then, this would go against established channels of information flow and place a great deal of responsibility in the power operator’s hands–er..mobile phone.

To connect the feedback loop, individual consumers could also be sending messages, informing of power cuts, potential spikes in use (a festival perhaps), or other changes or observations about consumption at the individual level.

You start to get the picture. Now, how do we do it?

For personal feedback looping (not including the energy company) here one option that allows you to visualize and share your changes in consumption.

Still, I think the bigger and better question is how we link consumers to systems level perspectives that are currently only know to those in the power industry. Any thoughts?

Ref: Miklos Antal, Janne I. Hukkinen, The art of the cognitive war to save the planet, Ecological Economics, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 3 February 2010, ISSN 0921-8009, DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.01.002.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-4Y9HP0Y-2/2/8effb7b70d90787bc2250323ffeef134)
Keywords: Human-environment interaction; Belief systems; Environmental strategy; Climate change communication; Cognitive studies

This is a dashboard for visualizing climate-related information developed by NOAA.

One thing we are trying to get our head around here in the Next Generation Infrastructure project group is the links between mobility, livelihood and shelter.

Part of the challenge is gathering and representing data on slums in Bangalore which collected and maintained by numerous organizations.

Below is a map that shows the location of slums throughout Bangalore and the governmental organizations who are in charge of maintaining those areas.

This experiment gives a whole new meaning to “Bio-Computing.”

Talented and dedicated engineers spent countless hours designing Japan’s rail system to be one of the world’s most efficient. Could have just asked a slime mold.

When presented with oat flakes arranged in the pattern of Japanese cities around Tokyo, brainless, single-celled slime molds construct networks of nutrient-channeling tubes that are strikingly similar to the layout of the Japanese rail system, researchers from Japan and England report Jan. 22 in Science. A new model based on the simple rules of the slime mold’s behavior may lead to the design of more efficient, adaptable networks, the team contends. Read More at Wired. Read the Abstract in Science.

What I like about this story is the use of a technology and non-intuitive way. We spend a lot of time here at CSTEP creating models of complex dynamic systems, often employing agent based models which have so many interacting parts that there are often “surprising and unexpected results.”

In this case, a team of researchers set up and executed what could be described as a “analog computing program”. Obviously, if one wanted to change the parameters after the initial run, it is a bit more costly than simply changing a parameter in a piece of digital code. On the other hand, there may be some advantages to creating predictive and descriptive non-linear models using biological agents. I am particularly interested in what the programmers at CSTEP think.

Mission Objectives

• Install the S6 Truss. You are tasked with installing the fourth starboard Integrated Truss Segment (S6). Trusses are essential to the continuation of the International Space Station because they form the backbone of the station.
• Unfurl the S6 Solar Arrays. The space station’s main source of energy comes from three of the four large photovoltaic arrays currently on the station, sometimes referred to as the Solar Array Wings (SAW). Can you assemble the fourth set of solar arrays to the station?
• Ride the Robotic Arm. There’s a tear in the solar array! Can you ride the robotic arm then use the clamps to fix the tear?
• Retrieve Your Tools. You have used a lot of tools to do your repair work. Now many of them are scattered in space. How many of them can you retrieve before heading back to the airlock?

Play the Game!

SOMETIMES it’s nice to be able to track your activity and find patterns that you can use to become more effective or just to discover something new about yourself.  This is a nice system that doesn’t interfere too much in the daily patterns of use that many of us at CSTEP are probably engaged in.  This setup allows you to add instances and tags to what you have done, consumed, observed, or worked on.  Try it out  and let me know if it makes tracing your time any easier…

1. Get a Twitter account (http://www.twitter.com)
2. Install the twitter bar add-on for firefox browser (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4664)
3. Follow @yfd on Twitter (go to http://www.twitter.com/yfd while signed in and click ‘follow’ underneath the icon)
4. Sign in to your.flowingdata with Twitter (click this link)
5. Start recording data (via direct messages) following a few simple guidelines

how to send data to yourflowingdata:

twitter bar allows you to post directly to twitter from your address bar in firefox
you can send logs of your activity to yourflowingdata by simply typing into the address bar:

d yfd youractivityhere time unit

d means direct message to yfd (yourflowingdata)
this means it goes directly to your yfd account and not to your twitter feed

more examples:

d yfd mango game 2 hr
d yfd solarpv 3.5 hr
d yfd disastermanagement at 20:00
d yfd energyefficiency at 11:00pm
d yfd dinner at 11pm
It’s also worth knowing that you can edit timestamps whenever you want in your action log.

read more @ your.flowingdata here:
http://your.flowingdata.com/guide/#tweeting_data

the elegance is you can add time use info directly to your browser without interrupting your surfing..enjoy

There is a great article in yesterday’s New York Times about how GIS and other visualization tools, including just plain-old creative vision, can revolutionize the understanding and use of space and architecture in cities.

The post is by Allison Arieff, who also writes for GOOD. GOOD brings together some great writing and insight (not to mention info graphics) from the world of technology, sustainability and media. GOOD is an integrated media platform for people who want to live well and do good. Simple enough.

Check it out–if only for this post in the category of “The New Ideal” which looks at an emerging domestic model for solar power.

Urbanized Area in color.

Source: Bangalore Development Authority. “Bangalore Master Plan 2015. Volume 1: Vision Document”, pg. 12. 2007.

ReBlogged from Information Aesthetics: where form follows data.

Inspired by the Ars Electronica Golden Nica-winning Nuage Vert project, Pixelache, an informally organised network of electronic art festivals, and Helsingin Energia, one of the largest energy companies in Finland, are collaborating to produce artworks related to the collective energy consumption in the Helsinki area. [Read more at Infostethics...]

Anthropogenic Biomes as a Region for Research in Evolutionary Design Ecology
Many systems of classification for regions ignore the integration of human influence and ecosystem form, process, and diversity. This situation was common when I was in school and we learned about different ecological regions that were described largely by vegetation type and the weather patterns. A definition of region that is based on many interactions between society and nature, including perspectives on global patterns of sustained direct human interaction with ecosystems, may be appropriate for weighing studies of human health, its interactions, and driving factors. Anthropogenic biome describes a recent and perhaps better system of regional classification than have previous definitions (Ellis and Ramankutty, 2008) which have tended towards pure forms of nature or the separation of nature and society.

Anthropogenic Biomes: Definition
Anthropogenic biomes are similar to ecological biomes: they describe patterns of vegetation, climate, and ecosystem processes. However, they also take into account the anthropogenic influences of land use and population density on ecosystem processes. Ellis and Ramankutty characterize anthropogenic biomes as heterogeneous landscape mosaics, combining a variety of different land uses and land covers. Some of this heterogeneity is driven by natural landscape variation, as well as human enhancement of natural landscape (e.g. intensive agriculture) and human created landscape (e.g. construction of settlements and transportation systems).

The Regional Classification System they developed is as Follows (Ellis and Ramankutty, 2008):
Dense Settlements: Urban, Dense Settlements

Villages: Rice Villages, Irrigated Villages, Cropped and Pastoral Villages, Rainfed Villages, Rainfed Mosaic Villages

Croplands: Irrigated Cropland, Residential Rainfed Mosaic, Populated Irrigated Cropland, Populated Rainfed Cropland, Remote Cropland

Rangelands: Rangelands, Populated Rangeland, Remote Rangeland

Forested: Populated Forests, Remote Forests

Wildlands: Wild Forest, Sparse Forest, Barren

Of Earth’s 6.4 billion human inhabitants:
40% live in dense settlements biomes (82% urban population),
40% live in village biomes (38% urban),
15% live in cropland biomes (7% urban), and
5% live in rangeland biomes (5% urban)
0.6% live in forested biomes.

Asia and Oceania have the most diversity in the distribution of these regions around the world.

Further refinement is possible (Alessa and Chapin, 2008) by resolving distributions of social values, dietary patterns, movement patterns, resource use and between local and regional scales, inter alia.

Why Anthropogenic Biomes Matter for Public Health and Other Forms of Research
Anthropogenic biomes are a more accurate description of broad ecological patterns than are systems that exclusively describe vegetation patterns based on variations in climate and geology. Likewise, anthropogenic biomes may be better at representing patterns of human interactions with the environment and describing the driving factors in health outcomes. There are multiple reasons for this that stem from the varied roles that ecosystem, climate, cultural, and social relationships enact in dialogue with each other.

Anthropogenic biomes differ substantially in terms of basic ecosystem processes (eg carbon emissions, reactive nitrogen) and ecosystem biodiversity. These factors in turn affect the relative availability of resources for that region, including and especially ecosystem services like clean air and water and nutrient availability for agriculture. Furthermore, they must necessarily feed back into human ways of knowing and interacting with the environment.

Anthropogenic biomes can be connected to global patterns of ecosystem processes, along with anticipated future increases in human influence on ecosystems and the associated health outcomes due to climate change-driven risk factors.

Genome by environment interactions may be particularly relevant at this scale of interaction. The region definition is appropriate to human movement patterns and thus exposure to sources of chronic and acute risk from disease and consumption patterns.

The land use type itself determines a wide variety of factors including interactions with other humans, livestock, dietary consumption, levels of hydration, energy intensity, and other factors.

Culture, ethnicity, and language are also important in response to land use and domestic patterns of consumption ranging from food use and taboos, communication of lifestyle and health options, provisioning of nutrition, water, and energy, availability, and the use of technology to process and maintain different lifestyle patterns.

In each of these regional definitions, the interactions between landscape and human activity affects affluence, access to health care, and political regulation which suggests that these are are other possible subdivisions since these regions correspond to human social, transport, technological, and social networks–especially in dense settlements versus villages and remote areas.

For these reasons, anthropogenic biomes may provide more of a mosaic-like image from which to base categorizations used by clinical and other studies of health compared to political and continental boundaries which conventionalize migration barriers and tribal relationships. Geographic and political definitions will slowly shift, leaving only historical genetic signatures. Furthermore, anthro biomes are not specific to any particular disease or health outcome. They may encompass suites of infection and disease patterning where behavior, exposure, risk, and land use are correlated. They may also be indicative of linked health outcomes at the physiological level where, for example, musculoskeletal disorders and endocrine system perturbations are bound by human-influenced ecosystem interactions. Or they may suggest psychological correlates, linking cognition and landscape to disease and health risks.

The main point to consider is that ecological relationships, including land use and human infrastructure development, script behavior and consumption in ways that drive health outcomes. Understanding human influenced ecosystem patterns helps us identify areas of positive feedback between health risks, land use, population density, and the construction of everyday life.

References
Alessa, L., & Chapin, F. S. (2008). Anthropogenic biomes: a key contribution to earth-system science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 23(10), 529–531.

Ellis, E. C., & Ramankutty, N. (2008). Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(8), 439–447.

After ManU went up 2-0 against Arsenal I started browsing and commenting on the submissions to this year’s Digital Media and Learning Competition that the MacArthur Foundation and HASTAC run each year.

Some observations:

• Lots of games and game-like labs in the mix.
• Art/Sci is now officially mainstream.
• Climate and Sustainability are BIG social issue themes in the sci/tech proposals.
• Lots of brands in the mix (Exploratorium, National Park Service, xlabs, Media Lab, Eyebeam, etc)

But after culling through them for an hour and a half, I think I got a good sampling of the 800 or so submissions to the Learning Labs track. Here are a few that seemed interesting, relevant and promising….to things I’m interested in..

ENERGY & CLIMATE ADAPTATION

Empowering Collaboration between Students and Vulnerable Communities in Three Degrees’ Real-World Climate Justice Seminar

Energy Game

The Wild Life Virtual Barnyard… Saving The Planet One Climate Cartoon At A Time!

Powerhouse: A Social Game That Teaches Players About Energy Efficiency

Climate Changers: An MMO virtual lab game to save a planet

Young People Take the VITAL SIGNS of Climate Change, Build Scientific Habits of Mind

Disadvantaged Youth Exploring Sustainable Energy Collaboratively Through Video Games

Pooling Resources Project [Prp]

OUTLIERS

EpiLab: Student-led epidemiology and public health surveillance in a global network of high school classrooms

HowStuffisMade & HowitcanChange: participatory platform to change the most toxic of global human activities.

Hackteria

WATER

On the H2O Case

Dry Land, Grey Water, Green Future: Interactive STEM Learning Through Gathering and Visualizing Environmental Data

Water Case Studies: Exploring Social History and Environmental Impact to Create Collaborative Solutions

This week I am doing some research on transportation and pedestrian issues in Bangalore. I was reminded of this excellent information diagram created by ThumbProjects last year. (Bangalore is the Dark Purple shape in the center).

(Click for larger version)

In my head Bangalore’s ring road is unfathomably large, like some massive underwater giant squid that everyone knows is dangerous, but that you only experience in a tentacle that occasionally lashes out at you.  I have been many parts of it in my year’s in Bangalore, but I have never experienced it all at once.

But if you look at this map, Bangalore’s inner ring road is more of a small dragon, that with the proper tools, policies and infrastructure could be harnessed and ridden to create a beautifully dynamic city rather than a blatantly dangerous one.

Are there other images or maps of Bangalore that help you understand the scale and the flows of the city and put it into perspective?

The India Year Book is published annually by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting of the Government of India. This reference manual gives comprehensive data on India, with sections on land, people, agriculture, polity, defense, education, energy, housing, art, and culture, and is available both in hard and soft copies (http://www.publicationsdivision.nic.in/others/India_2010.pdf).  As such, it provides an excellent starting point for those searching for official information on India.

While much of the press at COP15 dealt with “Leakgate,” the focus is now shifting to India and China.  Should they accept binding agreements at Copenhagen?

First of all, there is no “India and China” – they are different, not only in emissions (China is the world’s largest emitter, and India is FAR behind), but in their drivers. As pointed out in an Opinion piece in the Financial Times last year, India’s main driver is increased supply of modern energy services to its population (some 40% +/- of homes lack electricity).  In China, air pollution is a major concern.

Analysis indicates that to give a small supply of electricity to every home in India that lacks power will only require some 10 GW of capacity (if supplied from central generation stations).  If one chooses to use distributed/renewable generation, the number would come down slightly.

Given India aims to add hundreds of GW in the coming decades, this is a very small number.  Thus, one of India’s goals, of universal electriciation (China is over 98% already), can be met with modest carbon impacts, a level that can be mitigated elsewhere through efficiency and/or other means (e.g., the ambitious national solar mission).

The broader goal of increased energy consumption to fuel economic growth is another matter.  Given per capita consumption levels are multiple times lower than even the world average (let alone W. Europe), India will necessarily need space to grow its energy consumption. As the FT Opinion piece points out, the past matters.

“Green” energy is not yet cost-effective, not in the scale that India needs. Even efficiency, a vital activity that differentiates, say, Denmark from the US by a factor of 2 (energy intensity per GDP unit), can only do so much.  Energy intensity improvements have been only about 2.1% per annum in the long run in the US; even something vastly better will be dwarfed by the overall growth requirements).

It’s premature to say what India should do. A negotiation, with ramifications of legally binding limits is different than what its actions should be with good intentions.  India is certainly decades behind China in terms of certain infrastructure (at the current pace) – catching up will take energy and resources. Of course, it should be done in the best manner possible, and for this selected new technologies may be required. The experience of IGCC (integrated gasification combined cycle) indicates that China may be ahead of the US when it comes to commercializing such a technology.  India may need to embark on its own R&D, picking and choosing technologies from wherever they may be available at a fair price.

Coming back to an underlying sentiment about “Leakgate.” A major concern was whether a few countries were making decisions that would harm other otherwise impact others. In some ways, there are 4  sets of countries: Developed, China, India, and Other Developing.  One might want to recall the Swahili phrase: “When elephants fight, it is the grass that gets trampled.” In this particular case, we might say, “When elephants fight (or make love), it is the grass that gets trampled.”

– Rahul Tongia

Here is a very interesting talk that Devdutt Pattanaik gave at TEDIndia, highlighting  mythological/religious  explanations for the sometimes amusing and often exasperating challenges of cross-cultural cooperation in a business environment. Devdutt’s goal is to spread awareness of founding beliefs – both of India and the West – in order to foster greater mutual understanding.

Harsha, a research engineer at CSTEP has shared his views on the unconference “Mobilicity” organized by praja.in and CiSTUP.

It was a new experience for me to attend such a conference, an ‘un-conference’. Though I have attend one other un-conference before, it was a very different experience as the topic of discussion did not only involve only a specialized group of engineers. This topic involved discussions to solve a common everyday social problem experienced by every citizen. The event was also unique as the audience not only consisted of academics but also, politicians, bureaucrats, social activists, students and most importantly concerned citizens.

The discussions involved the management of the city roads and other transport infrastructure to ease the every day frustration felt by the general public due to the current dysfunctional transportation system. However, I cannot get away with just describing the problem as stated above involves many technical difficulties that was faced by engineers ever since the first civilizations decided to cease being nomads and settle down.

The day started off with a panel discussion with a set of panelists who represented the city municipality, the public transport, an elected representative, the police, a bureaucrat, a scientist/social activist and a academic/entrepreneur. The initial view expressed by each panelist in the first round was predictable. However as the audience got involved the discussion started to become interesting. Some of the important points that were discussed are as follows:

• The municipality which is responsible for all the public works needs to be more transparent in its function and also completely open to criticism form any concerned citizen. The importance of this point was highly emphasized.

• The political establishment need to be less paranoid about loss of control and has to empower the local governing bodies which interact with citizens daily. It was pointed out that the greatest threat to even the best designed policies was implementation and accountability.

• The public as whole is not sensitive to thinking for the greater good of the community and needs to be educated.

After a charged panel discussion, the un-conference took off in full swing. The highlight of all discussions was the recently released draft of the transport policy for the entire state of Karnataka. Various parts of the draft, its impact and its (numerous) shortcomings were discussed.

CSTEP presented a simple turn based game to demonstrate that the transportation system is actually a complex system and is also part of a larger problem of city planning (A city is a complex entity in itself). The game demonstrated that the problem has to be tackled as a whole and not by individual departments concerned with only parts of the problem. The game demonstrated the shortcomings of such a approach, a chaotic pattern to city development . The game demonstrated the importance of communication between the different stake holders (which included citizens). The choice of a game for a presentation was ideal as it not only allows a diverse audience to appreciate the complexity of the problem, it also engages the audience and plays on their curiosity. The feedback obtained will be invaluable for building better models.

As the day drew to a close I realized that the discussions (except CSTEP’s ) were a little unsettling for me as each solution or direction of development came with a long time-line attached in terms of its implementation and complex systems have a sneaky habit of changing their nature!

On the night of Saturday, November 14, three CSteppers – Jai, Ajay, and Niket – decided to become more cultured by attending the World Guitar Night at Jayamahal Palace. Niket was unsure of whether the event was worth the hefty R$1000 ticket price, but ultimately decided to pay in the hopes that the music would inspire him to finally learn to play guitar.

Upon entering the Palace, Jai and Ajay immediately noticed a large board announcing the chance to win an autographed Yamaha F310 guitar; a box labeled “Lucky Draw” sat by the corner of the stage. The air buzzed with excitement as the crowd of avid guitar players, including Jai and Ajay, considered the possibility of taking the guitar home – which would certainly make the night more than worth the R$1000. Niket, on the other hand, was unfazed, thinking, “These things never work out for me, anyway.” Nevertheless, he dutifully submitted his name for the lucky draw. Then, in a dramatic show of CSTEP solidarity, Jai also submitted Niket’s name, since Niket was the only one of the three without a guitar. Ajay, on the other hand, wanted to win the guitar himself – he wrote “AJAY” and threw his paper in the box.

As the concert drew to a close and the lucky draw ceremony began, Ajay uttered words he says he will forever regret: “I think Niket will win the guitar.” Instants later, Niket – baffled, but beaming – was striding down to the stage to pick up his new autographed Yamaha guitar. “Why couldn’t I have predicted that I would win the guitar,” Ajay now laments.

And there were skeptics. Many, like Niket, simply could not believe he could be so lucky. Some questioned his guitar playing skills. One man even asked him if he was actually a Yamaha Store employee, planning on taking the guitar back to his shop in the morning.

Niket, for his part, says his faith in luck –which had been all but annihilated after years of lost lucky draws and the like – was restored on Saturday night. He now plans on taking lessons with a guitar teacher he met at the show, and hopes that his lucky guitar will bring him even more luck in the future.