Instituto Superior Técnico Masters in Civil Engineering. Theme 3: Transport networks and external costs. Transport land-use interaction

Transcription

1 Instituto Superior Técnico Masters in Civil Engineering REGIÕES E REDES () Theme 3: Transport land-use interaction Prof. Filipe Moura 1

2 OUTLINE Transport networks, external costs and market failures Transport system and generation of externalities Technology oriented solutions Transport demand management oriented solutions What brought us where we are? Network society and activity space Trip-making decision hierarchy, land-use and mobility Transport networks and land-use interactions 2

3 3

4 North Metropolitan Tramways horse car, London,

5 Dead Horse Surrounded by Children on NYC street (1912) 5

6 Transport networks and External costs An external cost, also known as an externality, arises when the social or economic activities of one group of persons have an impact on another group and when that impact is not fully accounted, or compensated for, by the first group. Thus, a car that generates emissions of CO, causing damage to human health, imposes an external cost. This is because the impact on those who suffer damage to their health is not taken into account by the car driver when deciding on the activities causing the damage. In this example, the environmental costs are external because, although they are real costs to these members of society, the owner of the car is not taking them into account when making decisions. 6

7 Market failures and external costs A market failure exists whenever the market is unable to reach a resource allocation that maximizes consumer satisfaction. There are four main reasons for market failure: Provision of Public Goods (goods without viability of exclusion and without rivalry between consumers) Market control (imperfect competition, excessive influence of some agents over price) Production of externalities (external costs) Imperfect information (e.g., used-car market) Market failures are a main reason for the necessity of public intervention in the transport system and can be Demand oriented: regulation, pricing mechanism Supply oriented: provision of goods and services, financial measures (e.g., subsidies) 7

8 Source: 8

9 Externalities by the transport system Pollution Land Occupation Orgware Transport System Human being Natural desire for mobility + + Infrastructures Energy Walking or Vehicles Software Hardware Human Activity Natural Resources 9

10 The paradigm of sustainable mobility Technology oriented Technological Innovation Efficiency Increase More efficient powertrains (electric-drive), new fuels, eco-driving, load factors Absorption of residuals (e.g., catalyzers, noise barriers) Trip no longer made Replaced by non travel activity or substituted through technology TDM oriented Reducing the need to travel substitution Transport Policy Measures modal shift Promotion of walk and cycle, Slowing down of urban traffic, Demand management, Investment in public transport, Flexible use of streets Land Use Policy Measures distance reduction Build sustainable mobility into patterns of urban form and layout Increase densities and concentration mixed use developments, housing location Public transport oriented developments Thresholds for availability of services and facilities 10

11 How can they by avoided? Technology? Pollution Land Occupation Absorption Transport System Human being Natural desire for mobility Trip elimination + + Infrastructures Energy Walking or Vehicles Infrastructure Engineering Fuel Technologies Vehicle Technologies Human Activity Natural Resources 11

12 Technology Technological intervention is more attractive from the policy-making perspective, since problems can be tackled (transport supply) without involving primary decisions and individual mobility options of persons and companies. Limitations of this approach: Might not solve some of the problems (e.g., rebound effect or Jevons paradox ) Does not solve some problems related with land occupation 12

13 13

14 How can they by avoided? Demand management? Pollution Land Occupation Landuse planning Transport System Human being Project Assessment Natural desire for mobility Modal Choice + + Fiscal Instruments Infrastructures Energy Walking or Vehicles Infrastructure Engineering Absorption Fuel Technologies Pricing, Regulation Trip elimination Vehicle Technologies Human Activity Natural Resources 14

15 Transport Demand Management It is necessary to involve people, companies and other social organisations and thus interfere with existing behaviours Apparently simple, it involves a complex process of interactions with a diversied set of actors of the transport system Each actor has its own array of prefences and choice making criteria Matching all these requirements turns transport policy making into a complex and longrun process 15

16 What brought us to the point were we stand (I) Several changes in society which started about 200 years ago Technological changes both in transportation modes and industry increase in productivity Increase in income and in disposable income Steadily decrease in transport costs Steadily decrease in the prices of food (industrialized agriculture) and housing (more space and comfort with the same amount of money) Increase in expenditure in education and leisure and also on travel Better quality of life Lifestyles only accessible to a minority has become available to the majority Increase in mobility 16

17 What brought us to the point were we stand (II) Productivity rates (Europe) Household consumption patterns (Switzerland) Source: Axhausen (2002) A Dynamic Understanding of Travel Demand: A Sketch. 17

18 What brought us to the point were we stand (III) Societal changes Shorter working hours more time for other occupations Stronger women presence in the public arena Different and more complex allocation of tasks within the household Who takes the children to school? Who does the shopping? More chained trips The increasing complexity of task allocation and sharing in household contributes to higher levels of car use Decrease in family size Decrease in the total number of trips made by the household Increase in the number of trips by each individual within the household Smaller number of people to allocate household tasks, e.g. single parents or single person households These patterns tend to be more atomized thus more car dependent These complexities also lead to different scheduling strategies in trip making Higher levels of mobility consumption More atomized and complex patterns of mobility People nowadays feel that mobility is a right that they are entitled to!!! 18

19 Factors of Growth: The Last 200 Years Factors of growth Factor World population [billion] 1 6 x6 World income [trillion $] x70 Life expectancy [years] x2 Work hours per year 3,000 1,500 2 Free time over life [hours] 70, ,000 x4 Mobility [km/day] (excl. walk) x1000 Global energy use [Gtoe] x35 Carbon from energy [GtC] x22 (A. Grübler, 2000) 19

20 Network society and activity spaces Networks are (recalling Manuel Castells concept of space of flows ): Spatially wider than in the past More people in each network Nodes are more remote Tend to be less coherent because fewer people will share multiple and more affiliations than in the past Membership will overlap less in spatial terms Longer distances for face-to-face meetings Home-work travel distances have increased thus enlarging activity spaces The activity space is bigger nowadays than in the past It is the space we live in from day to day; that part of action space with which an individual interacts on a daily basis. There seems to be a hierarchy of activity spaces for most people, increasing in spatial extent from family space, to neighborhood, to economic space, and then to urban space 20

21 Decisions hierarchy, land use and mobility (I) In mobility there are long term and short term decisions Short term decisions include daily activities that can be easily accommodated in day-to-day stabilized trip scheduling (e.g., new sports activity, going to cinema, etc.) Long term decisions include (those that are structural decisions for the household) Home location Employment (school) location Car ownership Transit pass ownership (not so long) Not all long term decisions have the same time horizons Long term decisions usually have some inertia and are more or less difficult to reverse Long term decisions influence travel behavior by restricting the set of options 21

22 Decisions hierarchy, land use and mobility (II) Home location Car ownership level Make a trip or not Choice of destiny Trip scheduling Mode Choice There are feedback effects between decisions Each decision level is conditioned by the choices made before and by the information that individuals holds about optimal choices on successive decision levels Utility theory also considers, besides detailed attributes of each alternative, perceptions and attitudes and also the relations between long term and short term decisions, and is used for modeling purposes. Observed Mobility Source: Domencich and Macfadden,

23 Time use and trip scheduling Factors that influence time and trip use scheduling are: Spatial and temporal constraints on activities and travel (like those referred before) Scheduling and sequencing activities in time and space Interactions between activity and travel decisions Interactions between individuals Roles played by the household members in accomplishing household activities and tasks Demographic characteristics that contribute to differences in time use include: employment status, age, gender, education level, income, household composition and land use transport environment But some of these characteristics are endogenously determined by the household long term lifestyle choices and short term activity decisions 23

24 Effect of urban density on modal shares Increase in road congestion Higher costs of car trips (more time spent) Higher parking costs (parking spaces more rare and expensive) Higher costs in car use and higher costs of car ownership Other modes become more competitive Higher number of trips that could be made using non motorized modes (shorter distances and higher number of travel opportunities by km 2 ) Transit with right of way and functioning in separated infrastructure is more competitive 24

25 How could land use patterns influence travel behavior Mix of uses Similar effects to density Could encourage trip chaining more trips Urban design (network form, parking supply, etc) Could deter car trips and attribute different priorities to different transport modes Lattice network (reduced distances) could increase total number of trips, but in the end vehicle.km.time could be reduced Accessibility to public transport (distance to transit stations) Increases transit share Selective densification (higher near the stations lower as distance increases e.g. Curitiba) House and work locations More residential areas in the city centers can reduce km travelled Central location of employment contributes to the reduction of energy spent in transport (modal split favorable to public transport). Most public transport networks are radial more adapted to linking the center with the periphery 25

26 Urban Sprawl major argument to understand the relationship between transport and land uses Definition Expansion to the exterior. Urbanized areas tend to occupy zones previously used for agriculture. The city expands itself in an amorphous way Common and direct consequences Density decline - inhabitants, jobs and activities Land use segregation residential areas segregated from other land uses suburbanization Transport networks that allow high mobility levels making accessibility a harder task 26

27 Motives for Urban Sprawl Public policies aimed at: Reducing pressure over the city centers Promoting of housing ownership - subsidizing mortgages, mainly through fiscal policies Changes in space perception, in place perception and proximity Changes in consumption patterns Commoditization of residential environments The American model of detached houses and suburbs as a desirable lifestyle The idea of proximity with nature Existence of cheap land in outer zones combined with real estate promoter (housing mass production) Increase in income, cheap energy and easier access to motorization 27

28 Interaction between Income, Urban Sprawl, Motorization Levels INCOME TRANSIT USERS FACTORS IMPACTS PEDESTRIANS LOW URBAN DENSITY NEW CARS PARKING CONGESTION TRANSIT CAR USE OTHER IMPACTS Source: Adaptation from the London Research Centre 28

29 Increasing car use in urban areas Important levels of congestion measured in the 1980 s and 1990 s Large consensus that current levels of car use in urban areas are responsible for important and unsustainable negative impacts To solve this problem two main approaches have been proposed by policy makers and planners: TO GET THE PRICES RIGHT!!! TO GET THE LAND USES RIGHT!!! If travel is a derived demand (derived from the need to perform different activities in different places) Changing activities location and environment will lead to different travel patterns (presumably). The investments in transport also change land use patterns, by changing the relative accessibility of activities (urban economy that grounds classical theories of location choice) More accessibility => more travel demand 29

30 The 'land-use transport feedback cycle' Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 30

31 Theoretical impacts of land use on transport (I) Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 31

32 Theoretical impacts of land use on transport (II) Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 32

33 Observed impacts of land use on transport (I) Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 33

34 Observed impacts of land use on transport (II) Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 34

35 Theoretical impacts of transport on land use Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 35

36 Observed impacts of transport on land use Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 36

37 Theoretical impacts of transport on transport Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 37

38 Observed impacts of transport on transport (I) Source: Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999) 38

39 BIBLIOGRAPHY European Commission (2003), External costs: Research results on socio-environmental damages due to electricity and transport, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Brussels ( Banister, D (2008), The sustainable mobility paradigm, in Transport Policy, Volume 15, Issue 2, March 2008, Pages Axhausen, Kay W. (2005), A Dynamic Understanding of Travel Demand: A Sketch, in Integrated Land-Use and Transportation Models: Behavioral Foundations, Martin Lee- Gosselin e Sean Doherty (eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam. Online version on: Handy, Susan (2005), Smart Growth and the transportation Land use connection: What does the research tells us?, International Regional Science Review, 28 (2), pp , University of California, Michael Wegener, Franz Fürst (1999), Land-Use Transport Interaction: State of the Art, (8/12/2009) Rayle, Lisa (2008), Tracing the effects of transportation and land use policies: A review of the evidence, Paper# TSI-SOTUR-08-01, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=84&itemid=1 39