Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
intervening with physical or economic measures to address any excess demand which
remains? This may seem a rather esoteric point if, as is commonly believed, there
is little realistic scope for change. In practice the situation is more fluid. Research
conducted by the UCL Transport Studies Unit highlighted the large amount of 'churn'
which takes place each year in the population's car ownership and travel habits which
is overlooked because of statistics which report only the net outcome (LTT 401).
This issue surfaced in practice in the context of the Multi-Modal Studies when the
question arose as to what adjustments should be made to the output of the National
Transport Model to allow for the new breed of instruments supported in principle in
the 1998 White Paper (W S Atkins 1999). Many of the consultants undertaking the
studies also took the view that greater investment in these measures would generate
better value for money than some of the large-scale infrastructure schemes they were
being asked to consider.
In an attempt to calm what became quite fiercely contested waters, the Department
in 2003 commissioned a further study from a mainly academic consortium which
reviewed all the published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of soft measures and
additionally conducted a series of more detailed case studies. The results of this are
reported in the next section. It was in publishing this work that the switch in official
terminology to 'smarter choices' was made (Cairns et al. 2004).
16.4 Overview of 'Smarter Choices'
The 'Smarter Choices' research identified ten types of measure (Box 16.2). To this may
be added residential travel plans which have been the subject of separate research. All
the measures are commonly introduced independently of one another and by different
agencies. In theory all could be subject to public influence as a matter of policy through
regulatory or fiscal means, but for the most part have not been thus far.
Perhaps surprisingly only two types of measure - personalised travel planning
and travel awareness schemes - necessarily depend on public authorities for their
initiation and funding. All the rest can and have been introduced by businesses or
other organisations either as a commercial venture (e.g. public transport marketing,
car clubs and home shopping) or to improve their own functioning (e.g. teleworking
and teleconferencing). Workplace, school and residential travel plans fall into this
category too although they may also be prompted by public action, either through
promotional activity or through legal requirements. Local transport authorities may
help initiate, fund or promote some of the other types of measure (e.g. public transport
marketing and car clubs).
Having analysed individual examples of all the types of measure listed it was
estimated that the potential overall reduction in traffic obtainable from these measures
could range from 4-5% nationally at the low end (assuming 'business as usual') to
10-15% nationally and 15-20% locally under a more supportive policy environment.
These two scenarios were labelled 'low' and 'high' intensity respectively (Table 16.2).
Estimates of the traffic reduction effect of individual types of soft measure are
shown in Table 16.3. Note that in this table a different basis is used to report measures
which address a particular journey purpose from those which apply to travel in
general. The latter's much lower figures do not signify that they are necessarily any
less effective in reducing overall car mileage. (In fact their cost-effectiveness in these
terms appears to be better.) However the difference does illustrate a very important
point, namely that the purpose-specific measures can show 'visible' reductions for
Search WWH ::
Custom Search