A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
description
Transcript of A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Jens Schippl and Torsten Fleischer
Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyInstitute of Technology Assessment and
System Analyses
The 4th International Seville Conference onFuture-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA)
12 & 13 May 2011
Challenges for Transport Planning
Unintended effects are unavoidable
• Transport is a socio-technical field that characterised by – immense importance for economic development and quality of life
– high public interest / many controversies
– complexity / transport is derived demand
– risks and uncertainties
• Policy interventions lead to unintended or adverse effects in the transport system and beyond (economic, social, environment). Examples:
– new roads might lead to additional traffic;
– Introduction of biofuels might lead to deforestation and pressure on the food sector
– Flyvbjerg et al. 2003: cost of Megaprojects underestimated, revenues overestimated, environmental effects under evaluated
> Uncertainties are a challenge for prospective analyses in transport
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Tools and Methods in Transport Planning
• A wide range of tools and methods are applied in transport planning to anticipate unintended effects
• The tools and methods are of very different character:
– Sophisticated ICT-based models, CBA, MCDA but also focus groups, surveys, workshops, citizen’ consultation, pTA approaches etc.
– In the last decades discursive methods became more prominent
• Results of a planning are shaped by the applications of different methods
• Difficult to understand the potentials and limits of different approaches
> Key-thesis: simple and transparent classification is helpful
- to better understand the pros and cons of FTA-methods
- to support a more appropriate and transparent usage of methods
- to reduce risks, uncertainties and, thus, unintended effects
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Risks and Uncertainties
Different Approaches:
• Long tradition in studies on risks and uncertainties (e.g. Renn 2008)
• van Asselt and Rotmans 2002: Categorisation of the sources of uncertainty– Uncertainty due to variability (hardly removable)
– Uncertainty due to limited knowledge (in principle removable)
• Similar in Kleindorfer 2008: epistemic risks / aleatory risks
• Knight (1921) on risks and uncertainties (also Runde 1998; Grunwald 2007): – Risk: knowledge and parameters available to assess the likeliness of an outcome
– Uncertainty: more genuine lack of systematic understanding of causal relations
• Hansson (1996) adds “Great Uncertainties” as a third category– situations in which a decision maker lacks most of the information about his options and of
the values of the different outcomes.
> Three categories to classify unintended effects: risks (knowns), uncertainties (Known unknowns), great uncertainties (unknown unknwowns)
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Knowns and Unknowns
The following categories are used:
• Knowns: Solid knowledge is available, but still negative effects can not be fully excluded; risks in the Knightian sense
– Effects of speed limits on emissions and number of accidents
– Health problems caused by noise or pollutants
• Known unknowns: There is rough knowledge about the situation or the effects of certain interventions; but the cause-effect relations are not understood; uncertainties in the Knightian sense
– Segregation effects (new road) on biodiversity
– Impacts of noise from traffic on human creativity
• Unknown unknowns: There is no knowledge about potential effects or cause-effect relations; surprises or “great uncertainties” (Hansson)
– Car friendly urban policy in the 60’ties leading to congestions and urban sprawl years later
– From an 1970’ties perspective: heavy growth rates in freight transport in the EU on roads from and to eastern European countries
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Knowns and Unknowns II
Unknown unknowns Known Unknowns Knowns
Great Uncertainty Most features of the situation neither known nor well-defined (options, their possible consequences, reliability of information, value of different outcomes)
Uncertainty No sufficient basis for assigning a precise and accurate likelihood to a particular outcome, most other features of the situation well-defined and known
RiskBoth the likelihood of a particular outcome, and the nature of its impact, are well understood
Precaution Anticipate, identify and reduce the impact of ‘surprises’
Precautionary, Prevention Reduce potential hazards
Prevention Reduce known risks
Examples
- Car friendly urban policy in the 60’ties leading to congestions several years later - Car friendly urban policy in the 60’ties leading to urban sprawl - From an 1970’ties perspective: heavy growth rates in freight transport in the EU on roads from and too eastern European countries
- Effect of a bypass road on kilometres driven in an area (additional traffic might be attracted) - Segregation effects (new road) on biodiversity- Effects of market penetration of electric vehicles on travel patterns ( e.g. on modal split) Consequences of global warming on economic growth
- Effects of speed limits on emissions and number of accidents - Health problems caused by noise or pollutants- Effects of fuel prices on person kilometres driven in a region - Correlation between the development of GDP and growth rates in freight transport
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
The Transport System as a “web of nodes”
A climbing net as a rough approximation
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Methods and the Web of nodes
• “Web” consist of nodes and linkages
• All FTA-methods focus on – different – aspects of the web of nodes: – they either systematically cut out a certain area of the web (transport models)
– or, at the other extreme, they provide more punctual knowledge from rather different areas (brainstorming, open space)
• Transport models show a cut-out with selected nodes and linkages: – enables detailed studies with quantification
– still, wide parts of the “ world” are not included
– a decision was made on what to include or exclude; such decisions are usually based on norms and values (Grunwald 2009)
• No methods is able to cover the full web
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Two Categories
• Key questions for the categorisation of methods: – Does the structure of the method allow for a high degree in openness concerning the
inclusion of parameters and linkages between parameters or is the method rather characterised by a pre-defined set of nodes and linkages between these nodes?
• Two categories: structurally open / structurally closed:
– Closed methods: focus on knows (risks)
– Open methods: focus on unknowns (uncertainties and great uncertainties)
• Overlaps with “quantitative” and “qualitative” but should illustrate that closed methods systematically exclude many nodes and linkages
> important for the type of unintended effects that can be anticipated
• Categories are rather two points on a continuum
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
The categorisation
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Structurally open methods Structurally closed methods
Not too formalised and pre-structured
degree in openness is determined by the extent in pre-structure
mainly explorative
strongly shaped by qualitative information
integrate knowledge of experts, stakeholders or lay people
help to structure arguments and to separate facts from norms
help getting a rough understanding on effects
in principle open to detect effects beyond the system boundaries
> focus on unknowns (uncertainties)
pre-defined setting / formalised and pre-structured approaches
Good understanding of relevant parameters and causal relations needed
mainly quantitative
Designed by including and excluding parameters and linkages
focus on effects inside the pre-defined system
effects outside the pre-defined system can not be detected
specifications and quantification of knowns rather than for the detection of unknowns
> main focus on knowns (risks)
Examples:
open space, brainstorming, expert workshops, explorative scenarios, focus group exercise, stakeholder consultation
Examples:
quantitative models, cost-benefit analyses, multi-criteria analyses
Knowns and Unknowns II
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Unknown Unknowns Unknowns Knowns
Great Uncertainty Most features of the situation neither known nor well-defined (options, their possible consequences, reliability of information, value of different outcomes)
Uncertainty No sufficient basis for assigning a precise and accurate likelihood to a particular outcome, most other features of the situation well-defined and known
RiskBoth the likelihood of a particular outcome, and the nature of its impact, are well understood
Structurally Open Methods
Structurally Closed
Methods
Mixed Approaches
Characteristics
• In praxis, different methods are often applied in combination
• In principle, mixed approaches can cover the full range of unintended effects
• Application of mixed approaches need a careful design
Examples
• Scenarios– Ability to detect effects depends on the methodology
– Explorative scenarios are usually designed in a rather open way
• Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) / Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
– Combination of different methods (e.g. modelling approaches and discursive methods)
– SEA more open, integrates qualitative and quantitative data
– EIA more focussed on specifying and quantifying effects from the category knowns
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Conclusions I
Problem-oriented categorisation
• is feasible with the categories “structurally open” / “structurally closed”
• is helpful for a better understanding of the potentials of different methods in dealing with knows, known unknowns and unknown unknowns
• increase awareness for a more careful design and integration of methods
• increases awareness for risks and uncertainties
• underlines that methods from both categories are needed to reduce unintended effects
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
Conclusions II
Further research needed
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning
• regarding an optimised integration of structurally closed and structurally open methods in planning processes
• regarding “generic principles” for the combination of methods
• for example, the EU project OPTIC suggests (DLR, KIT 2010): – using open methods in the beginning; might be supported by simple pre-structured
approaches for better orientation; involvement of all relevant groups such a experts, of stakeholder/citizens; reduction of unknowns;
– closed methods in the middle; quantifications with models as a main task; mainly experts involved; reductions of risks
– open methods in the end again; discursive methods for the interpretation of the results; potentially affected groups should be involved
Thank you for your attention !
A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning