Docstoc

People want less traffic…

Document Sample
People want less traffic… Powered By Docstoc
					ECOMM 2005: 27th-28th October 2005, Parma, Italy



   Smarter Choices –
   changing travel behaviour through
   ‘soft’ policies



                                     Dr Sally Cairns
                             Senior Research Fellow
                                      TRL and UCL

                            Email: scairns@trl.co.uk
    Measures assessed
Travel plans           Information and
   Workplace travel     marketing
    plans                 Personalised travel
   School travel          planning
    plans                 Public transport
                           information and
                           marketing
                          Travel awareness
                           campaigns

                       More efficient use
                       of cars
                          Car clubs             Tele options
                          Car sharing              Teleworking
                           schemes                  Teleconferencing
                                                    Home shopping
Study details      Research for the UK
                    Department for Transport,
                    2003-2004

                   Study team:
                        Sally Cairns
                        Lynn Sloman
                        Carey Newson
                        Jillian Anable
                        Alistair Kirkbride
                        Phil Goodwin

                   Main report published in
                    conjunction with the 2004
                    UK White Paper on „The
                    Future of Transport‟
Background

                7 previous UK assessments of
                 the potential impact of such
                 measures
                Wide range of results, with both
                 optimistic and pessimistic
                 conclusions
                Rapidly developing evidence
                 base
Methodology
   Worldwide literature review
   24 case studies of current local authority practice
    Looked at effectiveness and cost of current schemes,
         and their potential scale in 10 years time
                              ↓
   Two scenarios: low intensity and high intensity
    High intensity scenario: assumed a step-change in
     activity and resources, but within the limits of what
                would be practically achievable
Results of high intensity scenario:
Potential traffic reduction in 10 years
               national                                   11%

     non-urban off-peak                                   7%
        non-urban peak                                14%

         urban off-peak                               13%
            urban peak                                21%
                          0   20   40    60    80   100

                                   % traffic

Findings consistent with re-interpretation of previous studies
Costs and benefits
For every 1000 vehicle kilometres removed:

   Average cost    = £15
   Average benefit = £150 (for congestion relief alone)
                            ↓
   Benefit : cost ratio is at least 10:1
   Higher ratios (up to 30:1) in congested city
    streets
BUT…. Benefits will only be realised if
traffic reduction is ‘locked in’ with
restraint measures
Example: Workplace travel plans
“a package of measures that an organisation puts in place
to encourage and enable staff to travel more sustainably”

            Support for:
             walking

             cycling

             public transport

             car sharing

             local recruitment / relocation

             teleworking



               Car park management
                                    Bluewater
                Orange, Temple Point Bristol
                     WS Atkins, Birmingham
                       Norwich Union, Bristol
      Addenbrookes NHS Trust, Cambridge
    Government Office for East of England
                           Plymouth Hospital
                 Birmingham Priory Hospital
          Birmingham city council economic
                     Cambridge City Council
          Buckinghamshire County Council
                       Cambridge University
     Northfield Medical Centre, Birmingham
         Chamber of Commerce, Cambridge
        Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust
                        Computer Associates
   Government Office for the East Midlands
                   Wycombe District Council
                                          Egg
              St Helen's College, Merseyside
                                           BP
                      Orange (Almondsbury)
                         Marks and Spencer
Cambridgeshire County Council (county hall)                    Reductions in car
                          University of Bristol
                                    Vodafone
      Birmingham city council transportation
                                                              driver trips to work
                                        Pfizer
                                AstraZeneca
                                       Agilent
                                Arup, Bristol
                                                              Typical reductions:
                    Oxford Radcliffe Hospital
      Local Government Ombudsman, York                             10-25%
                 Birmingham dental hospital
                           Boots, Nottingham
                               Stockley Park
                  Generics, Cambridgeshire
                      HM Prison Birmingham
               Compass Group Birmingham
    Birmingham Royal Orthopaedic hospital

                                             0%   10%   20%     30%   40%   50%     60%
Local authority role in workplace
travel plans
Local authorities have promoted workplace
travel plans by:
   Having advisers who
    work with businesses
   Using the planning
    processes
   Offering grants or other
    incentives
   Having a plan for their
    own staff
Scale of workplace travel planning

           % employees affected by a travel plan
     30

     20

     10

      0




                                                                                    am
                                                                     rk




                                                                                                 m
                    ire




                                              ll)
                                   l
                       l




                                                               S
                   ve




                                to



                                            (a




                                                                   Yo




                                                                                                  a
                                                           &
                             is
                 sh
                 ra




                                                                                 gh



                                                                                               gh
                           Br



                                           bs



                                                         ity
            am
              yt




                                                                             tin



                                                                                            in
           se




                                                     C
                                       am




                                                                                           rm
                                                                          ot
        gh




                                                    bs
        er




                                                                          N
                                       C




                                                                                         Bi
      in
 M




                                                am
    ck




                                                C
  Bu




Future scale: two urban areas estimated 40-50%; one rural
area estimated 15%.
What happens next?
   Research has shown the cost-effectiveness of
    individual Smarter Choice measures
   …But they will only deliver major cuts in traffic if they
    become mainstream
   The next stage: large-scale local Smarter Choice
    Programmes
   Now being developed in London, and in three
    „Sustainable Travel Towns‟ - Darlington,
    Peterborough and Worcester.
What an intensive Smarter Choices
Programme might involve
   Workplace travel plan team
       who also consider car-sharing, telework,
        teleconferencing
       over 10 years, reach half the workforce
       target larger employers first

                                                       Smarter
   School travel plan team                            Choices
       over 10 years, cover every school            Programme



   Personalised travel planning
       over 10 years, reach a third of households
       target 5-10,000 people per year
   Marketing of bus and rail
     increase ridership by 2-3% per year

   Over-arching travel awareness campaign
   Innovative projects: car clubs, home shopping
    (prepare for next phase)




                                        Smarter
                                        Choices
                                      Programme
Cost of an intensive Smarter Choices
Programme
                                            Smarter
                                            Choices
   Step-change in priority / resources   Programme



   Annual revenue spend ~ €8 per
    person to achieve „high intensity‟
    scenario

   Capital funding needed too
    e.g. safer crossings near schools,
    cycle route networks etc.
Conclusions
   „Smarter choice‟ measures could reduce traffic by up to
    21% in urban peak areas
         if they are given more priority
         if the benefits are ‘locked in’ with demand restraint
          measures
   Such measures are relatively cheap
         £15 to remove 1000 vehicle kilometres
         Benefit: cost ratios better than 10:1
   Local authorities have a critical role to play
   To achieve their potential, „smarter choice‟ measures
    need to be given more priority at national and local
    level
For the study reports, go to:

               www.dft.gov.uk

       then →     Sustainable travel

        then → „Smarter choices‟

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:11/1/2011
language:English
pages:18