 Thank you chair for this opportunity and good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Out of all alternatives we have in urban transportation to control greenhouse gas emissions, non-motorized modes is certainly one of the best options we have. So today I'll be talking about how to use these so-called non-motorized modes of transportation in urban transportation activity in order to control greenhouse gas emissions with a specific case study of Indian city called Mumbai. Popular belief and established fact that yes Asia is growing and it's urbanizing as you can see the figure and the numbers it explains that and as the urbanization is happening the number of larger cities is also on rise like 7 out of 10 mega cities in the world are located in Asia and as the cities both in number and size is growing naturally their contribution to economic development is also very significant. Some of the speakers in the morning also have showed some statistics saying that this particular fact is absurd and as the cities are growing in economic contributions to the country it's clearly observed in Asian developing countries that services sector is playing an important role. As the service sector takes a dominant role in economic activity naturally it ends up in having more of mobility or travel activity. So the transportation as an activity has increased with the increasing urbanization and increasing number of cities and increasing services sector in economic development process. So as you can see there's a need for infrastructure dollar, print and urban transport and Asian cities have been putting a lot of effort towards that. As a result of that naturally the car ownership is on rise and cars per kilometer essentially is increasing that leads to a lot of problems like congestion and so on. Another interesting dimension of these cities in Asian countries is as the cities grow in size the percentage population living in slums especially country like India especially has a lot of slum population as you can see the table shows the share of slum population in different countries. As the slum dwellers are essentially poor relatively compared to other sections of the society in the city environment the major mobility they rely on is non-motorized modes of transport that includes walking of course and the public transport. That's what the figures essentially explain you. So due to the change towards modernization transport sector in Asia is growing as a major GHZ contributor. The alarming fact about this is the transportation is going to be more intense in the years to come and so the GHZ emissions from this sector are going to rise significantly. As the cities are gearing up towards infrastructure development infrastructure development has a potential both direct and indirect. As it can say infrastructure provides the foundations for the present and future consumption patterns. So the moment you don't consider so-called green aspects of infrastructure development there's a potential of locking ourselves into unhealthy consumption patterns as well as energy is concerned. All right at this juncture when the developing cities are gearing up to develop their infrastructure what is observed is the following infrastructure is motor vehicle centered whenever you develop a road say in India for example it is all aimed at how to mobilize the automobiles how to make them move faster which is unfortunately it's not including unmotorized modes of other people who are not using motorized modes of transport for their mobility. Lack of long-term urban planning essentially problem lack of integration with the land use pattern which would effectively reduce the need to travel see and the car centric infrastructure development results in insufficient and also inefficient public transportation leaving the weaker sections unattended their needs are unattended which is an issue of equity by and Larry's making rounds these days. So Asian developing countries with rapid economic growth patterns that's being observed these days have been pulling up for the infrastructure development and with the present approach of infrastructure development cities have a potential to lock themselves into unsustainability as is explained just now. Now how do we address this urban transportation sector as far as greenhouse gas mitigation is concerned. We have observed that it has a potential to grow as a wood sining jazimita but how do we address that. There are concepts like we can use this number of vehicles is one dimension of it and the distance traveled is another dimension of it and of course emissions per vehicle kilometer that means energy efficiency of it. The technology oriented response strategies are limited to supply side as I had explained a supply-side management whose derived CO2 benefits will be easily offset by the rising number of vehicles and the travel activity. So not just like energy efficiency but also the need to travel and the number of vehicles have to be addressed in tandem. So for that we need to say build infrastructure for sustainable mobility rather than mobility of cars. Integrate transportation infrastructure development with city planning and changing land use patterns which can be achieved by decentralization and decongestion activities. Mumbai has attempted decongestion by developing a new town called New Mumbai. So there are efforts similar to that in different parts of the world. Then ensure equity in investment try to promote infrastructure in a way the needs of all sections of the society are met not just motorized modes but those poor who rely on non-motorized modes and public transport as well. Apply economic instruments to control the use of personalized modes of transport by means of congestion tax you know making a vehicle registration more expensive and tedious process and so on. There are different examples of such mechanisms. Now in order to make the transportation mode GSD friendly as some of our friends have presented in the morning session co-benefits approach is perceived to be one of the best ways of doing it. As we do that infrastructure to promote non-motorized modes of transport, control travel activity, improve engine efficiency and improve fuel efficiency which includes number of vehicles, travel activity and energy efficiency. As a developed infrastructure to achieve this you essentially try to see what are the possible co-benefits that we have. The moment you include this assessment of co-benefits in the infrastructure development that we talk about you end up having an inclusive assessment of the transport system which is sustainable mobility contribution towards a co-efficiency of the series and then control of GSD emissions and augmenting the economic growth. How do you do this? While you plan for sustainable mobility one way is long-term planning which people go for futuristic planning. The other way is to go for short-term or retrofitting measures. There are projects ongoing which did not consider the so-called co-benefits approach. So instead of waiting for the future projects to come, whatever the present project ongoing you try to identify, what are the retrofitting measures that you think of so that you try to have the so-called co-benefits which were not considered before in the plan. In a similar exercise we did a case study for Mumbai. Mumbai essentially has a lot of population. Numbers could vary with the new census coming in picture. Serious space limitations. Mumbai has a peculiar spatial structure which is unidirectional. A lot of space constraints. Severe congestion we have. Higher per capita income compared to national per capita incomes. We have predominant quasi-public mode which is neither public nor personal. Like tuk-tuk in Thailand we have auto rickshaws in India. They are energy inefficient in a way they are more polluting vehicles as well but they have a lot of social dimension involved in that. Then we have poor quality service like we must have seen pictures of Bombay metro local trains carrying people more than their capacity. But characteristic of Mumbai transportation is efficient mass rapid transit system with a well-spread network of metro rail and bus catching the prime lag of the travel in urban transport there. This takes care of prime lag and then walking, birds and other modes of transport which is averaging at 2.3 kilometers which is quite healthy for bicycling distance. They cater for access lag and agri-slag. Now there are projects, major projects in Mumbai. These two are completed. These two are ongoing. They have almost completed the tenure. Yeah. And this is the you can see the percentage share of different modes in Mumbai. It clearly explains that automobiles are taking a major share which which cater for access lag and agri-slag which ideally can be taken by by cycle and walking. So with that intention we try to find some measures where footpaths and bicycle lanes on all roads that are planned on under these two projects which were ongoing. And then we try to see providing bicycle stand at all rail stations which are falling under this network of roads improving road intersections for NMT and capacity building measures. These are the measures we consider as retrofitting measures for the ongoing projects. And we try to see what is the incremental cost involved in adding these things to the existing products. Then the GHG benefits were calculated by means of three wheelers as I said the quasi quasi public good here quasi public motor transport. Replacing those three wheelers how much of GHG benefits you'd get. That analysis essentially led us to the following results. If you convert the existing roads 10% of the existing roads to NMT complied roads you would get this would be the cost of the retrofitting measure and the benefits would be this much of 7.6 million tons of GHG reduction. Similarly for 100% conversion of roads to NMT compliance you have this much of cost involved and of course 100% conversion is not practicable. We should always consider less than that. So 75% conversion of existing roads to NMT compliant roads essentially would have given this much of GHG benefit. Okay, as you can see the marginal cost would be some like 2 to 7 dollars per ton of carbon reduction in the scenario of 10 to 100% road improved to NMT compliance. So these kind of benefits one can derive. As I said these are short term benefits in order to have a complete gaze of these benefits one has to take up analysis of other co-benefits such as air pollution reduction, noise control, accident control and energy consumption as well. If you include all the benefits together the co-benefits would definitely look much larger and enriched. Okay, how much more time we have? Two minutes more, okay. Now in order to do this there are certainly barriers involved. It's not easy to do that. So we try to identify what are the possible barriers in order to go for this retrofeeding measure of NMT in Mumbai. We found interesting barriers like lack of proper infrastructure, lack of institutional arrangement to integrate these NMT into a mainstream things, lack of legal basis for NMT usage and poor attitude of people like car driver would look at us a bicycle person as an inferior creature unnecessarily taking space. So the attitudes have to change. Unsafe conditions, many people said we don't use bicycle because it's not safe. One can come and hit me and I'm at risk. Poor social acceptability as I said bicyclers and walkers are seen as poor people, unfortunately. Lack of national NMT strategies and so on. So in order to avoid these barriers, once we try to find what are the possible policies that should be in place, we found the list of policies as necessary institutions. For example, incorporation of standards for the bicycle and pedestrian provision in the road design, which is missing at the moment, integration of NMT in public transport systems, we don't have it as it, and the formulation of national strategy to promote NMTs and so on. Finally, what we did in a multi stakeholder group assessment based analysis, what we have, we have considered administrative costs involved in doing this exercise, financial ability, administrative capability to conduct this conversion of roads to NMT compliance, political willingness and so on. We found that highest priority is given to policies to create awareness and capacity in order to achieve this conversion is given the top priority. Next is policies to integrate NMT in public transport, second priority, policies to incorporate standards for bicyclists in the design of the road and infrastructure is given third priority. So the points that finally we would like to make is controlling JSA emissions in Asian mega cities need to reorient towards mobility rather than moving motor vehicles. While infrastructure development for intermodal transport may be considered for long term planning retrofitting measures to the ongoing infrastructure projects will be considered because they also reap a lot of benefits out of the ongoing problems. Short term measures need to in order to justify, because the project is already on, in order to justify that we need to add these elements, we need to do complete cost benefit analysis and justify such inclusion. And as I said, finally, there is a potential of applying for global environment facility projects because all these retrofitting measures have tangible JSA benefits. And that would be added advantage. It can go into financial flow of the cities. That's all I have for you. Thank you so much.