The meeting was attended by Sanjay Chitnis, Suhas Kulhalli, Ananthram, K V Pathy, Srivatsava, Heragu, apart from me from PRAJA (hope I haven't missed out any names); and Prof T G Seetharam, Chairman, and a faculty member from CiSTUP; and a guest of Prof Seetharam ( I am sorry I didn't record their names - I expect Sanjay will fill in all that and also give a more elaborate report).
I thought the matter required a new blog, and therefore am transfering here the posts made so far elsewhere.
Good meet, my view on CiTSUP vision
Submitted by srkulhalli on 18 July 2009 - 7:31pm.
I think I will just shoot. Shri Seetharam went through the slides giving a overview. All in all, its a very good intent, it attacks head on the problems that we are facing, which needs quality research, and where else to go but for the premier resarch institute in the country.
While we applauded their vision mission at that time, on further thought, I am not too pleased. Here's why.
The vision was kind a too academic. There were research, training, student programms etc. Its sums it up when they say 5 yrs from now they want to be a UN university. This sounds good. HOwever, there is a real danger (as with some deparments in IISc) to become too academic/pure science oriented and not really real world. While its OK for almost all other departments (Computer science, maths etc) to be have that orientation, indeed it may be good to be so, I dont think it is correct for this department.
The mandate amd the reason it has really come into being is to solve the real problems that are being faced by the people in the city/state today. Problems are severe and with urban population explosion, its only going to get worse. They are funded for that reason, their executive council is full of members from various govt. bodies to have that kind of interaction. I would like their mission to really have something on the ground (pun intended) like we will have a model city developed or model suburb or a sustianable scalable model for transport problems etc. It needs some thought, but I do feel their mission needs to be rethought along these lines
I did bring up our work on the road design project and he was encouraging. He wants to have a follow up meeting a month later, when things will be more settled.
Suhas
A good vision Document
Submitted by psaram42 on 18 July 2009 - 8:50pm.
I think we are not sure of what was Mr. Yediyurappas mandate to CiSTUP at the time of setting up the Corpus fund of Rs 30 Crores at IISc. We should better check it up.
IISc is an academic Institute. It has to be an academic institute per say by its own mandate too. I think Mr. Yediyurappa has given a corpus fund of Rs 30 crore to IISc only for academic pupose. Also TGS IMHO has not only adressed to what Suhas is afraid of but also much more. This will be ensured by "the executive council is full of members from various govt. bodies to have that kind of interaction. I would like their mission to really have something on the ground (pun intended)" as already pointed by Suhas himself.
Forward this Blog entry
Comments
Meeting with CiSTUP chairman on urban infrastructure policy
CiSTUP is headed by
Professor, [Dr] T. G. Seetaram, Geotechnical Engineering Division, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560 012 , His Qualifications:
1. Master of Science (Engineering) from Indian Institute of Science in 1986
2. PhD University of Waterloo, Canada. in 1991,
3. Post Doctoral Research 1992-1994 at University of Texas, Austin, USA.
CiSTUP has an interdisciplinary mandate for development of Infrastructure for sustainable Urban Transport. Hence very through open ended themes including environmental effects on climate change are implied. However the following are not included:
1. Urban Planning
2. Social Science and economics
3. Information, communication and Technology
Laboratories and Metro are included now.
Being an academic institution their mandate includes producing excellent engineers at Bachelors, Masters, Doctoral and post Doctoral levels.
Prof TG Seetaram gave an excellent full fledge presentation which has attained the usual excellence for which IISc has been traditionally recognized. The same is likely to be made available on the web. Prof has promised to include us in the regular mailing list of CiSTUP.
Am not sure I understand
PSA,
Sometimes it is hard to follow what you are indicating :)
They definitely need to be academic and research oriented. Question is, is the research to getting more publications in journals or the research more to practically improve the quality of life in Bangalore. It can sound trivial here but it is fundamental and over the long run they can get lost doing the former.
Suhas
Corpus Fund
Suhas,
I agree it is hard to convey in writing what is intended. Some time I face the problem myself when I read what I have written.
I think the intent of the government in creating a corpus fund in a Scientific Institute like IISc cannot be mistook for doing something on ground per say. CiSTUP has been created as a center at the Department of Civil Engineering, not a Department by itself. CiSTUP has well defined specific goal of sustainable transport including transport relevant Infrastructure. TGS has added a new dimension of the environment also to the concept. The public consultation / participation scheme of TGS is praise worthy. The UNO University concept is worth while in this context. I am for insulating IISc from the muck that is outside the IISc campus.
If the intent of the Government of Karnataka was more specific, to have something on ground alone, it had the option to go to its own department called PWD, to do the job.
CiSTUP
Dear All,
I must at the outset apologise for being 'out of circulation' with Praja members. As explained, I was partly travelling and partly neck deep in work!
Read all the comments on CiSTUP meeting. Looks a great forum to get connected to. Sorry i missed the first meeting, but I will make it a point to attend future meetings.
Am not sure what slides were shown, but if I understand correctly, CiSTUP is a scientificx body trying to bring the technological perspective to the mundane business of constructing sustainable roads / infrastructure.
As some of you know I am actually in the business of spearhgeading a hitherto unknown in India technology which has been tried and tested in over 30 countries of the world. I would therefore like to meet up with Prof Seetaram and exchanmge notes when Praja members next meet him.
Suhas, I will seek a time from you to understand the rationale of what was discussed.
While on the subject, my meeting scheduled with ABIDe TF and the CM is still hanging fire. Shall let you all know when something concrete happens from my efforts on this front.
Regards,
Chari
RKC
CISTUP vision
PSA,
Much clearer, well written and good point. What you are worried about is they should not get too involved and appear to be politicised, they should be above it all. What I am worried about is they are too above it all and end up making zero impact to 'aam admi'.
By too above it all, I mean focussed on just publishing papers, more PhD students, UN university et al - and at the end of the day not really solving the city/states problems. There is no confusion with PWD - IISc is a research body. Like I said before, research should be focussed on practical, implementable solutions to everyday problems - that is all.
Chari,
The department has just started. Prof has requested at least a month to settle down.
Suhas
Report: additional points
Thanks to Ananthram Sir for posting the report. Many details are also available at http://cistup.iisc.ernet.in/ which I will not be duplicating.
Here are adidtional points:
1. This Center was established on initiative from Karnataka Government to help develop expertise in the area of transportation and urban planning. Infrastructure was added later and it still continues to be in "lower case" ("i" in CiSTUP).
2. Though it is very much part of IISc, it has its own separate council which consists of governmetn nominees, representatives from other institutes such as IITs, Center for Environmental planning, Ahmedabad etc. Prof Arcot Ramchandran from TERI, HABITAT is also on the council.
3. There is spontaneous response from everywhere to contribute as this seems to be a very potent area. For example, few researchers from Australia contacted on their own and conducted a workshop.
4. Prof. Seetharam, the chairman, is very open to concrete ideas and specific contribution from anythwhere. In fact he mentioned that he will provide place, some reasonable resources for any specific project for example, developing guidelines, conducting workshop and other events etc. Many times he gets mails and requests on specific topics (like cutting trees in front of IISc). However, we was very clear that he cannot get into issues at this level and divert the high level focus of the center. He will of course be interested the larger problems such as overall tree cover in Bangalore.
5. This is multidisciplinary center and many faculty from other department of the institute are associated with this. In fact I was wondering that this might create too many cooks and divergent opinions. In particular, institute has strong specialization in civil engineering (transportation is just starting) and ICT areas. Recently, Prog. Ashish Varma joined from IIT- Guwahati who is expert in transportation. http://www.geocities.com/rsashu/
6. The center is supposed to guide government in policy and some decision making. However, it is not into governance - it will develop technical extertise in these areas and government will consult these experts as needed.
7. In the short run, there is a specific target to develop training programs and capacity building for the center. The center is also looking at some alternate sites in the vicinity of IISc.
8. The center has been consulting many eminent experts like Vivek Menon (is transportation engineer himself), V S Arunachala from CSTEP etc. They have also sent some high level research proposals to CSIR.
9. The center has annual lectures from eminent people in the field.
10. From Praja, he specifically wanted help in developing guidelines on road design (Suhas volunteered for this), Feedback on Government policies etc. He has got permission from Government to post the draft of urban development policy on web and when it is posted, we can provide comments (may be we can have a separate meeting on this tpoic with him later).
11. He also had two more specific projects and if praja members are interested, they can contact him directly (email and phone on the center;s web page). The projects are: 1. standard for Signages for trasportation to take care of illiterate people and people who do not knwo local language. 2. Guidelines for drivers on the lines of similar ones available in USA.
12. Mr. Murali explained the history or Praja and updated him on recent activities including meeting with Mr. Manivannan. He also explained the concept of Upper house for cities in the context of role of Praja.
There were many details in the presentation especially the focus areas of the center and the charter. The presentation will be available on the web site of the center and I will post it as soon as it is available.
Personal comments:
I agree with the posts above, that the department should focus on 'applied research'. I hope the funding agencies will ensure that the funds are provided to address their immediate and strategic needs.
There is lot of scope of working with the center and the chairman is very supporting. So I will request Praja members to work actively to help solve Urban problems in India.
Sanjay Chitnis
More PhD, more papers
I mean focussed on just publishing papers, more PhD students, UN university et al
How coincidental I was discussing this over email with some praja folks on how we have so few of researchers in the urban planning domain. We underestimate research and always believe it is of no practical usage while there have been lot of technologies that have been spun off from universities for practical usage. Research assumes signifcance in the light of the fact that none of the urban technologies today are sustainable and not many people have a clue how to keep up growth to improve quality of life with technologies as we know today and still remain sustainable.
This has to be looked at as a long term investment and like PSA mentioned practical short term stuff there is Praja, ABIDe etc for tactical gyan. I should add points 10 & 11 where Praja can provide inputs are very practical steps.
We should take these up
10. From Praja, he specifically wanted help in developing guidelines on road design (Suhas volunteered for this), Feedback on Government policies etc. He has got permission from Government to post the draft of urban development policy on web and when it is posted, we can provide comments (may be we can have a separate meeting on this tpoic with him later).
11. He also had two more specific projects and if praja members are interested, they can contact him directly (email and phone on the center;s web page). The projects are: 1. standard for Signages for trasportation to take care of illiterate people and people who do not knwo local language. 2. Guidelines for drivers on the lines of similar ones available in USA.
CiSTUP's offer/Praja's feeds need checks, balances,deliverables
I personally feel that there should not be a flood of suggestions - whatever Pajegalu post on this feed needs to have checks and balances or some control mechanism/moderation/expert opinion that can culminate in a deliverable option for their expert consideration.
This is because, all Prajas with their fortified expertise may feel that his post is most relevant and has to be given due consideration.
Suggestions for chcks and balances and due dligence are welcome.
- Vasanthkumar Mysoremath
Dear VM, I totally agree. Let
Dear VM,
I totally agree. Let us not flood CiSTUP with a flood of suggestions sent by individual Praja members. Can the tech team collate everyone's suggestions and then pass it on after categorising them under different heads?
Just my two paise worth!
RKC
RKC