Get documents about "A5 The Case for
Shared by: huanghengdong
-
Stats
- views:
- 1
- posted:
- 2/9/2012
- language:
- pages:
- 38
Document Sample
The Case for New Trends
in Travel
The Future of Cities and Travel
Steven E. Polzin, PhD.
Center for urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida
October 19, 2008
Successful Strategies from
Florida
Successful Strategies from
Florida
Outline
A little theory
A little data
A little speculation
Disclaimer
The level of understanding and the amount of data
regarding travel behavior have never been better.
Yet it remains difficult to predict human behavior, new
technologies, and natural phenomena that may
influence the ultimate demand for travel.
Disclaimer
We haven’t been able to predict
Who will win the next election,
Which movie or TV show will be popular,
What will be the hot Christmas gift, or,
Which stocks (if any) will do well next year.
Therefore we shouldn’t apologize for uncertainty regarding
future travel.
But we should plan for uncertainty.
A Fundamental Desire to Travel
Travel is fundamental to the human desire to
interact and socialize. The desire to travel will
continue as it has through the history of mankind.
Travel enables economic interaction and the
transportation of products and is fundamental to
the functioning of the economy.
A Fundamental Desire to Travel
Growth in income and knowledge fuel
the desire to become more specialized in
employment, social interactions, and
consumption.
Employment
Income
Social Interactions Travel
Knowledge
Consumption
A Fundamental Desire to Travel
People do not necessarily aspire to travel.
They do aspire to carryout the economic and
social interactions enabled by travel.
Planners are torn between providing mobility,
minimizing the impacts of mobility, or
minimizing mobility.
A Framework for Thinking About Future Travel
Drivers of
Travel Behavior
Socio-Economic Conditions Demand Factors
Household/Person Characteristics
Economy Economic Conditions
Behaviors/Priorities
Security Business Conditions
Family
Structure
Land Use
Institutional Density
Structures Mix
Urban Form Travel
Legal/Political Urban Design
Climate Activity Scale/Specialization
Contiguousness
Culture/Values
Transportation System
Technology Modal Availability
Modal Performance
Cost
Etc.
Speed/Congestion
Safety, Reliability,
Convenience, etc. Supply Factors
Travel Growth Estimation Equations
Trip Generation Trip Length Mode
Travel Time Budget Travel Speed/Mode
Income
% Δ Population + 1/3 × % Δ Personal Income = % Δ Vehicle Miles of Travel
What Has Changed?
Historic trends in travel:
Socio-Economic
Demographic
Travel
“Without data, you're just another
person with an opinion."
YTD VMT -3.0% thru July 2008, -3.8% rural, -2.5% urban
VMT Growth Trends
Annual Change in Population and VMT
8%
VMT Change (each year)
VMT Change (annualized 5-yr. avg.)
6%
Population Change
4%
2%
0%
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
-2%
-4%
13
U.S. Population is Concentrated in
Peak Travel Age Cohorts
24,000 12%
Population Age Profile in 2000
20,000 10%
Percent of Population
VMT per Capita
16,000 8%
12,000 6%
8,000 4%
4,000 2%
0 0%
5- 9
+
5-
- 14
-19
-24
-29
-34
-39
-44
-49
-54
-59
-64
-69
-74
-79
-84
85
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
VMT per Capita 2001 PMT per Capita 2001 1970 2000 2020
14 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS and U.S. Census Bureau
Older Women Less Likely to Drive
100
90
80
Percent of Drivers
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
<= 19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84
Over 85
Age Group
Male Female
Source: FHWA, Highway Statistics Series, 2000
Per ACS 2007, Average HH size is now 2.61.
Average Household Size is
Stabilizing, 1930-2000
5
4.01
4 3.68
Household Size .
3.38 3.29
3.11
3 2.75 2.63 2.59
2
1
0
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
16 Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Per ACS 2007, zero-vehicle households are
now down to 8.72%, constituting about
6.05% of population .
Declining Zero-Vehicle Households
25%
20%
15%
Percent
10%
5%
0%
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
NPTS/NHTS Census
17 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS and U.S. Census Bureau
Vehicle Saturation?
Vehicle Gluttony?
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
Ratio
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
Ratio of Vehicles to Persons Over 16
Ratio of Vehicles to Drivers
Ratio of Vehicles to Workers
18 Source: FHWA, Highway Statistics Series
Per ACS 2007, nationwide carpooling is now 10.4 %.
Census Work Trips
Carpooling Mode Share
25%
20.4% 19.7%
Percent Carpooling to Work
20%
15% 13.4%
12.2%
10%
5%
0%
1970 1980 1990 2000
19 Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Per ACS 2007, walking is now 2.84%.
Declining Walk Shares
12%
Percent Walking to Work
10%
8%
6% 4.5%
4.0%
4% 5.0%
4.6%
2.3% 2.9%
4.1%
3.7%
2% 2.6% 2.8%
0%
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Work Trip by "Usual Mode" Work Trip by Actual Mode Census Walking to Work
20 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS, U.S. Census Bureau
Per ACS 2007, Transit usual mode commuting is now 4.88%.
Ending the Decline in Transit Mode
Share – Survey Data
10% 8.9%
9%
Percent of Trips on Transit
8%
6.4% 4.7%
7%
5.3% 5.0% 4.9%
6%
4.9%
5% 4.6% 4.1%
4% 4.6% 4.6% 4.7%
4.5%
3% 3.6% 3.7%
3.4%
2% 2.7% 2.7%
2.2%
1% 1.8% 1.6%
0%
1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002
Census Journey to Work Census Supplemental Survey-Work
NPTS/NHTS (all trips) NPTS/NHTS (work trips)
21 AHS (work trips)
Person Trips per Person per Year
and PMT per Person Trip
1,500 15
1,272
Trip Rate 1,457 1,483
PT per Person per Yr
994 978
PMT per PT
1,000 10
9.3 9.8
8.9 8.7 9.0
Trip Length
500 5
0 0
1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
PT/Person/Yr PMT per PT
22 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS
Factors Contributing to US VMT Growth
1977-2001
Mode
Shifts Population
16% 28%
Trip
Length
10%
Trip
Frequency
46%
23 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS
NHTS/NPTS Data Suggest Travel
Speeds are Now Slowing
40
35
30
Speed (MPH)
25
20 Changes in mode, path, departure Have we run out of
time, and moving to the suburbs ways to travel faster?
15 enabled higher speed travel
10
5
0
1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
All Trips Work Trip Usual Mode
24 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS
Travel Time Budgets Have Grown 1.8
Minutes per Day per Person per Year
90
78.5
80
Minutes of Travel per Day
66.2
70
58.2
60
50 45.7
32.8 more minutes of travel
40 each day since 1983
30
20
10
0
1982 1987 1992 1997 2002
25 Source: CUTR analysis of NHTS and NPTS
What Might Change?
Travel Growth Due to
Personal Income Growth
Elasticity of Travel with Respect to
Personal Income Changes
Percent change in per
capita VMT
Study
for each 1% Increase in
per capita personal income
NSTPRSC Forecasts +0.39%
Pickrell and Schimek (1999) +0.35% to 0.37%
Hu et al. (2000) Trip +0.20% to 0.40%
Trip VMT/ Cumulative
2001 NHTS Derived Rate Length PMT Impact
(CUTR) 0.1564 0.1178 0.0786 0.3940
Personal Income Impacts
Will personal income grow at its historic
rate of ~1.5%/year?
Will travel continue to respond to income
growth?
Vehicle availability
Travel speed
Personal income growth across the income
distribution
Impact of Density
Impact of Density
High density urban areas have as little
as half the per capita VMT as exurban
areas
Future high density residents may not
behave as in the past
Income
Vehicle ownership
Thespecialization of activity and
consumption may be offsetting the
economy of density (work, shop, recreate,
worship, medical, education)
Activity Scale and
Distribution
The average size of an elementary school in the
U.S. has grown from 155 students in 1950 to
473 in 2000.
America has gone from having 81 grocery stores
per million persons in 1977 to 35 per million in
1997.
In 1970, there were 34 hospitals per million
persons. In 2000 there were 20.
Do Business Economics
Contradict Travel
Minimization
1940 - Went to the Doctor
2008 - Went to the General practitioner
who referred you to the specialist who
sent you to the scanning center, the
pharmacist, and the physical therapist.
“They said we “No, they said we need
need high public transit to make
density to make high density work.”
public transit
work. “
32
Future Travel Costs?
Jeff Rubin of CIBC World
Markets was laughed at
three years ago when he
predicted $100 per barrel oil,
and now thinks it will climb
to $225 in four years.
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto On
04.25.08
DOE/EIA-0383(2008)
June 2008
Comparison of CPI and BHWY PPI
250
200
150
100
CPI Standardized
50
PPI
0
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
PPI does not incorporate:
shift from rural to urban design standards for larger share of projects
more/better MOT
more technology in infrastructure
higher cost right-of-way
more mitigation investments
The cost of buying consensus, etc.
Cost of Mode Shifts
Bus = $0.80 operating and $0.15 capital per pm ≈ $0.95.
LRT = $0.60 operating and $1.60 capital per pm ≈ $2.20.
>75% provided by public funds ≈ $0.75 - $1.70 per PMT
~ $0.02 per PMT for roadway travel provided by tax
sources.
Therefore, public transit is dramatically more public
cost intensive.
Source: National Transit Data 2006
Transit’s Future
Financial sustainability
Economy of scale for transit expansion
Elasticity of demand to transit service expansion
Environmental efficiency
Ability to influence location choices
Consistency with customer values
(security, convenience, privacy, image, etc.)
Comments on Non-Urban
Travel?
One vacation is equivalent to up to a 10
mile per day longer commute
How does city rebuilding compare to
other mobility accommodating strategies?
(Is a country that won’t raise gas taxes a dime willing
to transform urban America?)
Managing regional growth versus urban
growth.
$100,000 worth of Tata Nanos
