Auto-meters for the people

Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit’s promise to scrap autorickshaws — because autowallahs “harass” passengers and many ply “illegally” — is part of her desire to see visitors to Delhi’s Commonwealth Games return convinced “that they have been to a truly civilised city”. But are Delhi’s autowallahs really that greedy? Why won’t they switch on the meter? Why do so many ply “illegally”?

There are two types of auto-driver: 80 per cent are renter-drivers, renting autos from contractors who own multiple vehicles. They pay Rs 250-300 for 10-12 hours and earn the same amount in profit: half their daily taking goes on rent and CNG. Owner-drivers own their machines, although “owner” is misleading as most are repaying huge loans to auto-financiers from whom they purchased the rickshaw and the required permit. Monthly payments are Rs 9,000-15,000.

Two decisions have strengthened the auto-financiers’ hands. In 1997, the Supreme Court capped the number of autos, trying to cut emissions. No new auto-permits would be issued; nor could they be sold. Delhi’s size and population grew, but the number of autos did not. Consequently, the permit price rocketed and a black market emerged. Only auto-financiers won; their existing stock of auto-permits appreciated. In the late ’90s, a new rickshaw with permit cost just over a lakh. Today, after a decade of black-market inflation, the same package costs Rs 4-4.5 lakh: Rs 1.45 lakh for the auto, Rs 3 lakh for the permit. Meanwhile, demand for rented autos rose with new migrants, but supply froze, allowing contractors to hike rents.

Ads by Google '+google_ads[i].line2 +'  '+google_ads[i].line3 + ''+google_ads[i].visible_url.substr(0,20) +'

Then, in 1998, the Supreme Court ordered public transport vehicles to convert to CNG by 2002. Owner-drivers had to pay

Rs 30,000 each. In 2000, Delhi had 83,000 autorickshaws. In 2002, there were 55,000. Where did these autos go? The average owner-driver could not afford it; thousands had to sell their autos and valid permits cheaply to financiers. Others had their permits voided and were left unable to legally drive their autorickshaws: selling them to a financier was the only option. By cancelling and hoarding permits, financiers and the Transport Department managed to get rid of over a third of Delhi’s autos, sending permit prices spiralling.

Financiers now hold most of Delhi’s auto-permits — but in the names of the original owners (not the financiers), who sold their vehicles years ago. When a driver pays Rs 4-4.5 lakh for the auto-permit package, the permit will be transferred in his name only when the loan is repaid. Until then he drives “illegally”. Renter-drivers have the same problem: the auto-permit is in the contractor’s name, or a false name to cover the contractor’s activities. 

Other methods exist to retain control. The financier will make the driver — frequently a new migrant to Delhi — sign several blank loan contracts. This gives him power to raise interest rates and deny the driver ownership even when the loan is fully repaid. It also allows him to charge extortionate “penalty charges”. Many of Delhi’s owner-drivers have been repaying loans for many years due to compound interest and “late payment penalties” of up to Rs 30,000. The contract maximises the financier’s ability to repossess the autorickshaw. Once snatched back, it can be sold to the next driver. Many vehicles have been “sold” and repossessed five or six times.

The financial pressure on the auto-driver does not end here. The transport department and the traffic police need their cut too. Auto-drivers must carry around 16 documents with them at all times, “available” from the transport department on application. However, each application requires an absurdly long list of supporting documents: a 50-year-old Bihari driver may be asked for his old school certificates and Delhi ID and ration cards. Impossible requirements, of course, lead to bribes being offered.

Given these requirements, the traffic police can stop auto-drivers and find an excuse to challan them retrospectively. If the officer simply keeps asking to see documents, he will find one which is missing. If not, then he can issue a challan for “wrong uniform” (including “wrong socks”), “incorrect lettering on auto” (Rs 1500) or “illegal stopping”. (Delhi has 312 official auto-stands. They are unmarked. Nobody knows where they are.)

Is it surprising, then, that in this distorted market, auto-drivers can’t rely on the meter? Somehow, in the midst of all these repayments, rents, bribes and challans, the autowallahs must feed their families.

Yet autorickshaws are a vital part of Delhi’s infrastructure: they are efficient, affordable, economical, environmentally friendly — and iconic. They cannot be scrapped. Instead, the whole autorickshaw sector must be reformed, starting with the issuance of new permits. To become a “world-class city” Delhi does not need more taxis and cars; it needs a bigger, better fleet of autorickshaws that provides convenient public transport to residents and livelihoods to drivers.

The writer researches informal labour for the Delhi-based Aman Trust

express@expressindia.com

via indianexpress.com

Why Habits Are Hard to Change (And Printers Hard to Buy) | Psychology Today

The researchers were interested in two questions:
1) Does the difficulty of the decision influence the participants' likelihood of choosing the default?
2) Is there a neural signature for choosing the default vs. overriding the status quo?

As my shopping habits (and the researchers) predicted, participants were more likely to stick with the default when the decision was difficult. It didn't matter whether the default was in or out. If they couldn't make a confident choice, they essentially chose to do nothing. And as the researchers point out, this tendency led to more errors.

What was happening in the participants' brains as they chose? The researchers observed an interesting pattern when participants went against the default in a difficult decision. There was increased activity in, and increased connectivity between, two regions: the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and an area of the midbrain called the subthalamic nucleus (STN). The PFC is well-known to be involved in decision-making and self-control. The STN is thought to be important for motivating action.

The researcher's analyses couldn't determine for sure what the relationship between the PFC and STN was, but the observations were consistent with the idea that the PFC was driving, or boosting, activity in the STN.

These brain analyses suggest that going against the default in difficult decisions requires some kind of extra motivation or confidence. Otherwise, the decider in our mind is puzzled, and the doer in our mind is paralyzed.

Knowing this can help explain why changing habits can be so difficult. If you aren't sure why you're changing, don't fully believe you're making the right choice, or question whether what you're doing will work, you're likely to settle back on your automatic behaviors. That's why self-efficacy-the belief that you can make a change and overcome obstacles-is one of the best predictors of successful change. The decider and the doer need a boost of confidence.

It also helps explain why we love formulaic diets, investment strategies, and other decision aids. Formulas feel scientific, tested, and promising. They also give us a new default. We can rely on the rules (no eating after 7 PM, automatically invest X% of your income in mutual funds twice a month) when we're feeling overwhelmed. A new automatic makes change much easier. (For more on this idea, see "The Self-Control Costs of Flexibility.")

So next time you're trying to make a change, figure out what your current default is, and remind yourself exactly why it isn't working. Then look for ways to change your default (clean out your fridge, set up direct deposit) so you don't have to fight the old default as often. And feel free to be your own cheerleader when the going gets rough. Look for the first evidence (a pound lost here, a dwindling credit card statement there) that what you're doing is paying off. The status quo is seductive, and we all need a little encouragement to lift our fingers off the keyboard.

[Printer recommendations may be left in the comments section, along with your own strategies for behavior change and decision-making.]

Study cited:
Fleming, S.M., Thomas, C.L., & Dolan, R.J. Overcoming status quo bias in the human brain. PNAS. Published online before print March 15, 2010. doi:10.1073/pnas.0910380107
Full text available here.

via psychologytoday.com

India may make CSR a law | iGovernment.in

New Delhi: The government will look at all options, including legislation, to make more companies adopt corporate social responsibility (CSR), Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid said.

"You can't hope that everything will work without a basic legislative line drawn. But where that line should be drawn must come by way of consensus from industry," Khurshid said.

"The response to our voluntary guidelines has indicated that some people think in some areas we should move towards instructions, and in some areas the voluntary guidelines are adequate," added Khurshid.

The Corporate Affairs Ministry has put up a set of voluntary guidelines on CSR and corporate governance on its website for discussion and to elicit response.

Asked if the government would consider bringing in clauses on CSR in the new Companies Bill, Khurshid said, "It depends; the new law is still coming in. The discussions are still going on, people come and make presentations to the Standing Committee as well."

"So such areas that the Standing Committee wants to include in the law will certainly be included in the law."

CSR activities are still taken as charitable initiatives by most companies. But there are a few which have embedded their CSR activities with their existing business models. Among these are the ITC group, the Tatas, Bharti Airtel and state-run firms like the State Bank of India.

The government is in the process of issuing guidelines to state-run firms on CSR spending, which could be in the range 3-5 per cent of net profits of up to Rs 100 crore, reports IANS.

Those earning net profit of more than Rs 100 crore may be asked to contribute up to two per cent of the amount.

via igovernment.in