The Virtue of Rapid Urban Transit in Pakistan: Balancing Ecology and Heritage in Lahore’s Metro Project
Mass transit projects in cities of the developing world have become hallmarks of development prestige but remain controversial. While many impoverished cities should avoid such massive capital investment, South Asia’s dense, rapidly growing mega-cities are appropriate venues for such projects since the cost-benefit analysis for quality of life in economic and ecological terms usually favors such development. In my home city of Lahore, Pakistan a mass transit metro-train project was opened on October 25, 2020 after several years of delays that ensued from ligation against the development. The litigants were well-intentioned urban citizens who felt that the project was too close to major cultural heritage sites. These sites included the Shalimar Gardens, listed as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO and a Mughal monument called Chauburji.
Among the petitioners in the original case was the late human rights lawyer Asma Jehangir who focused the arguments on the country’s Antiquities Act and the potential for violations of protections accorded to cultural heritage sites. Yet, urban mobility is increasingly being regarded as a core citizen right by courts in many countries, including the United States Supreme Court. Furthermore, the survey data of users of mass-transit in Lahore suggests that such projects have a very favorable review by those lower income individuals who are likely to use these services the most. In a highly gendered social structure such as Pakistan’s, research has also noted that mass transit public transport is particularly appreciated by women. Thus the potential threats to cultural heritage need to be considered in the context of such social benefits. Nevertheless, the initial ruling of the Lahore High Court in 2016 favored the plaintiffs and the project was halted.
Subsequently, the Pakistani Supreme Court took up the matter and in 2017 applied a broader societal context to the case and overturned the case, but only after applying 31 conditions related to cultural heritage protection and due process for citizens. In my view the decision arrived at by the Supreme Court was correct given the data that is now available to us. UNESCO also agreed that the protective provisions set forth in the court’s ruling were adequate in addressing many of the most serious concerns for the sites. The plaintiffs played an important role to ensure attentiveness to cultural heritage concerns and deserve our respect for their vigilance. However, further obstruction of this project beyond these safeguards noted by the court would have been a classic case of elite conservation trumping the urgent needs of the impoverished populace. Some of the concerns about Chinese “debt diplomacy” in this projects are largely dismissed in a recent report on from the nonpartisan think tank Chatham House in London.
Structural concerns which are raised in the context of mass transit pertain to the “return on investment” in terms of profit potential as well as the relative opportunity cost. For the Lahore metro project, the arguments were made that the funds could be used to improve rural mobility across the Punjab province. However, the growth of urban areas in much of South Asia is inexorable and rural investments do not have density factors to provide the full economic or social benefits of investment. It is also far easier for smaller-scale private sector entrepreneurs to take on rural mobility due to less capital needs. As for profit goals, public transport, like public health or postal delivery should not be motivated by profit goals. While there are some public transport systems like those in Tokyo or Hong Kong which are profitable, a vast majority never intend to make direct money. However, their net numerical benefits come from the range of economic activities and quality of life improvements they bring to citizens.
In neighboring India, there was initial opposition as well to the Delhi Metro. However, several years hence the system has been successful in improving the quality of life of citizens and also improving ecological indicators as shown in the chart below from independent analysis:
Environmental planning decisions are often sub-optimal and tradeoffs between risks to conservation interests and societal good have to be made. The Lahore metro rail project shows that environmental and cultural heritage groups played an important role in raising alarm about conservation concerns and the legal process was effectively followed through. The apex court made a pragmatic decision with risk management assurances in mind and a mechanism for continuing citizen oversight of the project. The value of public transit in such settings from an environmental perspective is highlighted by the fact that even the Global Environment Facility (the world’s largest multilateral trust fund for the environment) considers mass transit in its “sustainable cities” portfolio. The next important step will be to ensure that energy supply for this project transitions to cleaner sources. As the world recovers from the COVID 19 pandemic, the value of high density urban living in terms of resource efficiency must not be neglected. Clean and safe mobility infrastructure, coupled with appropriate personal protective measures ,will ensure that mass transit projects such as Lahore’s Metro reach their full social and ecological potential.
Dr. Saleem H. Ali is Blue and Gold Distinguished Professor of Energy and the Environment at the University of Delaware and a Member of the United Nations International Resource Panel.