World Transport Policy &...

Con t en t s Volume 4, Number 2, 1998

World Transport Policy & Practice

World Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998]

©1998 Eco-Logica Ltd ISSN 1352-7614

Edi torJohn Whitelegg, Professor of Environmental Studies, Liverpool John Moores University, ClarenceStreet, Liverpool, L3 5UG, U.K.

Editorial BoardEric Britton, Managing Director, EcoPlan International, The Centre for Technology & Systems

Studies, 10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France.Paul Tranter, Senior Lecturer, School of Geography & Oceanography, University College,

Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra ACT 2600, Australia.John Howe, Professor of Transportation Engineering & Head of Infrastructural Engineering &Physical Planning, International Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic & EnvironmentalEngineering, Delft, The Netherlands.Mikel Murga, Leber Planification e Ingenieria S.A., Apartado 79, 48930-Las Arenas, Bizkaia,

Spain.

Publ i s herEco-Logica Ltd., 53 Derwent Road, Lancaster, LA1 3ES, U.K.Telephone +44 1524 63175 Fax +44 1524 848340E-mail: Editorial [email protected] Subscriptions [email protected]

Production TeamPascal Desmond (Subscriptions, Administration), Chris Beacock (Production). Please contactPascal Desmond for sample copies, orders and subscriptions, reprints and copyright permissions.

[ 1 ]

2 Abstracts & keywords

3 Editorial

4 Solving the rural transport dilemma: a case study of North DevonCamilla Swiderska & William R.Sheate

12 Children’s Perceptions of Transport Modes: car culture in the classroom?Julia Meaton & Simon Kingham

17 Transport Policy in the EU: A strategy for sustainable development?Sarah Wixey & Steve Lake

22 The Comparative Pollution Exposure of Road Users - A SummaryDavid Taylor & Malcolm Fergusson

27 Mortality from vehicular particulate emissions in Tel-Aviv-JafoGary Ginsberg, Aharon Serri, Elaine Fletcher, Dani Koutik, Eric Karsenty & Joshua Shemer

32 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes: Highway expansions in search of meaningPreston L. Schiller

39 Car Sharing and Mobility Management: Facing new challenges with technology andinnovative business planningConrad Wagner & Susan Shaheen

Abstracts and keywords

Mortality f rom vehicular particulate emissions inTel -Aviv-JafoGary Ginsberg, Aharon Serri, Elaine Fletcher, Dani Koutik,Eric Karsenty & Joshua ShemerKeywords: Air pollution, Deaths, Tel-Aviv-JafoThe present level of emissions due to motor vehicles inIsrael’s second largest city, based on kilometres travelled byvehicle and fuel type, was estimated. By applyingco-efficients relating changes in mortality levels withchanges in ambient PM10 levels, it is estimated that tailpipe

emissions annually cause around 293 premature deaths,primarily among the elderly. This annual toll is in excess ofthe combined total of deaths whose primary underlyingcauses were falls, homicides, infectious diseases, suicides,traffic and non-traffic accidents.

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes: Highwayexpansions in search of meaningPreston L. SchillerKeywords: HOV lanes, Transport investment, USA.High Occupancy Vehicle lanes have been widely promotedand constructed in the USA in a belief that the provision ofsuch facilities would improve transit performance,stimulate car and vanpool formation, and improve land useand air quality in urban areas. Critics, especially amongenvironmentalists and alternative transportation advocates,assert that HOV lanes are merely highway expansionswhich promote more driving, weaken transit, increase airpollution, and facilitate suburban sprawl. This articledemonstrates that, generally, HOV lanes are effective only tothe extent that they are designed to fill transit and formalcarpool program needs. Questions are also raised about theefficacy of HOV criteria, and the extent to which theseprograms are shaped by ideological and politicalconsiderations, rather than by careful analysis andplanning.

Car Sharing and Mobility Management: Facing newchallenges with technology and innovativebusiness planningConrad Wagner & Susan ShaheenKeywords: Business planning, Car sharing, InnovationMore car sharing organisations are beginning to appearthroughout Europe and North America. The use of existingand new technologies in an innovative way offerstremendous opportunities for this industry to grow.

Solving the rural transport dil emma: a case studyof Nor th DevonCamilla Swiderska & William R. SheateKeywords: North Devon, Policy options, Rural transport.This paper attempts to demonstrate how both rising trafficlevels and rural travel poverty can be alleviated through thedevelopment of a range of small-scale measures. UsingNorth Devon in South West England as a case study,specific issues such as land use, walking, cycling andtourism are examined. A tailor made scenario techniquewas used to engage local decision-makers and interestgroups in a discussion of the appropriate mix of policysolutions. Many of the proposed solutions could betranslated to other areas of rural Britain.

Children’s Perceptions of Transport Modes: carculture in the c lass room?Julia Meaton & Simon KinghamKeywords: Advertising, Children, Social conditioning,United KingdomChildren learn at a very early age how to identify betweendifferent modes of transport and which are preferable.Breaking the cycle of car dependency among futuregenerations will not be easy.

Transport Po licy in the EU: A strategy forsustainable development?Sarah Wixey & Steve LakeKeywords: Policy formulation, Trans-European NetworksThis paper seeks to analyse the European Union’s approachto transport policymaking and the programme of Trans-European Networks. The strategic considerations at theheart of this programme bear little relation to the Union'sstated commitments to sustainable development in allpolicy areas. Sustainable development can only beimplemented on a strategic level in policy formulation andnot, as seems to be the case with TENs, as an afterthought.The paper concludes by identifying the issue of transportfor ‘need’ as a guiding principle in the formulation of‘sustainable mobility’.

The Comparative Pollut ion Exposure of RoadUsers - A S ummaryDavid Taylor & Malcolm FergussonKeywords: Air pollution, Exhaust gases, Health impacts,Literature reviewLevels of vehicle-derived pollutants found inside andimmediately outside motor vehicles are a cause of concern.It is now generally recognised that car drivers, in particularduring rush hour, are travelling through a ‘tunnel ofpollutants’ and are exposed to significantly higher levels ofpollution than background readings would suggest.

[ 2 ]

breathe polluted air in a noisy and dangerous environment.The roads left in the much reduced list of 37 schemes ring

lots of alarm bells. There are widening schemes on the busiestsection of the M25 (London orbital motorway) in preciselythose circumstances where transport science, common senseand political acumen call for serious road traffic reductionmeasures and an absolute ban on more road space. Wideningthe M25 will encourage more cars to use the increased roadspace in a neat and depressing demonstration that thepoliticians have understood nothing of the transport debateand not even understood their own rhetoric. Other roadschemes have gone ahead on grounds of boosting theeconomy and aiding job creation when once again there isample evidence that either this does not happen at all or if itdoes it so weak and expensive that numerous other policieswould win out over roads if we really wanted to targettaxpayers money to create jobs.

Government has made much of the word ‘integration’ andyet has offered nothing to make sure it happens. Governmentpolicies themselves are not integrated. The tax systemencourages car use and penalises cyclists. New hospitals(built with public money) are built in locations which areinaccessible by public transport, foot and bicycle. They arethen provided with 2000 car parking places to send the veryclear signal that car use is what is expected. Smaller hospitalscloser to where people live are rejected. Similar perverseprinciples apply to schools. Out-of-town shopping centres arestill being built (as are out-of-town multiplex cinema sitesand huge leisure complexes) and the White Paper excludedretailing completely from the discussion about car parkingtaxes. Retailing is such an important pressure for more cartravel that it more than merits a national tax on every carparking place, imposed immediately and the income streamrecycled to help small, rural and urban, community-basedshops and post offices.

Integration means making sure that everything governmentdoes pulls in the same direction to achieve governmentpolicy objectives. It means the money follows the policy andit means that we get to grips with traffic reduction. On thiscriteria the White Paper is a monumental failure.

John Whitelegg, Editor

Re fe r e n ce sDepartment of the Environment, Transport and the Regions(1998) A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone TheStationery Office, London.Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions(1998) A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England The Station-ery Office, London.Both documents may be downloaded from the Department’swebsite http://www.detr.gov.uk/

In 1995 the UK government was committed to building 500new road schemes. In 1997 this was reduced to 140 and inJuly 1998 reduced yet again so that now only 37 schemesremain in the pipeline. This particular indicator ofsustainable transport might well have a claim to representone of the most dramatic reversals of any government policyin any area in recent years. More interestingly the reversal isassociated with a great deal of rhetoric about the need toreduce car dependency. Transport 2000, the well-knownnational campaigning organisation welcomed the change inpolicy with the phrase “This White Paper marks a welcomeend to 30 years of car-based transport policies”. So is thisall as good as it looks and should we in the UK be outcelebrating the success of 25 years hard work in turningaround the super-tanker of a land-grabbing, energy-greedy,socially-irresponsible transport system?

Sadly the answer is in the negative. The steep reductionin new road schemes in the Roads Review and the policychange which preceded it by 10 days - the White Paper -still miss the main points and carefully avoid the mosteffective things that government could do if it really wantedto reduce traffic. The new roads will cost the tax payerapproximately £1.5 billion compared with the £1.1 billionthat has been allocated to everything else (public transportsupport, pedestrian facilities, cycle facilities). The alloca-tion of cash is at sharp variance with the language and therhetoric, and every government official and politicianknows that cash ‘means business’ and words don’t reallyamount to very much at all. In very crude terms about 60%of the cash government is willing to allocate to transport hasbeen allocated to a particular form of transport (mainly thecar) which we have been told must be reduced. This willensure that the car continues to dominate the choices thatpeople make about how to travel and will continue to act asa deterrent to a large mass of potential bike and footjourneys which are there to be revealed but are suppressedbecause the road, walking and cycling environment are soirredeemably awful.

The White Paper skilfully avoids any commitment toreduce traffic levels in spite of considerable popular andparliamentary support for new laws in this area. It ducks anational approach to parking standards and does not requirelocal authorities to reduce generous parking provision forplaces of employment and out-of-town shopping centres. Inshort, it offers nothing that will turn off the engine drivingthe upward trajectory of car use. It does nothing at all toensure that small locally accessible services (shops, doctors,post offices, schools) are well funded and plentiful so thatin rural areas especially there is less need to travel longerdistances. It does nothing to give tax incentives toemployers and employees to switch away from car use fortheir commuter trips and it leaves in place a historicallycomplex but generous system of incentives for using cars. Itdoes nothing to curb excessive speeds of vehicles and offersnothing to all those who are victims of road traffic‘accidents’ and also victims of the everyday discourtesiesand stresses of trying to live alongside polluting, speedingand irresponsibly driven vehicles. The White Paper offersno relief for a countryside that will continue to receive everincreasing levels of traffic and towns that will continue to

E d i t o r i a l

[ 3 ]

transport corridors. Such corridors couldinclude taxibuses, new railway lines, andcycleways. However the cost of rail travel isprohibitive to many rural dwellers, and inremote areas where the population is widelydispersed (such as North Devon), many villageswill not be on or near a public transportcorridor. If the objective is to preserve thetranquillity of the countryside then publictransport corridors, even on a very small scale,may not be practical or desirable.

Rural transport problems

Travel PovertyMany rural dwellers suffer from travel poverty.This occurs when people cannot attend eventsor facilities which are available to others due toa lack of access to choice in relation to travel.Work carried out by the SMART (SustainableMobility and Accessibility in Rural Transport)research programme at the Transport StudiesUnit (TSU) at Oxford focused on the concept ofpublic transport increasing choice, particularlyfor rural dwellers where walking and cyclingare not an option due to mobility problems,hilly terrain or travel distance (Root, 1996).Rural dwellers who are without access toprivate transport are finding themselvesincreasingly isolated as facilities such asschools, hospitals and shops become moredispersed. As more village shops and smallerlocal hospitals close people must travel furtherto out-of-town shopping centres and regionalhospitals.

National Road Traffic Forecasts (NRTF)The 1989 NRTF predicted that between 1988and 2025 the amount of traffic on Britain’sroads would increase by between 82% and142% (the difference between the forecastsbeing related to the rate of economic growth).The latest revision to these forecasts hasreduced the growth rate (from 1996)considerably to a range of 24-51% by 2016 and36-84% by 2031 (DETR, 1997). Such a growthrate would still result in significant increases onalready congested roads. The implications forrural areas have been explored in two detailed

Address for correspondence:William R. Sheate,Centre for EnvironmentalTechnologyImperial CollegeUniversity of London48 Prince’s GardensLONDONSW7 2PEe-mail: [email protected]

Solving the rural transport dilemma: a case study ofNorth Devon

Camill a Swiderska and William R. SheateCentre for Environmental Technology, Imperial College, University of London

Abs tr a ctThis paper attempts to demonstrate how bothrising traffic levels and rural travel poverty canbe alleviated through the development of arange of small-scale measures. Using NorthDevon in South West England as a case study,specific issues such as land use, walking.cycling and tourism are examined. A tailormade scenario technique was used to engagelocal decision-makers and interest groups in adiscussion of the appropriate mix of policysolutions. Many of the proposed solutionscould be translated to other areas of ruralBritain.

K eyw or dsNorth Devon, Policy options, Rural transport.

Int rodu ct i onIt is estimated that traffic levels in rural areas ofEngland will rise by between 127% and 267%by 2025 (Transport Studies Unit, 1992). This isconsiderably more than in urban areas wheremany routes are at or close to capacity. Already,a legacy of ‘predict and provide’ transportpolicy has resulted in air, noise and lightpollution invading many quiet rural areas ofBritain. Although such road improvements mayinitially have helped rural economies (thoughthis is debatable, SACTRA, 1997), they havealso made remote and wild corners of thecountry accessible to increasing numbers ofcar-based tourists and freight lorries. Thedilemma for policy makers is how to provide anacceptable level of public transport for thesignificant number of rural dwellers who do nothave access to a car, whilst at the same timemanaging passenger and freight traffic levels ina manner that will protect sensitive areas fromfurther environmental degradation. Successfulworking examples of cheap, popular,community services include post-buses, liftsharing, shared taxis and taxi buses. Generallythey have financial support from, for example,the Rural Development Commission, or rely onvolunteer drivers. It has been suggested thatpublic transport use in rural areas can beencouraged by the development of public

[ 4 ]

Swiderska & Sheate: Solving therural transport dilemma: a casestudy of North DevonWorld Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 4-11

reports: one at the national level by the TSU(1992), the other in Norfolk by the MetropolitanTransport Research Unit (MTRU, 1994). TheTSU study, more relevant to this report, foundthat traffic would grow in rural areas almosttwice as fast as the average, producing anincrease of between 127% and 267% by 2025.For rural dwellers the main impacts are areduction in the environmental quality of thevillages and hamlets due to increased noise,street lighting and danger. The enjoyment ofwalking and cycling is reduced when there ismore traffic – indeed walkers and cyclists mayfeel unsafe when increasing amounts of trafficare speeding through the village. In addition thecharacter of the countryside is gradually lost aswindy roads are straightened and signposts andstreet lighting are added. The recent growth intraffic calming policies through villages has metwith opposition from some rural residents whosay that excessive humps, stripes and speedrestrictive signposting ruin the character of thevillage.

Pollut ionEmissions from motorised transport whichcontribute to global atmospheric pollution havegenerally been portrayed as an urban problembut a study of rural transport in Wiltshire byFriends of the Earth found high levels of groundlevel ozone in the South West of England (FoEWiltshire, 1997). Ozone peaks between 3 p.m.and 4 p.m. as polluted air masses drift out fromthe cities on thermals, before falling off again inthe evening. High ozone levels in rural areasmay affect people’s health, dissuade peoplefrom spending time outside on hot sunny daysand may create poor visibility thereby affectingtheir enjoyment of the countryside.

Freigh tThere has been a steady and substantial growthin traffic from heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)since the 1950s and these have become muchlarger and heavier. Much of this growth isbecause goods are moving further, not becausemore goods are being produced. The number ofgoods moved by rail has declined by more thanhalf the amount carried 40 years ago (Plowdenand Buchanan, 1995). Most of the goods nowcarried by rail are bulk goods such as fuel andbuilding materials. Freight transport by roadhas large external costs that are not fullyreflected in pricing and taxation structures.External costs of road freight transport includedamage to road infrastructure, fatalities andinjuries in crashes, air pollution, noise andother damage such as damage to streetfurniture, roadside buildings, banks, verges andhedges. This is particularly relevant to rural

areas where sometimes walkers and cyclistsmust share narrow roads, not designed forheavy lorries, with road freight traffic.

Research for the Department of Transport hasindicated that 4.5 billion tonne km of roadfreight (about 3.3%) could conceivably beswitched to shipping (Mawhinney, 1995). Halfof that would involve a complete switch fromroad onto coastal transport. About half wouldbe re-routed to ports nearer to their destination.In rural areas with working ports and harbours,such as South West England, there is somepotential to move freight off the road in thisway. Rural areas would also benefitconsiderably from reduction rather thanincreases in lorry weights and sizes.

FundingLocal transport schemes for public transport,walking and cycling are notoriouslyunderfunded. In the 1997/98 Local TransportSettlement, the Government allocated £746million to local transport schemes, yet less thanone in ten transport packages tackled theproblems of rural areas (CPRE, 1996). Of thisamount £110 million was allocated to bridgestrengthening but only £79 million on ‘greenerpackages’. The guidance on Transport Policiesand Programme (TPP) submissions fails toencourage authorities to submit packages forrural areas (Transport 2000 et al., 1996). As aresult highway authorities are presently usingtheir minor works budget to improve conditionsin small towns and villages. Yet the minorworks budget was cut by 38% in the 1996settlement. Also, local authorities are onlypermitted to bid for package funding for oneyear – yet other schemes can be presented aslonger-term schemes. Planning ahead for ascheme is difficult if it is not known what fundswill be available the following year. Howeverthe package system can introduce a workableand sustainable local transport system –working examples include the STAR project inrural Surrey and the package for DartmoorNational Park (Swiderska, 1997).

TourismMany rural areas are renowned for their peaceand beauty and may be covered by some form ofenvironmental designation such as Area ofOutstanding Natural Beauty, Heritage Coast, andSites of Special Scientific Interest or be in aNational Park (such as the Dartmoor NationalPark). Due to the lack of public transport, roadsinto these areas become congested with touristtraffic during the summer season. The appeal ofsuch tourist destinations may becomethreatened by the increase in the number oftourists travelling by car. The destinations


[ 5 ]

themselves may be sensitive areas, whichcannot withstand the environmental impact ofsuch increases and may suffer irreversibledamage. It is clear that visitor trafficmanagement strategies must be adopted andthis is already happening in the Lake Districtand in parts of South Devon.

Case study of North Devon

Why North Devon?The Council for the Protection of Rural England(CPRE) has stated that there are only three areasof extensive rural tranquillity now left inEngland and one of these is North Devon(CPRE, 1995; The Independent, 1998). Figure 1illustrates its location. Nevertheless, it isrepresentative of other rural areas of Britainwhich suffer the transport problems outlinedabove, namely travel poverty, approximately50% increase in traffic during the touristseason, and an increasing number and weight offreight lorries on small rural roads. Through avariety of projects there has been some progressin meeting the needs of the travel poor. Thecounty is renowned for its innovative solutionswhich include a transport co-ordination centrerun by the County Council which has led tobetter use of resources and considerablefinancial savings. However many villages have


Figure 1: Location of North Devon

Figure 2: Map of Rural Bus Services in North Devon.

only one bus service per week (see Figure 2)and many tourist destinations are ruined bycongestion.

Bus and train servicesThere is only one railway branch line in NorthDevon. It is known as the Tarka line and hasreceived wide recognition for its achievementsmost notably by helping to regenerate localinterest in rural rail, and by promoting green

[ 6 ]

tourism in the area. However locals complainthat the service is too infrequent (one serviceper hour in the day and none at night) and tooexpensive (it is cheaper to drive fromBarnstaple to Exeter for the day if it is just thecost of petrol that is considered).Approximately one third of the population ofNorth Devon do not have a car (8,000households). The public transport system thatthey rely on has many problems:

The cost of public transport: it is prohibitivefor some people, such as the unemployed /those on low incomeTimetabling and connections: bus servicesare infrequent; there are no late services(often the last bus is at 5.30 p.m.), and thereare poor connections with school times; thetrain service does not connect with theLondon and other long distance trains; theRing and Ride service for disabled people isweekly in some areas and only fortnightly inother areas; there is a lack of bus/railintegration making multi modal journeysmore difficult and costly. Finally, there is nofacility for taking bicycles on the bus and nosafe cycle storage at train stations.Community transport: resources are oftenunderused due to poor communicationbetween commercial and subsidised orvoluntary operators. Current operatinglicenses are restrictive, for example Ring andRide vehicles cannot pick up youngable-bodied people.Ticketing: there is no through-ticketing


(separate tickets must be bought for differentbus companies and trains).Travel awareness: many remote villages lackaccess to valuable travel information.

Visitor managementNorth Devon has both popular coastal resortssuch as Ilfracombe and picturesque river valleysand villages inland. The number of cars swellsby 50% during the holiday season, causingcongestion on roads into these areas. Narrowroads are often blocked by caravans. In the past,many places have responded by building morecar parks (e.g. Ilfracombe now has 8 car parks).However since the adoption of Local Agenda21, community partnerships are being built,albeit slowly, and parish councils, inrecognition that their appeal as touristdestinations may be threatened, are beginningto draw up and implement their own trafficmanagement strategies. Although additional busservices are put on in the summer, it seems thattourist needs are not met in terms of comfort,accessibility and frequency of service. There issimply not enough incentive (financial or other)to leave the car at home or at touristaccommodation. At the regional level the WestCountry Tourist Board transport strategyhinders any pursuit of sustainable tourisminitiatives by persistently lobbying for theupgrading of the road network. However somesustainable tourism initiatives have beensuccessful in encouraging a modal switch, themost successful being the Tarka Trail. This is abranch rail line running through thepicturesque ‘Tarka country’ between Exeter andBarnstaple with cycle hire available at manyinterim stops together with route maps of theextensive cycleways in the area.

Stakeholder survey of policy scenariosIn order to propose a mix of sustainable policysolutions, a consultative approach was chosen.Case studies of rural transport initiatives suchas the Lake District Traffic ManagementInitiative have shown that unless there iswidespread agreement and co-operation amongboth resident and business interests, evenproposals with the best intentions will notwork. A list of organisations in North Devonwas drawn up which fairly represented theinterests of residents, tourism and business.This included policy makers, transportoperators, non-governmental organisations,businesses and residents. Twenty two out of thethirty people who were originally contactedresponded (see Table 1).

Given that one of the greatest long termthreats to rural areas is the ever increasingtraffic on rural roads, the NRTF and their

Table 2: Three Scenarios

I Accept traffic forecasts as inevitable cater for the growth - policies would includeroad building, suburban development etc.

II Damage limitation strategies try to deter the worst effects of traffic growth -policies would include fiscal measures, suchas road pricing

III Trend reversing strategies try to ensure the forecasts do not come true -policies include improving public transport andprovisions for cyclists and walkers

Table 1: Organisations which responded to the stakeholder survey

Devon and Cornwall Railway PartnershipTransport 2000 local groupGregory Distribution Ltd (road haulagecompany)North Devon District CouncilWest Country Tourist BoardDevon Wildlife TrustBarnstaple Parish CouncilCyclists Touring Club local groupNorth Devon Rail Users GroupA local ActivistLocal Agenda 21 local groupCombe Martin Community Partnership

Braunton Parish CouncilCPRE local groupTransport Action and Information Network(TRAIN)Ramblers AssociationDevonshire Dales Development TrustNorth Devon Transport ForumIlfracombe PartnershipNational TrustDevon County Council, TransportCo-ordination TeamRed Bus North Devon Ltd

•••

••••••••

•••

•••••••••

[ 7 ]

•

•

•

•

•

conditions in the following areas: travel trendsand land use, public transport, walking andcycling, tourism, road freight and travelawareness. These areas were chosen in orderthat the concerns of a broad range of interestgroups could be addressed ranging from freighttransport to the tourism industry and localpassenger transport. Policy solutions wereproposed in each of these areas and examplesare given in Table 3 while Table 4 showssuggested policy solutions in relation to trafficfor the three different scenarios. Furtherproblems and solutions in each scenario weregiven in the remaining categories.

Re s u l tsA summary of the results of the survey aregiven in Table 5. Some immediate conclusionscan be drawn from the table:• no respondent chose Scenario I although two

respondents did choose a combination ofScenario I and II;

• the majority chose Scenario II or III with over72% selecting a combination of II/III or IIIalone;

• 50% chose Scenario III, which proposedtrend-reversing strategies.Given the mix of stakeholders interviewed,

the results indicate that the desire for a differentapproach to transport was not confined solelyto the ‘green’ groups, but was widely sharedacross the interests consulted.

Lessons from the scenario survey

FundingCurrently, the main way a local authority canmove towards a more sustainable transportpolicy is through its annual bid for funds in theTPP. Such a trend is inhibited by large capitalroad projects which will be built at the expenseof many more schemes to encourage travel onpublic transport, bicycle and on foot. Althoughthere has been a slight upward trend in packagebid money by Devon County Council, its TPPstill contains large sums for major roadsincluding in the case of North Devon, a bid forthe Western Bypass and the Downstream Bridgethrough Barnstaple. Through its TPPsubmission Devon Co. Co. could press forreallocation of funds to more sustainable modesand this is supported by the survey results.

Land use planningThe scope of the package bid could be widenedto include projects that would reduce the needto travel, such as reopening and reformingvillage shops. The new rate relief scheme

implications for the case study area werechosen as a focus for discussion. Threescenarios were selected which presented apicture of what North Devon would look likegiven particular traffic conditions (see Table 2).

Full details of the scenarios can be found inSwiderska (1997). In summary, the first twoscenarios used an interpretation of the NRTFwhich predict the increases in traffic to 2025 –high growth for scenario I and low growth forscenario II. The third scenario askedrespondents to consider a situation wherebytraffic levels dropped by 20% over the period, afigure not inconceivable given that the RoadTraffic Reduction (UK Targets) Bill goingthrough Parliament was aiming to introduce anational target to reduce 2010 traffic to 90% of1990 levels. A brief summary is given below inTable 3. Alongside predicted traffic levels ineach scenario were the associated transport

Scenario III: trend-reversing strategies

• road traffic levels rising by more than 2.5x current levels• travel trends• public transport• cycling and walking• tourism

• freight transport• travel awareness

Scenario II: damage limitation strategies

Scenario I: accept traffic forecasts as inevitable

Problem Proposed policy solution

Table 3: Summary of three local transport policy scenarios

accept the forecasts and cater for the growth. Policies wouldinclude road building, suburban development, etc.

encourage near universal car ownershiplargely maintained by voluntary schemessome encouragement as part of national policyaccommodate tourist demands for faster road links to NorthDevon and its resortsencourage road freight as cheapest modelittle need for awareness campaign as majority already preferthe car

damage limitation strategies - manage existing road network

gradually introduce environmental pricingsome rural rail lines open; bus services operating wheresocially necessarypromoted as alternative to private car; some building ofcycleways and walkwayspromote use of public transport and cyclinggreater use of rail network and shipping encouragedexpansion of TravelWise campaign

target of reducing road traffic by 20% by 2025reduction in the need to travel through land use policiesall road investment diverted into public transport - significantimprovements: choice of mode increasedlarge transfer to this mode for journeys under 2 milescreate visitor management plan; relieve pressure pointsusing road hierarchy and access only roadsroad freight restricted to strategic lorry routes; all futureinvestment in rail and shipping freightwider publicity to raise awareness among both rural dwellersand tourist trade


[ 8 ]

• road traffic levels - steady rise• travel trends• public transport

• cycling and walking

• tourism• freight transport• travel awareness

• road traffic levels• travel trends• public transport

• cycling and walking• tourism

• freight transport

• travel awareness

announced recently by the Department of theEnvironment, Transport and the Regions whichwill enable some village shops which mayotherwise have closed to remain open, is asmall step in the right direction. This schemewill provide 50% rate relief to post offices andgeneral stores, with a ratable value of less than£5000, in rural settlements with less than 3000people. With regard to freight, land useplanning could play a much bigger role insecuring distribution points, particularly foragricultural produce in the area. For instancethere are no Milk Marque distribution depots inNorth Devon. Milk produced in the area isroadfreighted to Somerset for processing andpackaging before returning by road forconsumption in North Devon.

Public TransportOften in rural areas it is not the number ofvehicles and drivers that is the problem but thelack of co-ordination and communication

between commercial and volunteerorganisations which can lead to severeunderutilisation of resources. Second, improvedtimetabling and connections would attract morepeople onto buses and trains. To achieve this,detailed research needs to be carried out toestablish the most appropriate route networkand service provision which must include earlystart times to serve journeys to work andschools, and evening timings to facilitate leisureand visits to friends and relatives. There willobviously be different requirements for differentrural areas but the principle is the same. Third,many respondents identified the lack of bus/railintegration as being a major disincentive totaking public transport. One respondent feltthat bus deregulation and rail privatisation maybe an opportunity to improve services since co-operation between bus and rail operatorsworking together on a commercial basis couldserve to complement each other rather than toincrease competition. Perhaps the lowest costinitiative would be to display taxi information,together with a telephone link at the bus stopwhich would enable travellers to reach theirfinal destination on public transport in relativesafety rather than risk being stranded at aremote rural bus stop. The Government’s recentallocation of an extra £41.7 million to localauthorities for rural bus services (including£1.42 million to Devon), may help to get somenew initiatives off the ground (DETR, 1998).

Table 5: Favoured scenarios

Scenario chosen Number who chose this scenarioScenario I 0Scenario I and II 2Scenario II 4Scenario II and III 5Scenario III 11Total 22

Freigh tContrary to the opinion of some respondents inthis survey, there are measures which countycouncils can take to both reduce the physicalimpact of HGVs on the countryside and toreduce HGV traffic overall. CPRE’s Losing Lanesto Lorries Campaign has identified these asfollows (CPRE 1997):

effective planning policies which reduce theneed to move freight long distances andwhich discourage developments which relyon long distance freight movements by roadas opposed to rail (currently industry inBarnstaple is largely located in two industrialestates, Roundswell and Pottington but thereis no freight depot or rail service);the creation of more local markets for foodretailing in which locally produced food is


[ 9 ]

Scenario I: Dramatic rise in traffic on rural roads.

Scenario II: Road traffic levels rising

Scenario III: Road traffic levels gradually dropping

Traffic in rural areas forecast torise by 267% (high growthscenario); will be mostnoticeable on most strategicroutes such as the A361 linkroad, the Barnstaple urbanrelief roads, proposed Westernbypass and Downstream bridgeand tourist destinations on thecoast

Traffic in rural areas is forecastto rise by 127% (low growthscenario), while traffic noise androad lighting extend far into thecountryside

Making sure the NRTF do notcome true• traffic levels will drop by 20% over the period• use of selected road closures in sensitive areas (as proposed in the Lake District)• traffic management: use of speed restrictions and traffic calming in villages

Accept the forecasts as inevitable;carry out measures to allow for growth:• aim to accommodate predicted growth in traffic• build Western Bypass and Downstream Bridge without further delay.• build further urban relief roads around Barnstaple• widen Link road to dual carriage way• build by-passes to all villages congested in summer

Damage limitation strategies:• manage existing network: new roads will be built only where there is no alternative.• build Western Bypass and Downstream Bridge, which will bypass Barnstaple on the western side (currently largest capital item in the TPP (£23 million) despite Devon Co. Co. accepting the SACTRA (1994) conclusions that new roads induce new traffic).• gradually introduce policies to discourage car ownership• use of fiscal measures such as road pricing, environmental pricing

Trend reversing strategies:• increase petrol costs; increase the fixed costs of motoring (national policy)• increase parking charges particularly at tourist destinations and for car based commuters in towns such as Barnstaple.• congestion road pricing at popular tourist destinations: revenues to be reinvested in public transport systems.• charging to enter North Devon by car; incentives to enter North Devon by public transport (cheap return tickets, etc.).• traffic calming and speed restrictions

Table 4: Example policy solutions for three scenarios of road traffic levels

•

•

sold in the vicinity of where it has beengrown, reducing the need to transport it longdistances, (Barnstaple has a regular PannierMarket selling local produce and craftswhich could be replicated in other smalltowns);to identify strategic routes for lorries whichare best suited for HGV traffic and to signthem appropriately;to make greater use of weight, height andwidth restrictions in order to reduce thephysical impact of lorries on villages and thecountryside;to introduce lower speed limits, such as 20mph through villages, thereby reducing theimpact of lorries in the countryside andimproving safety.Such constraints also serve to help shift the

balance towards alternatives to car and lorry-based transport. In addition local authoritiescan lobby national and EU policy makers tointroduce legislation that will enforce the abovemeasures. Local authorities can also establishvoluntary agreements with freight companiesand the Road Haulage Association, to achievethe above and also to find other means to payfor structural maintenance and bridgestrengthening, a major part of the Devon TPP.

In North Devon, the existing rail linebetween Barnstaple and Exeter is underutilised.There is only one service each way per hourand no services at night. There is considerablepotential to introduce freight trains on thisroute and to provide connections to InterCitytrains at Exeter to London (via the GreatWestern and South West Trains routes), theSouth Coast, Bristol, Plymouth and Cornwall.

TourismWith the exception of the Tarka Trail initiative,there has been a clear reluctance to tackle theproblem of tourist traffic congestion in NorthDevon. There have been successful schemes inother parts of the country, for example the LakeDistrict Traffic Management Initiative whichhas introduced policy measures such asaccess-only roads, which make it easier for thetourist to use public transport to reach the mostsensitive beauty spots. Once again, thoroughconsultation is vital and could be initiated andmanaged by Local Agenda 21 branches.

Travel awarenessComputer hardware and links can be installedto enable an area controller to access centrallyheld information and distribute it toneighbouring parishes, information boards orhousehold distribution. Also, the TPPconsultation process could be extended toinclude the general public. The travel

awareness campaign, TravelWise, currentlyused in urban areas could be extended to ruralareas.

National changeChanges at the local level would be moreeffective if they were accompanied by a changeof direction at the national level. Even if onlysome of the policy recommendations werecarried out, local authorities throughout thecountry would immediately be better equippedto introduce a sustainable transport system thatpeople would want to use. Briefly, such changesshould include the following measures:

Internalise externalities - increase the cost ofvehicle use so that the full environmentalcosts of motorised transport are accountedfor (the revenue to be reinvested in publictransport);Change TPP funding – alter the system toallow for revenue projects (rather than justcapital projects) and for long term spending(three years instead of one year); give clearguidance to encourage local authorities to bidfor entire rural areas;Freight – enforce lorry operations andregulations, and restructure lorry taxes sothat the biggest lorries travelling the furthestpay the most tax;Public transport - create a strategic railauthority to ensure co-ordination and co-operation between rail operators; reform the1985 Transport Act to make special provisionfor rural bus services; introduce a nationaltravel awareness campaign to encouragemore use of public transport.

Concl u s i onsThis article has attempted to identifysustainable, cost effective and feasible solutionsto address the specific and complex nature ofrural transport. Interviews with keystakeholders in the case study area revealed thatthe majority would like to see not only afundamental change in approach to ruraltransport planning at the local level but alsorecognition of the need for a well defined ruraltransport strategy at the national level. The casestudy of North Devon has shown that invirtually every policy area, from the promotionof public transport to tourism initiatives,feasible policy alternatives do exist. Many arelow cost measures that can be initiated locally,either by the local authority or by communitygroups. While some may affect existing andfuture traffic levels only at the margins, thebenefits to communities and individuals inrural areas could be highly significant. However


•

•

•

[ 10 ]

•

•

•

•

these measures would be greatly strengthenedby a recognition of rural transport policy issuesat the national level. The Government WhitePaper on an integrated transport policy is anopportunity to make special provision for ruralareas and to ensure that rural projects areallocated a significantly greater share of thelocal transport allocation.

Most importantly, a new national integratedtransport policy could provide the ef fectiveframework within which local change andaction could be facilitated, enabling some of therural initiatives discussed above to beimplemented more quickly and more easily.The solution to the rural transport dilemma,however, lies not only in transport policy, but


also in those other sectors which have affectedtransport trends over recent decades: housing,health, agriculture, economy, tourism, land use,etc. All activities have transport implications,and it has been changes in those otheractivities, as much as in transport itself, whichhave brought about the current rural transportdilemma. Just as it took several decades for thecurrent problems to become self-evident, so itmay take many years to bring about a significantreversal of past transport trends. There has beena significant shift in attitude over just the lastfive years. This brings some hope that newinitiatives can be put in place in rural areas andmay ultimately succeed in providing realbenefits to those who live there.

[ 11 ]

Re fe r e n ce s

Council for the Protection of Rural England(1995) Tranquil Areas CPRE, London.____ (1996) “Rural areas left on the fringe ofLocal Transport Policy” CPRE, London [pressrelease, September].____ (1997) Lessening the Load: Lorries in theCountryside CPRE, London.Department of the Environment, Transport andthe Regions (1997) Developing an IntegratedTransport Policy – An Invitation to ContributeDETR, London.____ (1997) “Strang Reveals Latest TrafficForecasts” DETR, London [press release, 14October].____ (1998) “Rate Relief Will Benefit VillagePost Offices and Stores” DETR, London [pressrelease, 5 January].____ (1998) “£41.7 Million Boost For RuralPublic Transport” DETR, London [press releaseNo. 330, 28 April].Friends of the Earth Wiltshire Network (1997)Making Tracks in Wiltshire - rural package bids:the next generation FoE Wiltshire, Bristol.The Independent (1998) “Inch by Inch,England’s Green and Pleasant Land Is SlowlyDisappearing” The Independent, London, 26January.Mawhinney, B. (1995) “Freight Transport” inTransport : the way ahead - speeches by theSecretary of State for Transport Department ofTransport, London.MTRU (1994) All Change – Demand

Management Case Study: Norwich Institute forPublic Policy Research, Transport 2000 andMetropolitan Transport Research Unit, LondonPlowden, S. and Buchanan, K. (1995) A NewFramework for Freight Transport The CivicTrust, London.Root, A. (1996) “Rural Travel and TransportCorridors, Interim Report of the SMARTresearch” Environmental Change Unit,University of Oxford, Oxford.Root, A. and Fielding, W.J. (1996) “Placebo orPanacea? Rural Transport Corridors: some socialand environmental issues” World TransportPolicy & Practice vol. 2, no. 4, 20-27.SACTRA (1994) Trunk Roads and theGeneration of Traffic The Stationery Office,London.____ (1997) “Transport Investment, TransportIntensity and Economic Growth: InterimReport” Standing Advisory Committee on TrunkRoads Assessment, London. Available from<[email protected]>Swiderska, C. (1997) “Rural Transport Policy: aStrategy for North Devon” Unpublished MScthesis, Imperial College Centre forEnvironmental Technology, University ofLondon.Transport 2000 et al. (1996) At the Crossroads:Investing in Susta inable Local TransportTransport 2000 and CPRE, London.Transport Studies Unit (1992) Trends inTransport in the Countryside CountrysideCommission, Cheltenham [report no. CCP382].

Meaton & Kingham: Children'sPerceptions of Transport Modes:car culture in the classroom?World Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 12-16

Children’s Perceptions of Transport Modes: carculture in the classroom?

Julia MeatonDepartment of Geographical and Environmental Sciences, University of Huddersfield

Simon KinghamDepartment of Environmental Science, University of Hertfordshire

Addresses for correspondence:Department of Geographicaland Environmental SciencesUniversity of HuddersfieldQueensgateHUDDERSFIELDHD1 3DHe-mail: [email protected] of EnvironmentalScienceUniversity of HertfordshireCollege LaneHATFIELDAL10 9ABe-mail:[email protected]

Abs tr a ctChildren learn at a very early age how toidentify between different modes of transportand which are preferable. Breaking the cycle ofcar dependency among future generations willnot be easy.

K eyw or dsAdvertising, Children, Social conditioning,United Kingdom

Introdu ct i onMost planners, academics, and even politiciansnow agree that there is an urgent need toencourage people to reduce their use of cars andto persuade them to travel by alternative means(Royal Commission on EnvironmentalPollution, 1994). Unfortunately almost allresearch conducted in this area concludes thatthis is almost impossible to achieve (Andersonand Meaton, 1994a; Stokes and Hallett, 1992;Lex, 1995). People with cars are highly resistantto giving them up or even reducing their use.They offer a whole range of reasons for this butthese are often excuses to justify their use of ahighly convenient and flexible mode oftransport. There have been several attempts topersuade car users to use greener modes oftransport with the use of publicity andeducation campaigns (Anderson and Meaton,1994b; BBC, 1994; Ciaburro, 1994; Curtis andHeadicar, 1997), and such campaigns are oftenrecommended as imperative in order to changecar culture (Meaton and Morrice, 1996;Anderson et al., 1998). However, recentevidence suggests that such campaigns can be atbest, only marginally effective, and at worst,counterproductive. For example researchers inthe Netherlands attempted to find out theeffectiveness of different types of information instimulating car users to be more selective intheir car use (Tertoolen, 1994). The researchfound that while information concerningenvironmental effects helped raise individualsawareness of the need for environmental policy,the information did not lead to a change in therespondents behaviour. Information aboutfinancial implications of travel behaviour was

similarly ineffective in changing behaviour andactually led to greater criticism of alternativemodes. Combined information had nodiscernible effect. The researchers were left toconclude that displacement mechanisms werebeing used whereby increased knowledge of theenvironment leads the individual to pass theresponsibility on to others and increasedawareness of financial costs were dealt with bycriticising alternatives and a reassertion of thenecessity of using the car.

Another problem with publicity campaignsconcerning the environment is that to try andpersuade people that it is important for them tochange their behaviour, they have to useinformation that can convey the urgency of thesituation. This can mean that the publicity iseither shocking or full of dire warnings of theconsequences if people don’t do something.This again can also be counterproductive in thattypical responses to gloom and doominformation is to feel completely overwhelmedby it so that it induces feelings of helplessnessand despair amongst the target audience.

One of the problems is that car use appears tobe addictive (Vlek et al., 1993; RAC, 1995).Once a person has a car they travel more often,over longer distances, and cannot contemplatelife without their vehicle. If this is the case,policies should be formulated that are designedto deal with habits. Although there are variousapproaches to dealing with habits, most expertsagree that the best way of dealing with a habit isnever to pick it up.

Using this argument the best way of dealingwith unnecessary car use is never to start it inthe first place. Lex (1995) conducted a survey ofchildren aged between 13 and 16 in order tofind out their attitudes towards cars andmotoring. The results found that youngsters arealready as dependent on the car as their parentswith 90% of girls and 75% of boys saying thatthey would find it difficult to adjust theirlifestyles without a car. Most of the respondentsexpected to be driving their own cars by thetime they are 19 with over half wanting to owna sports car. When the boys were asked whatsort of things they would look for in a car thegeneral look of the car and speed were the mostimportant factors. Girls were more concerned

[ 12 ]

about its colour and whether it had a goodstereo. For both genders, the environmentalfriendliness of the car was the least importantfactor.

The evidence suggests that children arealready hooked on cars at a very early age. Thishas the potential to manifest itself in the ‘carculture’ and the excessive car use which is sodifficult to reverse in later life. If attempts are tobe made to prevent the continuation of thisculture and to prevent future generationsbecoming addicted to the car, it is important totarget children who have yet to assimilate thepro-car propaganda. The Lex study suggests thatby the time children reach the age of 13 it isalready too late, and that by then children havealready been absorbed into the car culture. Thisis unsurprising given the amount of socialconditioning they are subjected to. Babies arefrequently given squashy car toys to play with,‘car’ is one of the first words many childrenspeak. Children learn from their parent’sbehaviour that cars are something to be admired(Stokes and Hallett, 1992) and children unableto walk are given dummy driving wheels sothey can mimic their parents while they drive.Recent advertising for the Vauxhall Astra hasshown babies ‘demanding’ certain qualitiesfrom cars. As they grow up society and evensome government ministers inform them of thecar’s superiority to public transport and theybegin to appreciate the different imagesassociated with different makes of cars. Forexample, few people are ignorant of the run ofSkoda and Lada jokes that were around in thelate 1980s. Such image association iswidespread in society and it is undeniable thatcertain modes of transport and certain types ofcar are associated with certain types of people.Porsche drivers are typically regarded as‘loathsome, stripe-shirted youthful city slickers’(Independent on Sunday 3rd April 1994) and theimage of a Skoda driver is of ‘an extremely oldman hunched over a steering wheel’ (The Times16th December 1995). Research in Norway basedon focus groups identified a range of images oftransport users including the following ; a cardriver was perceived as ‘a man, earning moreand having a higher position than the average,and is a successful person’; a train passengerwas ‘well dressed, effective commuter living inresidential areas and having a relatively highposition in society’; and bus passengers were‘women, old or very young, belonging to theworking classes or working as a functionary,and who cannot afford to have a car’.

The question is when does this socialconditioning begin to register with the child?Since Lex has found that many children aged 13have already absorbed the car culture, it was

decided that a study of younger children shouldbe conducted in order to identify the age atwhich children consciously become aware ofthe various images and lifestyles associatedwith different modes of transport.

M ethodGleaning information from children as young asfive can be problematic and using conventionalquestionnaires is often inappropriate. A newmethodology was required that would not betoo demanding for the children and which didnot require them to read or write. Show cardshave been used extensively with children(Kirklees Metropolitan Council, 1995) and havebeen found useful in extracting informationfrom children on their attitudes andunderstanding of a wide range of issues. It wastherefore decided that the methodology woulduse two sets of show cards. One set would shownine different types of transport including avariety of different types of cars, and the otherset would show nine different types or groupsof people. The children would then be asked tomatch up the two sets of cards putting thepeople together with the transport mode theythought they would be most likely to use. Table1 shows the mode and the people types shownon the cards and suggests the ‘correct’ pairings.

In addition the children were asked to rank themodes of transport in order of preference. Theywere also asked what their normal mode oftransport was, whether their family had a carand what type of car it was. Any relevantcomments made by the children were alsonoted. The survey was conducted at twoprimary schools in Huddersfield, WestYorkshire. 140 children were interviewed, 70 ateach school. Each age group (5-11) wasrepresented by 20 children, and both genderswere represented equally in each age group.

Table 1: Mode and people show cards and ‘correct’pairings.

Family estate car Family of fiveLandrover Lady in country clothes with dogTrain Business man wearing bowler hatMotorbike Denim-clad bikerBus Old ladyBicycle Sporty young manPorsche Flashy looking young manLada Old manBMW Professional couple

Mode Show cards People Show Cards

Meaton & Kingham: Children'sPerceptions of TransportModes:car culture in theclassroom?World Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 12-16

[ 13 ]


[ 14 ]

Re s u l ts66% of the children were in families thatowned a car, and almost the same numberstated that the car was their normal mode oftransport. 31% said that the bus was how theynormally travelled, while two children usedtheir bicycles and one child mentioned the trainas their main mode.

The favourite mode of transport for allchildren was the motorbike, with the twoperformance cars, the BMW and the Porschecoming in at second and third respectively. Thebicycle and the family car were joint fourthfavourites and the Landrover fifth. The trainand the bus each had one admirer but the Ladawas not mentioned by any respondent. Theseresults suggest that there is a certain amount ofbrand awareness between car models, and thatalready public transport is unpopular. Somegender differences were evident. 50% moreboys than girls preferred the motorbike and thePorsche, while twice as many girls preferred thefamily car, bicycle and Landrover.

There are also variations evident in modepreference according to age. The numbers ofchildren favouring the motorbike declines withincreasing age, as do those favouring thebicycle, while those favouring the Porscheincrease in number.

An alternative way of assessing preference ofmode is to compare the ranking given to eachmode by the children. The frequencies ofrankings of children’s preference for transportmode were calculated. Except for firstpreferences for the Lada, all modes are rankedeverywhere from first to last. The BMW,motorbike, family car and Porsche all appear tohave higher ranks; Landrover and bicycle seemmore evenly spread, and train, bus and Ladaseem to lean more towards lower ranks. Toassess the rankings further, the mean ranks foreach mode were also calculated. The BMW hasthe highest mean rank (3.72) followed by themotorbike and the family car. Although themotorbike is the most preferred mode by thechildren, there are also a number of children(18) who rate it as their least or second leastpreferred, resulting in a less favourable meanrank than the BMW. The Porsche, Landroverand bicycle all have mean ranks of between 4.3and 4.7. The train, bus and Lada are the leastfavoured, with mean ranks over 6. This may notbe surprising for the ‘unfashionable’ Lada, butis worrying for the two modes of publictransport.

Table 1 suggested the ‘correct’ pairings.When the data was analysed it was found thatfor all modes, it was these hypothesisedpairings that got the highest score. However,there were great differences in the percentage of

children making the correct match, rangingfrom 75% to 27%.

The mode/person match that appeared tohave the most significant image association wasthe motorbike and the biker. 75% of thechildren put these two showcards together. Afurther 7% thought that the rather flash youngman might drive a motorbike. The remainingpercentage was made up of a mixture ofresponses with three children thinking that theold lady might drive a motorbike.

The family and the family car gained thesecond best score but with 55% of childrengetting it correct. This represents a much vaguerimage association than for the motorbike. Theprofessional couple were associated with thefamily car by 16% of the children and 9% and8% linked it with the sporty young man and thecountry looking woman respectively.

The only other pairing that was correctlyidentified by over 50% of the children was theLandrover and country woman. 52% of thechildren placed these two showcards together,9% thought the family might use it and 8%suggested the old lady as the most appropriateuser. Interestingly 6% thought that theprofessional looking couple might use it,possibly reflecting the current fashionability of4x4s and their recent manifestation as prestigesymbols.

The idea of buses being associated withwomen was evident amongst the sample with48% of children linking the old lady with thebus. A further 21% thought that the old manwould be likely to use this form of transport. Noother people groups were strongly associatedwith the bus.

The bicycle was linked with the sportylooking young man by 47% of the sample andthe only other people types showing anysignificant association were the flash lookingman and the commuter (14% and 11%respectively). Interestingly no women peopletypes were associated with this mode oftransport.

The Lada has long been regarded as aninferior model of car and this image appears tohave been assimilated by our sample. It was theonly form of transport not mentioned by anyoneas their favourite mode and it seems that it islargely associated with older people. 41% of thepupils linked it to the old man and 16%thought the old lady might be the most obvioususer.

The BMW had similar levels of imageassociation but this time 37% linked it to theprofessional couple and 15% with the sportyyoung man. Both the flashy looking young manand the commuter were linked to the BMW by13% of the children. The Porsche, while being

Table 2: The number of children that correctly matched numbers of pairs, by age.

0 1 5 2 10 1 51 8 40 5 25 1 5 1 5 1 52 2 10 4 20 3 15 5 25 1 5 1 53 5 25 7 35 4 20 2 10 1 5 2 10 2 104 4 20 2 10 2 10 4 20 2 10 4 20 2 105 1 5 3 15 4 20 5 25 3 15 4 206 1 5 4 20 2 10 4 20 5 25 5 257 2 10 2 10 4 20 6 308 1 59 1 5 3 15 1 5

Mean no. of pairs 2.45 2.35 3.75 3.90 5.60 4.90 5.75

the third most popular mode of transportcaused some confusion amongst the children asto who would be most likely to drive it. Some27% thought that the flash young man would bethe most obvious user, a further 19% thought itwould be driven by the professional couple and16% thought the commuter might use it.Interestingly no child linked the old lady andthe old man with the Porsche or the BMW. Thechildren in this sample appear to recognise thatthe Porsche and the BMW are rather upmarketmodes of transport, but are less able todistinguish between the types of people mostlikely to use them. However, they do appear tobelieve that old people are unlikely to drivesuch vehicles and have identified the moresuccessful looking people (young men,professional couple, commuter) as being themost likely users.

The train was associated with the commuterby 27% of the children , although 16% thoughtthat the flash young man might travel by train.This would seem encouraging in that the trainas a mode of transport doesn’t appear to bebeset with the negative imagery associated withbuses. However, since 15% of the childrenlinked the old man with the train and 11% theold lady, it would still appear that publictransport is still largely associated with older,poorer sections of society even by children ofprimary age.

This research aimed to find out at what agechildren begin to notice different forms oftransport and when they begin to associatedifferent modes with different types of people.The results so far clearly show that this imageassociation is well and truly established by thetime they reach the age of eleven. In order to bemore precise about the actual age when theystart to differentiate and absorb society’s valuesfurther analysis was conducted.

The age children were starting to accuratelymatch pairs was compared. The results suggestthat the older the children, the greater the

number of correctly matched pairs. To ascertainwhether this is statistically significant chi-square analysis was done for each separatemode pair to see whether the ability toaccurately match the pairs was related to thechildren’s age.

The ability to match the pairs for bicycle,bus, family car, Landrover, motorbike andPorsche are all significantly related to age(p<0.05), with older children being more able tocorrectly match the pairs. The pair matching forthe Lada and BMW are not significantly relatedto age while for the train there is a weakrelationship. For those modes where there wasa significant relationship with age, the age atwhich the children correctly matched morepairs than was expected, varied around ages 7,8 and 9. For bicycle and bus it was at age 7, forLandrover it was 8, and for family car andPorsche it was 9. The picture is less clear for themotorbike as the observed number of childrencorrectly matching the pairs was almost thesame as the expected number for 7, 8 and 9 yearolds.

A total score of between zero and nine wascalculated for each child on the basis of howmany of the pairings they had got correct. Ascore of nine indicates the child got all ninepairings correct, a score of zero indicates a childgot no pairings correct. There was littledifference between the mean number of pairscorrectly matched for boys and girls (4.07 and4.13 respectively). Using a Mann Whitney Utest we were able to confirm there was nostatistically significant difference between thetotal pairing scores for boys and girls p=0.989).

The number of correct pairings, subdividedby age can be seen in Table 2. There appears tobe a difference in pairing ability according toage, with the older children correctly matchingmore pairs. The mean number of pairs correctlymatched, according to age seems to confirmthis. A Kruskal-Wallis test proved this wascorrect (p<0.00001), the older children beingmore able to correctly match pairs than theyounger children.

Discussion and ConclusionsThe results of this survey are worrying. Theyindicate that image association between modesof transport and different sections of society areevident in the minds of children as young asseven. This suggests that the origins of the carculture so pervasive in adult society, arenurtured at the very early stages of a child’sdevelopment. Car culture, as a result, is almostseamlessly perpetuated between generations,and it appears likely that the next generationwill be even more wedded to their cars than


No. of pairs Age 5 6 7 8 9 10 11N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

[ 15 ]

previous ones. If we are to break this cycle ofadmiration, aspiration, acquisition andconsequent addiction, we must act at all levelsof society.

It has been argued that young people areoften overlooked in the transport debate (Turnerand Pilling, 1998). This research suggests thatyoung children also need to be brought into thediscussion. The next real issue is how to goabout it. The problem is that although there arerecognised forums for teaching and influencingchildren on values, rights and wrongs, etc.,(schools, television, parents) these all representand sanction the values that are being ques-tioned. School teachers, for example, frequently


drive cars to work, many parents own, use andpreen their vehicles, and society in generalcontinues to applaud the motor car. It istherefore unlikely that campaigns undertaken inany of these single spheres will be successful.What is required is a complete package ofinnovative campaigns, targeted at all sections ofsociety, in different ways. We cannot change theattitude of the children without changing theattitudes of their parents, and we cannot changethe attitudes of parents without changing thevalues in society. Once it is accepted that thisradical action is required, more research will benecessary to identify the optimum means ofachieving it.

Re fe r e n ce s

Anderson, M. and Meaton, J. (1994a) “Greenertransport in carrot and stick mix” Planning 4thAugust.____(1994b) “The Green Journey Guide” WyeCollege.Anderson, M., Meaton, J., Potter C. and RogersA. (1998). “Public Preferences for GreenerTransport Towns” Transport and theEnvironment Economic and Social ResearchCentre, London.BBC(1994) Drive [television programme] BritishBroadcasting Corporation, London.Ciaburro, T., Jones, P. and Haigh, D. (1994) “Afeasibility Study for a Transport AwarenessCampaign: Raising Public Awareness as aMeans of Influencing Travel Choices”Transportation Planning Systems vol. 2, no. 2.Cullinane, S. (1992) “Attitudes Towards the Carin the UK: some implications for policies oncongestion and the environment”Transportation Research A vol. 26a, no. 4, pp.291-301.Curtis, C. And Headicar, P. (1997) “TargetingTravel Awareness Campaigns; whichindividuals are more likely to switch from carto other transport for the journey to work?”Transport Policy vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 57-65.Kirklees Metropolitan Council (1995)ntroducing the Concept of Susta inability to

[ 16 ]

Children Kirklees Agenda 21/Kirklees Education Advisory ServicesLex (1995) Lex Report on Motoring - what drivesthe motorist Lex Services, London.Meaton, J. and Morrice, D. (1996) “The Ethicsand Politics of Private Automobile Use”Environmental Ethics vol. 18, pp. 39-54.RAC (1995) Car Dependence [Research carriedout by TSU/ESRC] Royal Automobile Club,LondonRoyal Commission on Environmental Pollution(1994) “18th Report, Transport and theEnvironment” HMSO, London.Stokes, G. and Hallett, S. (1992) “The Role ofAdvertising and the Car” Transport Reviews vol.12, no. 2, pp. 171-183.Tertoolen, G. (1994) “Free to Move? A fieldexperiment on attempts to influence private caruse and the psychological resistance it evokes”Faculty of Social Science, Heidelberglaan,Utrecht.Turner, J. and Pilling, A. (1998) “Catching themYoung: young people’s travel and the scope forinfluencing their travel behaviour” RGS-IBGAnnual Conference, Kingston.Vlek, C., Hendrckx, L. and Steg, L. (1993) “Asocial dilemmas analysis of motorised transportproblems and six general strategies for socialbehaviour change” Transport Policy and GlobalWarming ECMT/OECD, Paris.

Abs tr a ctThis paper seeks to analyse the EuropeanUnion’s approach to transport policymakingand the programme of Trans-European Net-works. The strategic considerations at the heartof this programme bear little relation to theUnion's stated commitments to sustainabledevelopment in all policy areas. Sustainabledevelopment can only be implemented on astrategic level in policy formulation and not, asseems to be the case with TENs, as an after-thought. The paper concludes by identifying theissue of transport for ‘need’ as a guidingprinciple in the formulation of ‘sustainablemobility’.

K eyw or dsPolicy formulation, Trans-European Networks

Introdu ct i onThis paper examines the confusion generatedby the failure to clarify the conceptualdistinctiveness of ‘sustainability’ and‘sustainable development’. Both terms areessentially contested but it is argued that thesubstitution of ‘sustainable development’ for‘sustainability’ results in what McManus calls a‘… marginalised sustainability dis-course’. (1996, p. 54).

This divergence is examined with referenceto the issues of transport and mobility. Theconsideration of the issue of sustainability inthis policy area must begin by questioning thenotion of the need to travel. A more radicalnotion of sustainable development is proposedwhich entails the incremental application of along term sustainability strategy.

This is contrasted with the currentsustainable development agenda, where thebasis of a sustainable transport policy has beenonly partially worked out. Questions continueto be raised about what sustainabledevelopment means with regard totransportation and mobility. The availablepolicy documents often contradict each other.This is demonstrated in the discussion of the‘Trans-European Networks’ (TENs).

The Process o f Sustai nableDevel opmen t

“… any process of ‘sustainable development’must be based upon the principle it is tryingto achieve - that is, sustainability. […] Assuch, ‘sustainability’ becomes a goal whichmay be unattainable given the need to startfrom current ecological, political, economicand social realities, but still one that shouldbe pursued as an appropriately positionedyardstick against which ‘sustainabledevelopment’ can be measured.” McManus(1996, p. 69)If we treat development here as ‘process’ and

sustainability as ‘end’, at least we havesomething to work with, as McManus says, a‘yardstick’. Doubtless this rather simplemeasure will fare no better than many otherattempts for clarity on this issue. Argumentsover absolutes in regard to sustainability will nodoubt continue ad infinitum, in the evaluationof policy as well as in more theoretical realms.This ‘yardstick’ approach can however beinformative in terms of assessing the generaldirection of policy making. This is what weshall attempt in the following analysis ofEuropean transport policy and sustainabledevelopment.

In practice, much of what passes for policyon ‘sustainable development’ has a muchnarrower remit. The chief focus of much policyclaiming to be ‘sustainable’ is on issues moreusefully placed under the category of ‘quality oflife’. Clearly there is a distinct overlap between‘sustainable development’ and ‘quality of life’agenda, but it would be foolhardy to equatethem. Sustainable development goes beyond ashallow environmental approach or short termconcern for living standards. This paper isimplicitly concerned with sustainability whichmay in general underpin debates over quality oflife, but which addresses a global concern withlimited resources and capacities. Thedifferences are in matters of scope, in thatsustainable development deals with a broaderrange of issues, not all necessarily linked toquestions of human welfare. In addition, theconcept of futurity is crucial to sustainabledevelopment as a move in the direction ofgreater sustainability and is thus concerned

Transport Policy in the EU: A strategy forsustainable development?

Wixley & Lake: Transport Policyin the EU: A strategy forsustainable development?World Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 17-21

Address for correspondence:Social Science ResearchCentreSouthampton InstituteEast Park TerraceSOUTHAMPTONSO14 0YNe-mail:[email protected]@solent.ac.uk

[ 17 ]

Sarah Wixey and Steve LakeSocial Science Research Centre, Southampton Institute

with intergenerational and intragenerationaljustice. Concern with quality of life can be andoften is more limited in terms of thepopulations who are deemed to matter.

Conceiving of sustainable development as aprocess which refers to the originating notion ofsustainability is a reminder of the implicitlyradical content of both terms, regardless of theextent to which they have been watered downin practice. This may be an inevitable feature ofbeing ‘… (arguably) the dominant globaldiscourse of ecological concern’ (Dryzek, 1997,p. 123). Being central in discourse over theenvironment, sustainable development retainsan important resonance which requires frequentre-iteration in terms rather less equivocal thanthose of governments and bureaucrats. In orderto progress the debate on sustainabledevelopment, we may not insist on consensus,which would surely only be wishful thinkinganyway, but we should insist on reflection.Indeed, there is an urgent need to re-state if nota detailed definition (or even a ‘shopping list ofsustainable goods’), what the purpose ofsustainable development is in the broadestsense.

“Sustainable development, therefore,amounts to a strategy for environmentalsustainability because of the belief that aparticular form of development will providethe conditions within which environmentalsustainability can be guaranteed” Dobson(1996, p. 422).No doubt there will be continued

disagreement over what sustainability andsustainable development entail. The problemthen hinges on equally contested notions ofsustainability, for which there are already over300 definitions available (Dobson, 1996).Sustainability in the broadest possible(anthropocentric) interpretation is concernedwith maintaining the present natural capacitiesof the biosphere whilst satisfying the needs ofthe human population. Numerousinterpretations of this underlying principle seekto elaborate this basic starting point, inbewildering directions at times.

This paper examines one aspect of the debateon sustainable development within the contextof the European Union. The treatment ofdifferent dimensions of political economy interms of policy sectors does tend to mitigateagainst the overall strategic essence of thesustainability issue. In treating the issue oftransport in this distinct fashion we are payingnecessary attention to this problem as far aspossible. It is certainly the case however thatone cannot hope to engage with real politicaldebates and the business of policy makingwithout taking these issues to some extent on

their own terms. The issue of sustainabletransport is therefore not seen as entirelyseparate from other considerations despite thefact that this often appears to be the outcome ofsuch a focused approach.

‘Sustainable Transport’?A lack of commitment to a strategic notion ofsustainable development would justify apessimistic conclusion that, at best, sustainabletransport policy has rhetorical value, but islargely subordinated to issues of ‘economicgrowth’. This seems to be the current approachtaken to the issue of transport in the EuropeanUnion. The sheer quantity of resourcesconsumed combined with the negative exter-nalities which result make transport a particu-larly urgent issue for those concerned with thesocial and natural environments.

Maddison, et al. (1996, p. 221) examine the‘Main Factors in Transport Social Cost’ andconclude that work undertaken indicates fourkey factors of concern. These are: roadaccidents; noise nuisance; air pollution andclimate change. The emphasis is on the identifi-cation of economic costs related to these fourareas, which a number of studies repeatedlyshow to be most problematic. The measurementof ‘quality of life’ has become synonymous withthe practical approaches to measuringsustainable development. In this approach,identification of ‘sustainability indicators’ israther more to do with the quality of life agendathan evolving a strategic, cross-sectoralresponse to the need for sustainabledevelopment.

The campaign to develop sustainabletransport policies within a European contextposes great challenges to the Community and itsmembers. In the face of growing transportliberalisation the Union has a commitment toits current and prospective members, to providetransport policies which meet the needs of itscitizens. Such requirements range fromincreasing transport safety; protection of theenvironment and investing in the quality andeffectiveness of transport infrastructure byusing new and innovative means. The EuropeanCommission accepts that it is necessary to actquickly to prevent damage to the environment,as well as to the economies of member statesand their citizens. The Commission has alsoexpressed the hope that member countries willadopt its plans for developing a series ofintegrated transport projects in order to attemptto reduce the growing levels of internationaltraffic. The traditional ‘predict and provide’ and‘business as usual’ approaches to resolvingtransport grievances can no longer be used as

[ 18 ]


remedies to the Union’s growing transportproblems.

The development of European transportpolicies, commonly referred to as the ‘Trans-European Network’, is a priority projectfor the European Commission, avowedly as anattempt to establish social and economiccohesion and sustainable mobility. Before suchprojects can be developed there is a require-ment to reconcile two fundamental objectives;on the one hand mobility, and on the other, thewellbeing of the environment. The TENsprogramme, based on the complementarity andinteroperability of modes of transport, has manyroles to fulfil in an ever growing Union. Thecentral objectives of the TENs are:

to support trade and economic activity;prevent further infrastructure inadequacies;act to bind Europe together;and remove obstacles which prevent furtherenhancement of the Single European Market.A key concern will be to eliminate any

difficulties in the general implementation of thecommon market which arise from transportregulations. For example, in having cross borderpassageways without passport or customscontrols.

According to the Commission, the proposednetwork will

‘take advantage of synergies and offerpassengers and freight operators greaterchoice. This will stimulate efficiency,improve services, enhance safety and providean optimal network from an environmentalpoint of view’ (Johnson and Turner, 1997, p.48).Environmentalists however do not agree with

the Commission’s sentiments. The proposedseries of projects, it is feared, will cause hugedisruption to natural environments, splitcommunities, create ‘improvements’ which willresult in greater road usage, thus conflictingwith its other priority commitment stressed inthe Maastricht Treaty - sustainable mobility.Transport Commissioner Neil Kinnock refusesto accept that the network will be inherentlydamaging to the environment (June 1995). Hehas put forward three arguments to defend theprojects. First, that a vast majority of the roadnetwork has already been constructed and someprojects will consist of upgrading low qualityexisting roads. The majority of new construc-tion will take place in the peripheral and poorerparts of the Community, namely Ireland,Greece, Spain and Portugal. The aim is to bringtheir road networks up to the same standard asthe rest of the EU. Environmentalists wouldargue the days of basing road developments onthe perceived need to accommodate increasedmobility are over. Policies should be aimed at

reducing the need to travel by private car andprovide incentives to use alternative,environmentally less damaging modes.

Secondly, Kinnock has used the budgetallocation as proof of his commitment tore-orienting modal priorities. Of the 90 billionECU destined to be spent on the first 14 priorityprojects 80% will go to rail, 9% to road/raillinks and 10% to roads. Johnson and Turnerdispute this claim, for they argue the criticismconcerning the assessment of TENs depends onthe number of projects rather than the size ofinvestment. They state:

‘68 North-South road links and 60 West-Eastroad links are included in the guidelinescompared to only 11 links in total for rail,whereas 80% of the spending on theChristophersen priority projects by 2010 isdestined for rail, which accounts for only 6%of passenger and 15% of freight traffic.Roads, the dominant mode, will receiveabout 20% of the investment’ (1997, p. 61).The essential point therefore is that the

varying levels of expenditure reflect theprevious priorities which favoured roadconstruction in the majority of cases, in the UKparticularly. As such, the higher figures for railreflect the rather parlous state of many parts ofthe European railway network and are not dueto privileging rail over road.

Finally, Kinnock argues in addition to theexisting environmental impact assessmentrequirements, the Commission is developing amethodology for carrying out a ‘StrategicEnvironmental Assessment’ (SEA) of the entirenetwork. The methodology for this SEA will betested in 1999 when the projects are subject tothe five year review. Assessment of individualprojects have now been completed. Questionsare raised as to how sustainable the networkactually is, bearing in mind the SEA of theentire network was conducted after theprogramme was completed and the plans werein place. In addition, Johnson and Turner haveexpressed concern about the validity of themethodology used in conducting the SEA in thefirst place (1997, p. 90).

The Commission has also developed plans toassist economic regeneration projects. In turnsuch developments automatically lead toincreased traffic levels if they are not subjectedto careful and progressive planning. Preventionof rising traffic levels requires adopting newand innovative approaches to transport policies,such as investing in transport telematics;eliminating barriers to administration andcross-border traffic flows; improvements inmulti-modal links and investing in the qualityand attractiveness of public transport. (Kinnock,1997)

[ 19 ]


[ 20 ]

Commitments to sustainable developmentdeclared in the Maastricht Treaty and the FifthEnvironmental Action Programme (5EAP)cannot be maintained with the current TENspolicy. The priority projects favour long dis-tance mobility, gained at the expense of shorterdistance transport. As previously mentioned,the TENs will result not only in adverse socialeffects, but also has major implications for theenvironment by damaging the landscape,fuelling the growth in demand for transport andcontributing to the growth in greenhouse gases.Whitelegg has estimated that there will be ‘anincrease in carbon dioxide emissions of 15-18%above the existing forecast, which threatens toundermine attempts to meet greenhouse gasreduction targets’ (Whitelegg, 1995). Even afairly basic appreciation of the notion ofsustainable development would surely involvea commitment to reducing the need to travel.

The reason for the TENs programme and theretreat from Maastricht, Rio and 5EAP is notdifficult to identify. No matter how hard the EUtries to create ‘environmentally friendly’policies, it still retains economic prosperity asits major objective. As Johnson and Turnerargue, the ‘accelerated establishment’ of theTENs programme is part of a wider strategy toenhance Europe’s economic competitiveness.(1997, 14). Job creation and a competitiveeconomy are therefore seen as a necessaryrequirement for the long term advantage of theCommunity. The objectives of sustainabledevelopment rather than being a part of thisstrategic overview, appear to be an afterthought.

The primacy of economic considerationsover environmental concerns is illustrated byNeil Kinnock’s opening speech for the EuropeanCommission Conference on Fair and EfficientRoad Pricing. Kinnock cited the UK RoyalCommission on Environmental Pollution reportand it’s recommendation for an increase in fuelduties as an incentive to limit distancestravelled in private cars. He stated that thereport advocated these fuel cost increases to bephased in across the EU. However, the reportrecommended that this measure should be usedin conjunction with other policies, such aspublic/private partnership investments inpublic transport. Kinnock’s justification for notencouraging the widespread use of increasedfuel duties across the EU was purely financial:

‘apart from the fact that such a proposalwould get no support from the Council ofEconomic and Finance Ministers, anincentive which relied on fuel price riseswould simply increase costs without offeringany certainty of durable improvement or realreduction in most of the significant andcostly problems of transport’ (CEC, 1997).This emphasis on lower costs is directly

contrary to EU environmental policy based onthe Polluter-Pays Principle and its commitmentto internalise the external cost of transport. Thefailure to appreciate the necessity for findingalternatives and compensating for losses as faras practicable is not really considered byKinnock. The increased costs in duties wouldpotentially be available at least as acontribution to improving parts of the publicand commercial transport infrastructure in linewith the principle of sustainable mobility.

Denial of the use of taxation is inconsistentwith the Directorate-General XI views onenvironmental approximation. DGXI is infavour of using environmental taxes andcharges as supplementary policy instruments solong as they do not interfere with EU principlesconcerning competition and the internalmarket. Economic incentives could encouragepollution producers to look for alternative,cleaner methods of mobility. Economicinstruments have the double advantage in thatthey help deliver both a cleaner environmentand a stronger economy.

The European Federation for Transport andEnvironment (T&E) believe the EU’s transportpolicy is heading in the right direction, even ifthe TENs plans leave a lot to be desired. The EUhas a firm commitment to stabilise CO 2 emis-sions, but fails to reach this target mainly due totraffic growth. The Commission believe this isnot a long term problem as there are a numberof ongoing research and development pro-grammes investigating new technology whichwill be geared towards users’ demands andrespect for the environment. The ‘Auto-Oil’programme is one such example, theCommission is investigating economicallyefficient measures including vehicle technology,fuel quality, enhanced inspection andmaintenance to reduce vehicle emissionsthroughout the Union. Significant differencesexist between member states with regards to airquality and socioeconomic conditions. Thestrategic nature of the problems require that anumber of different instruments need to beimplemented simultaneously if policy is to beeffective. Solutions cannot be applied withoutthe full co-operation of national as well asregional and local authorities. The complexityof problems arising from the principle ofsubsidiarity in strategic implementation of allaspects of sustainable transport are themselvesworthy of discussion, but cannot be assessedhere.

The idea of ‘sustainable mobility ’Finding a formula that works in transport is aconcern for those involved in all aspects of themove to a more sustainable society. The issues


relating to land use, planning, urban design andsocial equity are fundamentally important.Success in any one sector can all too easily beundone by a failure to co-ordinate practice orshare principles with those working in otherareas.

Disentangling the various reasons for traveland the priorities these might have in asustainable transport policy is itselfproblematic. Concentrating on modes that areresponsible for the greatest amount of damageor loss in terms of externalities is one method ofapproaching this. According to Maddison et al.92% of transportation's external costs comefrom road transport. Of this figure, 60% is dueto cars and approximately 20% from freight.Priorities can thus be set reactively in regard tothis figure by addressing those modes whichgenerate the greatest external cost.

In the debate over sustainable transport, theneed for agenda setting which reflects social aswell as environmental priorities is evident. Anemphasis on ‘mobility’ contains more than thetraditional transport agenda. Implicit is arecognition of the issue of ‘travel for need’based on the notion of access and socialinclusion. If there is to be a more sustainable setof practices advocated which is progressive inboth social and environmental terms it mustsurely lie in this direction. Decreasing travel byunacceptable modes, whilst attempting toreduce the structural causes of much travel, canbe consistently applied with this emphasis onequity of access.

‘Sustainable mobility’ can thus be defined insuch a way that it encompasses a hierarchy oftravel of favoured modes and favouredpurposes, privileging in both cases the moreenvironmentally benign (whilst being cognizantthat this is a matter of degree) and the sociallyinclusive. The consequences of development ofout of town shopping demonstrate that a failureto consider issues of access and inclusion haveother structural disadvantages such as desertionof town centres by customers and ultimatelytraders.

Skinner (1997) has utilised Maslow’s‘Hierarchy of Needs’ to illustrate how mobilityties in to the consideration of human choicesand quality of life. The challenge of a coherentnotion of sustainable mobility is undeniablycomplex. To have an operational notion ofwelfare needs is a precondition of establishingdistinct quality of life goals. These requirescrutiny in turn with regard to the broaderissues presented by sustainable development.Doyal and Gough (1991) refer to theintergenerational dimension in any assessmentof ‘needs’ and their attempt to categorise needsshows clearly that the temporal dimension,whilst problematic is unavoidable. Inexamining differing accounts of needs (see forexample Doyal and Gough, p. 220) it is clearthat mobility is a facilitator of needs, not a needin itself. It may involve facilitation of otherneeds such as social contact (or indeedinclusion) and access to facilities e.g. hospitalsand schools. That these are currently providedto a large extent on the basis of extensiveindividual travel hardly needs pointing out. It isalso clear that this is by no means aninevitability, but that the only solutions are bothstrategic and long term in nature.

Concl us i onLess transport-intensive economic developmentwill not only give us a better environment, itcan also give us greater economic efficiency andbetter communities, creating more jobs and(potentially) spreading wealth more fairly. Thechallenge of sustainable development can onlybe met by a strategic approach which crossespolicy sectors and is inter-disciplinary innature. Economic and environmental objectivesmust be integrated as far as possible if thestrategic imperatives of one sector are not toresult in the neglect of the other. As long aseconomic issues are dealt with strategically andenvironmental ones reactively the outlook forsustainable development in Europe is bleak.

[ 21 ]

Maddison, D. et al. (1996) Blueprint 5: The True Costs of RoadTransport Earthscan, London.McManus, D. (1996) “Contested Terrains: Politics, Stories andDiscourses of Sustainability” Environmental Politics vol. 5 no. 1.Kinnock, N. (1995) “Three EU transport challenges for the ninetiesand beyond : TENs, Environment and Safety” Transport Seminar -Rosenbad, Sweden (29th June).____ (1997) “Investing in Sustainable Mobility” Speech delivered inBrussels (21 st January).Skinner, I. (1997 ) Sustainable Transport, T heory and P ractice: T heCase of the South East of England Proceedings of Sixth Conferenceof the Interdisciplinary Network on Environment and SocietyWhitelegg, J. (1995) “Fast track to nowhere” Town and Country

Planning (November)

Re fe r e n ce s

Commission of the European Communities (1997) “Neil Kinnock’sopening speech for the European Commission Conference on Fairand Efficient Road Pricing” CEC, Brussels (22nd September).Dobson, A. (1996) “Environment Sustainabilities: An Analysis anda Typology” Environmental Politics vol. 5 , no. 3 .Doyal, L. and Gough, I. (1991) A Theory of Human NeedMacmillan, Basingstoke.Dryzek, J. (1997) The Politics of the Earth Oxford University Press,Oxford.Johnson, D. and Turner, C. (1997 ) Trans-European Networks - ThePolitical Economy of Integrating Europe’s Infrastructure Macmillan,Basingstoke.


The Comparative Pollution Exposure of Road Users -A Summary

This paper is asummary of Road userexposure to airpollution published bythe Environmenta lTransport Associa tionon behalf o f theDepartment of theEnvironment, Trans-port and the Regions.Environmental Trans-port Associa tion10 Church StreetWEYBRIDGEKT13 8RShttp://www.eta .co.uk

Address for correspondence:The Institute for EuropeanEnvironmental PolicyDean Bradley House52 Horseferry RoadLONDONSW1P 2AGe-mail:[email protected]

Taylor & Fergusson: TheComparative Pollution Exposureof Road Users - A SummaryWorld Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 22-26

David Taylor, PhD and Malcolm Fergusson, MAInstitute for European Environmental Policy, London

Scope and Def initions

Pollutants CoveredThe main pollutants examined are volatile

organic compounds (VOCs, including benzeneand other hydrocarbons), carbon monoxide(CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2) and respirableparticulates (PM10). Of these, benzene and COare primary by-products of the combustion ofpetrol, and particulates from diesel combustion.NO2 is mainly a secondary pollutant, formedwhen nitric oxide (NO), another primary by-product of the internal combustion engine, isoxidised in air.

Evidence on pollution from particulates,various oxides of nitrogen (NOx), VOCs and COis extensive and these are amongst thepollutants addressed in the UK National AirQuality Strategy.

Some other pollutants such as ozone and1,3-butadiene are excluded, either because thereis little relevant information, or because theyare of lesser relevance to the subject of thereview. Tropospheric ozone is not coveredbecause, although it is an important secondarypollutant formed by complex chemicalreactions in the atmosphere, concentrations arenot particularly elevated in the presence oftraffic-generated pollution. Indeed, ozone levelscan be reduced by the presence of otherpollutants, so one would not expect to find thehighest concentrations of ozone in or nearvehicles. 1,3-butadiene is not included owing toa shortage of specific data on this chemical.However, findings on other VOCs may well beof relevance to 1,3-butadiene.

Primary and Secondary PollutantsPrimary pollutants, such as CO and VOCs,

are emitted directly from vehicle engines orexhaust systems. As such, they are likely to beat their highest concentrations in or near traffic,with levels falling off rapidly as one movesaway from the source of pollution owing todispersal into the surrounding air. Secondarypollutants are those which are created fromprimary pollutants through chemical reactionsin the air. NO 2 is the most important secondarypollutant considered in this study. As thechemical reactions which generate secondarypollutants can take some time to occur, some

Abs tr a ctLevels of vehicle-derived pollutants foundinside and immediately outside motor vehiclesare a cause of concern. It is now generallyrecognised that car drivers, in particular duringrush hour, are travelling through a ‘tunnel ofpollutants’ and are exposed to significantlyhigher levels of pollution than backgroundreadings would suggest.

K eyw or dsAir pollution, Exhaust gases, Health impacts,Literature review

Introdu ct i onIn response to the London smog of 1952, whenover 4,000 additional deaths occurred in amatter of days, the air quality in Britain’s majorcities was dramatically improved throughlegislative action and a switch from coal totown gas as a source of fuel. In more recentyears however, developing scientific knowledgehas drawn attention to the human healthimpacts of other, less discernible, forms of airpollution. Many of the most importantproblems result from vehicle exhaust emissions,especially in urban areas, and have becomemore pressing as traffic levels have steadilyrisen. Major efforts are now being made tomonitor and evaluate this pollution, and to cutemissions.

Most studies of air pollution from vehicletraffic have concentrated on urban backgroundair quality and its effects on people outsidevehicles. Equally, ‘ambient’ levels are oftenequated with values measured at backgroundmonitoring sites, intentionally positioned atsome distance from major roads. However,experimental evidence suggests that road users(including pedestrians, cyclists, drivers andpassengers in all kinds of vehicle) are exposedto higher levels of air pollution than thebackground data might suggest. Furthermore,the evidence indicates marked differences inthe exposure levels of travellers by differentmodes.

[ 22 ]

Figure 1: Comparison of differences in CO, NO AND NO2 concentrations on thesidewalk and inside the car (Rudolf, 1994)

dispersion of the pollutants is also likely to takeplace while they are being formed. As a result,secondary pollutants may not be so heavilyconcentrated around emission sources as areprimary pollutants, and clear patterns ofpollution may be more difficult to detect.

Factors Influencing Pollution Levelsexperienced by Road UsersPatterns of pollution vary greatly from city tocity, and also over time. These can makemonitoring results difficult to assess, and limitthe applicability of information from one sourceto other times and places. A wide range offactors will influence the level of pollutionexperienced, including the following:

Vehicle technology, vehicle mix and condit ionVarious characteristics of the vehicles whichmake up traffic influence emission rates and,therefore, the characteristics of local airpollution. The combustion and emissionstechnology of new vehicles in the developedworld has progressed rapidly during the lasttwenty years. The most significant step for carshas been the introduction of 3-way catalyticconverters which can reduce emissions of mostpollutants greatly. The penetration of suchvehicles and the overall mix of vehicletechnology within the fleet varies from countryto country. Clearly, the make-up of vehicletechnologies will have a bearing upon theoverall levels of various pollutants in andaround the roadway. Similarly, the overalltraffic mix in terms of cars/trucks/buses/motorcycles can be characteristic of particularparts of the world or even specific cities andthis too will tend to dictate the nature of localair pollution, especially where it affects thepetrol/diesel split or the balance of heavy andlight duty vehicles. The condition and level ofmaintenance of the vehicles making up the

traffic will also influence the emission rates andultimately the levels of pollution.

Fuel qualityJust as vehicle characteristics influenceemission rates, the standard of fuel used inthose vehicles also impacts upon emissionrates. The simplest demonstration of theimportance of fuel is found in the directrelationship between the amount of leaded fuelused and the levels of lead pollution in the air.Other fuel characteristics which influenceemission rates include benzene concentrationsin petrol and sulphur levels in diesel. Beyondthese single components, there are some morecomplex relationships between aspects of fuelquality and emission rates of various pollutants.Some European countries and states in the USAhave introduced reformulated petrol and dieselfuels which can reduce emissions of somepollutants by up to 20%.

Traffic and the effects of preceding vehiclesFor many pollutants, there is a clear linkbetween traffic levels and the concentration ofpollution in the roadway air. There are twocomponents to this relationship: firstly, eachextra car on a given stretch of road contributesto exhaust emissions. Secondly, as levels buildup, traffic speed tends to decline. This in turntends to increase the emission rate of somepollutants: stop-start traffic is perhaps the mostpolluting. In general, air quality can beconsidered likely to worsen as traffic levelsincrease and congestion develops.

A separate but related issue is the influenceof vehicles in the immediate vicinity of roadusers’ exposure. Recent research seems toindicate that the level of pollutants inside carsmay depend in particular upon the emissionrates of the vehicle immediately in front of thevehicle being monitored. This phenomenon hasimplications for the peak concentrations whichmay be reached when travelling behind highlypolluting vehicles and, to some extent, thetransferability of results.

Dispersion of Pollutants Across the RoadwayResearch carried out in street canyons showsthe importance of position on the roadway: theconcentration of pollutants from vehicles tendsto fall as one moves from the centre of theroadway to the pavement. Figure 1 shows thisrelationship for three pollutants, derived fromresearch in Frankfurt roadways. The gradient isgreatest for the primary pollutants, CO and NO,while secondary pollutants such as NO 2 showless difference between roadway and kerbsideconcentrations. A similar relationship can beestablished for vertical distance above the road -


[ 23 ]

concentrations of primary pollutants tend to fallaway quite rapidly with increased height whileNO2 levels show a slower fall and ozoneconcentrations actually increase with heightdue to the reaction with NO in the lower partsof the street.

In general, those road users in the centre ofthe roadway are likely to be travelling through atunnel of the most polluted air and this is theprincipal reason for their raised relativeexposures to pollutants.

Weather: temperature, wind and rainThe weather can influence air quality innumerous ways. In general, high winds and raintend to clear pollution from the air. Directsunshine tends to exacerbate pollutionproblems by enabling reactions involvingprimary pollutants that contribute to theformation of secondary pollutants and smog.The importance of temperature is more difficultto define simply - both high and lowtemperatures can be associated with poor airquality. Higher temperatures increaseevaporative emissions of VOCs. Lowertemperatures increase cold-start emissions(emissions occurring in the first few miles ofdriving, before the engine and any emissionsequipment have warmed up enough to operateefficiently). The most dramatic influence ofweather conditions upon air quality is when atemperature inversion occurs over a city (warm,still, polluted air is trapped by a layer of colderair above) and such incidents tend to beresponsible for the most elevated levels ofpollution in many cities.

Vent ilation of VehiclesThe state of ventilation of a vehicle is likely toaffect the level of pollution inside. Fans andheaters often raise levels (in particular, ofVOCs) by drawing in air heavily laden withpollutants, while air conditioning may reducelevels of certain pollutants, presumably bycondensing out the compounds from the intakeair. It also appears that air filters offer onlylimited protection from particulates, especiallythe smaller sub-micron (PM 1.0) particles, andthat ventilation increases particulate levels.

Durat ion o f ExposureTo fully assess the health significance of thepollutant concentrations experienced by roadusers, account has to be taken of the duration ofthe individual’s exposure in different locations.In general, for members of the public, exposurewill range from a few minutes to a few hours onany one occasion. For commuters, and otherdaily road users, this enhanced exposure willtypically be repeated twice daily for most of the

days in a year. This may well be an importantelement in total pollutant exposure, but a fullconsideration of this matter is beyond the scopeof the present review.

A further factor to be taken into account isthe different timescales of significance for thedifferent pollutants. Thus for NO 2, effects arerelated to short durations of exposure, typicallyone hour, and the higher concentrations experi-enced by road users will therefore be of directrelevance. For carcinogens, such as benzeneand 1,3-butadiene, it is the longer-termexposure that matters, hence the air qualitystandards are expressed as annual means. Inthis case, the short periods of exposure tohigher concentrations experienced by roadusers will not be of direct relevance, but willonly be significant in so far as they increaselong-term exposure. For PM10 the time periodconsidered to be of significance is 24 hours, andthis will also diminish the importance of theshort periods of high concentrations experi-enced by road users.

Monitoring PointsA number of different practical approaches tomonitoring concentrations and exposures areemployed in various studies. Clearly,monitoring the level of pollution as close aspossible to an individual is likely to give thebest indication of their exposure to pollution atthat particular point in time. This however, isonly a ‘snapshot’ and may not give a reliableindication of their worst (peak) exposure ortheir average exposure over time. It will also notbe a reliable guide to their exposure in a rangeof different circumstances, or to the levels ofpollution affecting the population at large. Forthese and other reasons, a range of measures areused in monitoring pollution levels in order toassess possible effects on human health.

Typically, ‘background’ levels of pollutionhave been assessed by monitoring equipment ata distance of 50 to 100 metres from theroadside. Many authors also recorded the levelsof pollution within vehicles. For cars and othersmall vehicles, it can generally be assumed thatthe exposure levels of drivers and passengerswill be similar. This may not be the case forlarger (mainly public transport) vehicles.

A general point should be made aboutmonitoring technology: the performance ofportable monitors is not always good, and somecaution should be exercised when comparingconcentrations from portable and fixed sitemonitors which employ different methods.

Transferability and Robustness of ResultsThe study drew on analysis conducted byscientists in many parts of the world, and in a


[ 24 ]

wide range of situations. As such, some of it isof obvious relevance to the UK or Europeanurban environment, and some less so. Ingeneral, this can be determined through somecomparison of the factors listed above thatinfluence in-vehicle concentrations ofpollutants. Equally, some studies are based on alarge number of measurements and a highquality of sampling and analysis, while othersappear less reliable for various reasons. Therehas in general been a marked improvement inthe quality and reliability of results obtained inrecent years, compared for example to thosereported in Jefferiss et al. (1992).

Miscellaneous FindingsA study by Rudolf (1990), of motorway drivingaround Frankfurt in the summer of 1989 foundthat levels of in-vehicle pollution in passengercars was 10% - 40% higher than that of trucks.This in general supports similar findings frombuses, suggesting that larger vehicles, somewhatmore removed from the level of most exhaustpipes, experience lower levels of pollution thando cars.

Rudolf also noted that pollutionconcentrations fell rapidly away from roads.Findings from most other studies, and for mostpollutants, strongly support this interpretation.

Beyond this general tunnel of high pollutantconcentration, a number of studies point to thedirect effects of individual vehicles on the levelof exposure. For car drivers their own car canbe an important source of pollution, especiallyif the technology is faulty or less advanced,while in slow-moving traffic, the vehicle infront can be a major source. Similarly, and toperhaps a greater extent, a nearby vehicle canstrongly affect the pollution exposure of cyclistsand pedestrians.

Other transport-related microenvironmentscan also have distinctive pollutioncharacteristics. Open-air car parks generallyhave relatively low levels of pollution,comparable to background levels, as the numberof vehicle movements is typically quite low.However, enclosed car parks appear to retainthe pollution caused by vehicles, and highlevels of pollution have been recorded. Vehiclefilling stations also expose drivers to high levelsof VOC emissions.

Health ImpactsThere are a number of health-related studieswhich have used epidemiological techniques todetect health effects in certain occupationalgroups. Results suggest that elevated levels ofexposure to air pollution may have contributed

to some health effects.For example, Raaschou-Nielsen et al. (1995)

found not only that street cleaners inCopenhagen were exposed to higher levels ofpollution than cemetery workers, but that therewere clear differences in health as a result.Chronic bronchitis in the study sample wasassociated as much with pollution levels aswith smoking, and asthma was linked to jobtype but not affected by individuals’ level ofsmoking. Reports of coughs, phlegm andirritation of the mucous membranes were alsomore common amongst street cleaners than incemetery workers.

Forastiere et al. (1994) studied the incidenceof cardiovascular disease and cancers amongsturban police in Rome. They found that thelikelihood of bladder cancer was significantlyincreased amongst car drivers, andmotorcyclists showed increased risks ofnon-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. They concluded thatvehicle exhausts and (for motorcyclists)inhaling fumes from fuel tanks were key factorsin explaining their results.

Concl u s i onsThe studies reviewed indicate that cars inparticular offer little or no protection againstthe pollutants generated by vehicle traffic.Indeed, by virtue of their position in the road,road users can be exposed to significantlyelevated levels of pollutants when driving andthey are, in effect, driving in a ‘tunnel ofpollutants’. In short, more recent studies haveserved to confirm the general conclusions setout in Jefferiss et al.

Studies from Britain, continental Europe andthe United States agree that in-vehicle levels ofthe vehicle-derived pollutants benzene (andother hydrocarbons), carbon monoxide, andnitrogen dioxide are substantially elevatedabove the levels of these pollutants found in airat a distance of around 50-100 metres from thevehicle, whereas levels of non-vehicle derivedpollutants vary far less. Although commutingjourneys may take up an hour or two of the day,car commuters may receive more than 20% oftheir total exposure to some pollutants fromthese journeys. Typical indicative values foraverage concentrations relative to backgroundlevels are shown in Table 1.

Most of the studies indicate that drivers andpassengers in motor vehicles are exposed tohigher levels of these pollutants thanpedestrians and cyclists. Larger public transportvehicles appear to exhibit lower pollutant levelsfor primary pollutants than do cars. Cyclists aresubject to higher personal exposure because oftheir elevated respiration rates, but nonetheless


[ 25 ]

worse during motorway driving, and levels ofNO2 in particular seem to rise later in the day.Interestingly, in most studies the level ofventilation did not significantly alter interiorconcentrations, although conditions tended tobe worse with the heater or ventilation on andsometimes better (for VOCs) with airconditioning in use.

Clearly, the levels reported by background,fixed-site monitoring and road-userconcentrations do not correspond closely to oneanother. There appears to be a strong argumentfor increasing the number of monitors inkerbside positions, on central reservations andat road junctions, so as to establish moreaccurately the exposure of road user groups.

Given the apparent dependency of peakconcentrations in road users’microenvironments upon emissions fromindividual vehicles in the immediate vicinity,governments should consider to what extentadvanced inspection and maintenanceprocedures could help to reduce short-termexposures of road users.

In the UK National Air Quality Strategy it isstated that ‘the Government considers that theobjectives should apply in non-occupationalnear-ground level outdoor locations where aperson might reasonably be expected to beexposed over the relevant averaging period’. Itis clear from this report that measurements frombackground monitoring are likely tounderestimate the exposures of road userssignificantly.

Beyond the exposure of the general public,the findings may also have implications forguidelines on occupational exposures. Trafficwardens along with drivers of taxis, buses anddelivery vehicles are all likely to be subject toraised concentrations of vehicle-derivedpollutants for much of their working day. SomeEuropean studies reviewed suggest that occupational exposure limits for these groupsmay be exceeded and this area also should bere-examined.

Pollutant Pedestrians/Cyclists Bus Users Car UsersVOCs 2 3-4 4-6Carbon monoxide 2-2.5 3-4 4-5Nitrogen dioxide 1.5-2 2 3Particulates some elevation - figures uncertain

Table 1: Typical Ratios of Average Concentrations to Background Levels by Mode

appear to suffer similar or lower exposures thanmotorists owing to their usually travelling closeto the kerbside. Contrary to popular belief,pedestrians generally experience the lowestexposures of any road users. Table 1 alsodemonstrates that the issue of road-userexposure to particulate pollution is one worthyof further research efforts, especially given thegeneral and growing concerns over the healtheffects of this pollutant.

Some time series data from Europe havefailed to detect any marked improvement inlevels of in-vehicle pollution in spite of theintroduction of catalytic converters, whileothers do indicate a downward trend, especiallyfor VOCs. Some data from the US, where themajority of vehicles now use catalyticconverters, do suggest some improvement. I tmay as yet be too early to draw firmconclusions as to the likely impact of catalyticconverters in Europe, but it is possible thatcatalysts alone are not sufficient to solve theproblems identified, and this matter should bekept under review.

It should also be noted that the ratios set outin Table 1 seem likely to persist even if back-ground pollution levels fall, especially for theprimary pollutants. This conclusion issupported by the fact that similar ratios arefound in various parts of the world, in spite ofdiffering absolute levels of pollution andvariations in traffic levels and conditions, fleetcomposition and mix of technologies.

Not surprisingly, the factors exacerbating theinterior levels of VOCs and CO in cars seem tobe dense, slow-moving traffic, stable air, vehicleage, and a faulty exhaust system. The in-vehiclelevels of NOX, on the other hand, seem to be


Car Drivers and P assengers to Veh icle Emissions: Comparativepollutant lev els inside and outside veh icles Gre enpeace UK/ EarthResources Research, London.Raaschou-Nielsen, O., Nielsen, M.L. and Gehl, J. (1995) “Traffic-related air pollution: exposure and health effects in Copenhagenstreet cleaners and cemetery workers” Archives of EnvironmentalHealth vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 203 -213.Rudolf, W. (1990) “Concentrations of air pollutants inside carsdriving on highways” Science of the Total Environment vol. 93,pp. 263 -277.____ (1994) “Concentrations of air pollutants inside cars driving onhighways and in downtown areas” Science of the Total Environ-

ment vol. 146/147, pp. 433-444 .

Re fe r e n ce sIn total 77 papers were reviewed in Road user exposure to a irpollution. Th is included 45 new papers and some previouslyanalysed in Jef feriss e t al . (1992).

Department of the Environment and The Scottish Office (1997)United Kingdom National Air Quality Strategy The StationeryOffice, London.Forastiere, F., Perucci, C.A., Di Pietro, A., Miceli, M., Rapiti, E.,Bargagli, A. and Borgia, P. (1994) “Mortality among urban police-men in Rome” American Journal of Industrial Med icine no. 26, pp.785 -798.Jefferiss, P., Rowell, A. and Fergusson, M. (1992) The Exposure of

[ 26 ]

Abs tr a ctThe present level of emissions due to motorvehicles in Israel’s second largest city, based onkilometres travelled by vehicle and fuel type,was estimated. By applying co-efficientsrelating changes in mortality levels withchanges in ambient PM10 levels, it is estimatedthat tailpipe emissions annually cause around293 premature deaths, primarily among theelderly. This annual toll is in excess of thecombined total of deaths whose primaryunderlying causes were falls, homicides,infectious diseases, suicides, traffic and non-traffic accidents.

K eyw or dsAir pollution, Deaths, Tel-Aviv-Jafo

Introdu ct i onIsrael has one of the highest densities of motorvehicles per square kilometre in the worldcausing ever-increasing problems of trafficcongestion (Fletcher, 1998). There are around550 motor vehicle accident fatalities a year in apopulation of only 5.8 million (CBS, 1996). Incontrast to the huge publicity given to theseroad fatalities, little or no attention has beengiven to fatalities caused in a more indirectmanner as a result of motor vehicles emissions.

This paper aims to quantify the present levelof mortality and morbidity as a result of motorvehicle emissions in Israel’s second largest city,Tel-Aviv-Jafo, which has a population 353,100.

M ethod s

Tailpipe EmissionsData as to the number of vehicles by type (car,taxis, vans less than four tonnes, motorcycles,buses and trucks) and fuel used (petrol ordiesel) were collected for the city of Tel-Aviv-Jafo. Data on the annual average number ofkilometres by vehicle type travelled within thecity was also obtained (CBS, 1996), enabling acalculation of total vehicle kilometres by

Gary Ginsberg DrPHMinistry of Health, Jerusalem.Aharon Serri MScMinistry of Environment, Jerusalem.Elaine Fletcher BAFreelance Environmental Journalist, Jerusalem.Joshua Shemer MDMinistry of Health, Jerusalem; the Israel Centre for Technology Assessment in Health Care, GertnerInstitute for Health Policy Research, Tel-Hashomer; and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-AvivUniversity, Israel.

Mortality from vehicular particulate emissions inTel-Aviv-Jafo

Dani Koutik PhDIsrael Electricity Corporation, Haifa.Eric Karsenty MDMinistry of Health, Jerusalem.

Ginsberg et al.: Mortality fromvehicular emissions in Tel-Aviv-JafoWorld Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 27-31

[ 27 ]

vehicle type and fuel used.Next, in conjunction with the Technion

University, Haifa, we collected data on urbancycle emission factors (g/km) by type of emis-sion (NOX, CO, etc.) for cars by year ofmanufacture and the presence of a catalyticconverter (Tartakovsky et al., 1997). SPM(suspended particulate matter) emissionsestimates were obtained from fleet-weighteddata from Holland (Ministry of Housing, SpatialPlanning and the Environment, 1997) for petroldriven cars adjusted to Israeli fuel consumptionand emissions data (0.026 g/km). Emissionsfrom petrol-fuelled taxis, since the average ageof taxis is around two years old, were assumedto be the same as cars with catalytic converters(0.020 g/km) based on English fleet data (UKEmission Factors Internet Database).

Emissions from diesel taxis were based onDutch data for diesel cars adjusted to Israeli fuelconsumption and usage data, with a level of0.259 g/km for SPM. Similar adjustments gavediesel fuelled van, bus and truck SPMemissions of 0.288, 1.795 and 1.133 g/km.Motorcycle SPM emissions of 0.09 g/km werealso based on UK data applied to the enginesize and stroke parity characteristics of theIsraeli motorcycle fleet (CBS, 1997a).

Data on total annual kilometrage by vehicletype was multiplied by the emission factor co-efficients in order to arrive at the total annualtailpipe emissions by type of vehicle. Data onSPM was converted to PM10 (particulates < 10µm) on the basis that PM10s constituteapproximately 99.4% and 96% of SPM frompetrol and diesel motor vehicle emissionsrespectively (Small and Kazimi, 1995).

Refinery EmissionsPetrol refinery emissions based on Israeli dataof 0.10 g per urban kilometre travelled for petrolfuelled cars and taxis (A. Kotler, IsraelElectricity Corporation; personalcommunication) were used. An identical valueof 0.10 g/km was used for refinery emissions fordiesel-fuelled cars and taxis, since diesel andpetrol fuel refinery emissions per kilometre aresimilar (Lewis and Gover, 1996). Diesel refinery

Address for correspondence:Gary GinsbergDan 8 BakaJerusalem 93509Israele-mail:[email protected]

Note: The viewsexpressed in thispaper are so lely thoseof the authors and donot necessarily reflectthe views of theiremploying institu-t ions.

We wish to acknowl-edge the assistance o fDr. Leonid Tartakovsk i(Technion University,Haifa) and Mr JoeBasis (Tel Aviv Mu-nicipality) regardingIsraeli vehicularemission fac tors. Inaddition, thanks to Mr.Moshe Tenne (Ministryof Infrastructure) formodelling advice.

emissions of 0.29 g/km for buses and truckswere based on USA data (Kitchen and Damico,1992) adjusted to Israeli refinery conditions.Motorcycle fuel refinery emissions of 0.009 g/km were based on the relative fuel consumptionof motorcycles compared to cars.

Again total tonnes emitted at the refinery wascalculated by multiplying kilometrage byemissions per kilometre. Since the refineries arebased near coastal ports, we assumed that only50% of their emissions would actually fall onIsrael, the remainder falling into theMediterranean sea. Based on nationwide datafrom the USA, we expect that 50.95% of SPMemitted from the fuel refineries were PM10s(US-EPA, 1995).

Data from the Environmental Ministry’snewly established air monitoring stations foundthe average ambient air level of PM10s fromthree monitoring stations in Tel-Aviv-Jafo to be56.8 µg/m 3 in 1996 (Aaron Serry, Department ofEnvironment; personal communication). Thelargest single source of these PM10s (48.2%) isemissions from the Reading power stationsituated on the North-west seafront of themunicipality, based on assumption that 40% ofthe 1377 annual tonnes of PM10 emitted actuallyfall within the municipal boundaries (Dr. IlanSetter, National Meteorological Centre, BeitDagan; personal communication). Around 412.7tonnes or 36.1% of the PM10s (i.e. 20.51 µg/m3)are generated by motor vehicles, 14.4% comingfrom natural sources such as sand(Environmental Monitoring Unit, Tel-Aviv;personal communication) and 1.3% fromindustry and home heating. For each tonne ofPM10 emissions from vehicles, ambient PM 10 airlevels will rise by 0.0497 µg/m 3 (20.51/ 412.7total tonnes of PM10 emitted from motorvehicles).

Health Ef fects of EmissionsA 1.0 µg/m3 increase in ambient air levels ofPM10 will increase all cause non-accidentalmortality in persons aged over 30 by around0.381% (Pope et al., 1995). There were 4048non-accidental deaths in Tel-Aviv-Jafo amongthe over 30 population in 1997 (Tel-Aviv-JafoMunicipality, 1996). If there were no vehicularemissions, ambient air levels of PM10s would be20.52 µg/m3 lower and the number of deathswould be only 3755(i.e. 4048/[1+20.52 * 0.381%]). Therefore eachtonne of PM 10 emitted from vehicles contributes0.711 deaths ( i.e. [4048-3755]/412.7 tonnes) . Bymultiplying this co-efficient of 0.711 deaths/tonne by the number of tonnes emitted by typeof vehicle we arrive at the number of excessdeaths attributable to PM10s by type of vehicle.

We estimated that there would be an increaseof 0.51% in the number of chronic bronchitis(including emphysema) cases annually per 1µg/m3 increase in ambient PM10 levels (Abbey etal., 1993). One tonne of PM10 is estimated tocause 0.58 extra cases of chronic bronchitisannually in the Tel-Aviv-Jafo municipality.

Increases in hospital use was based on co-efficients of 0.34% increase in all-agerespiratory admissions excluding those forchronic bronchitis and emphysema, 0.21%increase in cerebrovascular admissions inpersons over 65, 0.001% increase in CongestiveHeart Failure and Ischaemic Heart Diseaseadmissions in persons over 65 respectively per1 µg/m3 increase in ambient PM10 levels(Wordley et al., 1997; Thurston et al., 1994;Schwartz and Morris 1995). Baseline data wascalculated from diagnosis specific hospitaladmissions (CBS, 1997b) adjusted bydepartment specific lengths of hospital stays inthe Tel-Aviv-Jafo municipality. Increases inemergency room visits are negligible and sowere omitted from our calculations (WHO,1996).

For every 1 µg/m3 increase in ambient levelsof PM10 s we assumed a 0.0029% increase in lostwork days, over and above a baseline of 1.51days/person year (Ostro, 1987).

Life expectancy at the average age of atailpipe death of 72.8 years (Pope et al., 1995) isaround 84.9 years (CBS, 1996) meaning thatthere were on average 12.1 potential years oflife lost for each tailpipe death. These mortalityeffects of lost life years were valued using a 5%discount rate, according to the willingness topay method of valuing human life, whichassigned a value of $222,450 per life year lostbased on adjusting US data (Moore and Viscusi,1988) to estimated Israeli GNP levels of $16,857per head in 1997 (CBS, 1996). Chronicbronchitis cases were similarly valued at$197,396 per case (US-EPA, 1997). Eachhospital day was valued at $387 (Ministry OfHealth, 1997) and each lost work day at $97 perday (CBS, 1996).

Health effects of PM10 emitted from refinerieswere similarly estimated based on a (populationweighted) national ambient PM10 level of 38.3µg/m3, produced by 37,923 tonnes of PM10.Based on 32,720 non-accidental deathsannually in the over 30 population (CBS, 1998),we estimate that each tonne of PM10 emittedfrom refineries causes 0.126 deaths nationwide.

Re s u l tsAround 416,000 motor cars each travel anaverage of 6238 kilometres annually in the city,resulting in an annual total of 2595 million

[ 28 ]


Table 1: Mortality from tailpipe and refinery emissions1

Notes1 The numbers in the table have not been adjusted to account for rounding errors.2 8083 inter-city diesel buses stop in Tel-Aviv-Jafo, 1100 operate exclusively within the municipality.3 Average tailpipe emissions of PM10 for all vehicles is 0.138 g/km

kilometres or 83.8% of all vehicle kilometrestravelled in the city. The 1100 buses of the Danbus company, while representing less than 0.2%of all vehicles actually contribute to 2.8% of thetotal kilometrage since each bus travels anaverage of around 78,000 kilometres annually inthe city. As a result of their high per kilometreemission rates, diesel buses account for nearlyhalf of the 293 fatalities attributable to vehiculartailpipe emissions (see Table 1). Trucks, carsand diesel vans cause the majority of theremaining deaths. At present in Tel-Aviv-Jafowe estimate that cars account for 8.3 of the 10.2annual deaths from refinery emissions.

In addition to the 303 expected deaths fromtailpipe and refinery emissions, a further 134

new cases of chronic bronchitis will be inducedannually. Together these account for 99.6% ofthe $661 million costs of emissions to societycaused by vehicles in Tel-Aviv-Jafo (Table 2).External health emission costs per kilometretravelled range from $0.04 and $0.05 for petrolfuelled taxis and cars respectively to $1.77 and$2.79 respectively for diesel trucks and buses(Table 3).

Di s cu s s i onDeaths from tailpipe emissions account forapproximately 15.7% of mortality primarilycaused by cardio-circulatory-pulmonarydiseases in Tel-Aviv-Jafo. The estimated 293annual deaths from tailpipe emissions exceed,by a tenfold factor, the annual average of 29traffic accident fatalities in Tel-Aviv-Jafo overthe past decade. The magnitude of the publichealth menace is also evidenced in that tailpipeemission mortality also exceeds the combinedtotal of deaths in Tel-Aviv-Jafo whose primaryunderlying cause was falls, non-vehicleaccidents and homicides (125 per year), infectious diseases (92 per year), suicides (43per year) and motor vehicle fatalities (29 peryear) (Tel-Aviv-Jafo Municipality, 1996).Mortality costs from tailpipe emissions amountto around $610 million in addition to $25million morbidity costs, mainly from new casesof chronic bronchitis.

The costs induced by tailpipe emissionsalone represent around 10.7% of Tel-Aviv-Jafo’scontribution to Gross National Product. Most ofthese costs will never be realised but justrepresent the valuations that peopletheoretically are willing to pay to avoid death.Using a human capital method of valuinghuman life according to lost productivity willconsiderably lower the magnitude of costs,although this method is considered by welfareeconomists to be theoretically unsound.

As a result of car fuel usage in Tel-Aviv-Jafo,a further ten persons (mainly) living elsewherein Israel are estimated to die annually fromrefinery generated emissions. Mortality costsfrom refinery emissions amount to around $21million in addition to $3.5 million morbiditycosts.

Our non-accidental mortality co-efficient of0.381%/µg rise in ambient PM10 levels wasderived from a seven year prospective study of151 metropolitan areas in the USA with over550,000 adults. The study measured both acuteand chronic effects of PM10 emissions (Pope etal., 1995) independent of the potentialconfounders of tobacco smoking and socio-economic status. This study has been used asthe benchmark ‘gold-standard’ by both the

Emissions source Refinery Tailpipe TotalDiesel Bus 0.023 2.768 2.791Petrol Car 0.008 0.040 0.048Trucks Total 0.023 1.747 1.770Diesel Vans 0.001 0.444 0.445Diesel Taxi 0.001 0.400 0.401Motorcycles 0.004 0.138 0.142Petrol Taxi 0.008 0.031 0.039Total $ 5.636

Table 3: External costs ($ per km) by vehicle type

Diesel Bus2 8083 110 205.6 1.795 1.1 140.3 141.4Petrol Car 416,016 2595 67.5 0.026 8.3 47.7 56.0Diesel Trucks 6000 64 75.7 1.133 0.6 51.6 52.2Diesel Vans 9261 103 30.9 0.288 0.0 21.1 21.1Diesel Taxi 1740 156 42.2 0.259 0.1 28.8 28.9Motorcycles 15,529 59 5.3 0.089 0.1 3.7 3.8Petrol Taxi 85 8 0.2 0.020 0.0 0.1 0.1Total 456,714 3095 427 0.1383 10.2 293.3 303.5

Table 2: Annual mortality and morbidity costs from refinery and tailpipe vehicleemissions in Tel-Aviv-Jafo (1997)

Emission source Refinery Tailpipe Refinery TailpipePersons $ Million

Deaths 10 293 $ 21.1 $ 610.6Chronic Bronchitis 17 117 $ 3.4 $ 23.2Hospital Days 60 1649 $ 0.0 $ 0.6Lost work days 1286 19490 $ 0.1 $ 1.9Total 1373 21549 $ 24.7 $ 636.3

[ 29 ]


World Health Organisation (WHO, 1996) andthe Environmental Protection Agency in theUSA (US-EPA, 1997). The above estimate can beconsidered conservative in that the only otherstudy which captured both acute and chroniceffects (Dockery et al., 1993) reported a 0.784%rise in non-accidental mortality per 1 µg rise inambient PM10 levels in a sample based on fewerlocations than Pope’s study. In addition theestimate is downward biased since inter-citymigration, which would tend to homogeniseexposures of cohort members, was notconsidered by Dockery et al.

Many short-term exposure studies based ontime series have reported on statisticallysignificant relationships between PM10 andmortality, reporting co-efficients in the range of0.03% - 0.17%/µg rise in ambient PM10 levels.(Wordley et al., 1997; Ito and Thurston, 1996;Katsouyannji et al. 1997; Faiz et al., 1996).Taking the mid-point of 0.105%/µg means thataround 81 (of the 293) deaths can be attributedto short-term effects of exposure to ambientPM10 levels. It is important to note that thestudies found linear increases in risk occurringwith no threshold at concentrations belowcurrent ambient air standards (Wordley et al.,1997). Unlike the short-term nature ofexposures to smogs, fogs, wood fires andindustrial accidents, exposure to vehicleemissions by city dwellers is clearly of aneveryday chronic nature.

The fleet average of 0.0258 g/km of PM10

used in our model for petrol-fuelled motor caremissions, is almost identical to the 0.028 g/kmreported in the UK for both urban and ruraltravel (UK Emission Factors Internet Database).

Because of their high kilometrage and the 1.8g/km PM10 emission factor, diesel buses accountfor almost half of the tailpipe mortality. The 1.8g/km PM10 emission factor represents thevintage of the bus fleet in Tel-Aviv-Jafo.However, this emission figure is lower than the2.66 g/km reported in New York city (Faiz et al.,1996) and the 2.50 g/km in Santiago, Chile(Escudero, 1991), but higher than the 1.40 g/kmfleet urban cycle in the UK and 1.50 g/km fleetlevel in Holland (Ministry of Housing, SpatialPlanning and the Environment, 1997).

The 6000 trucks ‘by virtue’ of their highkilometrage and 1.13 g/km PM10 emission factoraccount for more fatalities than the 416,000petrol fuelled cars. The emission factor fortrucks is slightly higher than urban emissionsfrom the British HGV fleet of 1.04 g/km and the0.91 g/km overall emissions from trucks inHolland, but is lower than the 2.46 g/km, 1.60g/km and 1.47 g/km emitted by New York city,urban European and Californian heavy dutytrucks (Small and Kazimi, 1995).

The mortality data is sensitive to thepercentage of PM10 emissions from the Readingpower station estimated to fall on Tel-Aviv-Jafo.Our calculations used a conservative estimate of40%, (i.e. one that would minimise the relativeimpact of emissions from vehicles). However, ifthis was reduced to 30%, then tailpipe emissionmortality would rise from 293 to 337 deaths.

We used a conservative estimate (withrespect to prevailing winds) that only 50% ofrefinery emissions would fall on land, if thisfigure was 60% (as is possible due to the likelydistribution of the prevailing winds) thenestimated annual mortality from refineryemissions would rise only from 10 to 12 deaths.

A further conservative bias is that thedaytime population of Tel-Aviv-Jafo isconsiderably higher than the residentialpopulation due to the presence of manycommuters who work in Tel-Aviv-Jafo but liveoutside the municipality. These commuters willalso be exposed to vehicle emissions but whosedeaths (if any) will be recorded in districtsoutside of Tel-Aviv-Jafo and are hence notincluded in our baseline figure of 4048 non-accidental deaths in persons over 30 years ofage.

Considerable attention has been given togenerating (though not necessarilyimplementing) policy measures aimed atlowering the traffic accident fatalities (Richter,1998). These should be supplemented withadditional policy measures aimed at reducingthe far greater magnitude of mortality caused bytailpipe and refinery emissions.

Immediate measures could include thesubstitution of oxidising catalysts to dieselengines or the use of alternative fuels such asLPG in diesel buses or trucks. Additionallonger-term reductions in motor vehicle-generated emissions could be gained by theadoption of town planning and fuel pricingmodalities that encourage the design and use ofpedestrian routes, cycle paths and rail networks(Fletcher, 1998). In keeping with the PolluterPays Principle, the external emission costs(Table 3) could be used to increase the cost ofdiesel fuel relative to petrol and henceencourage the use of substitutes for diesel fuel.

In direct contrast to the clear identification ofthe causality of motor vehicle fatalities, theidentification of the vector-victim relationshipfrom vehicle emissions is based on statistically -modelled relationships. This indirect mode ofidentification should not be an excuse forinaction, since such statistical relationships arenow accepted worldwide with regard to thelinkage of mortality to radiation and cigarettesmoke exposures.

The biblical imperative ‘though shalt not put

[ 30 ]


a stumbling block before the blind’ (Leviticus19:14) allied to the magnitude of the publichealth menace from vehicle emissions (and itsassociated high external costs), should providesufficient incentive to overcome problems

arising from the interdisciplinary nature ofpotential solutions to vehicle emission deaths,involving multiple-ministerial co-operation(health, transport, environment, interior,energy).

[ 31 ]

Re fe r e n ce s

Abbey, D.E., Petersen, F., Mills, P.K. and Beeson, W.L. (1993)“Long-term ambient concentrations of total suspendedparticulates, ozone and sulfur dioxide; and respiratorysymptoms in a nonsmoking population” Archives ofEnvironmental Health 48: 33-46.CBS (1996) Statistical Abstract of Israel, No. 47 CentralBureau of Statistics, Jerusalem.____ (1997a) “Motor Vehicles as at 31/12/96” Central Bureauof Statistics, Jerusalem [no. 1065].____ (1997b) Diagnostic Statistics of Hospitalisations 1990Special series No. 1058. Central Bureau of Statistics,Jerusalem.____ (1998) Monthly Bulletin of Statistics vol. 49, no. 3.(March) Central Bureau of Statistics, Jerusalem.Dockery, D.W., Pope, C.A., Xu, X. et al. (1993) “Anassociation between air pollution and mortality in six U.S.cities” N Engl J Med 329: 1753-59.Escudero, J. (1991) “Notes on air pollution issues in SantiagoMetropolitan region” Commission especial dedecontaminacion de la region metropolitana, Santiago.Faiz, A., Weaver, C.S. and Walsh, M.P. (1996) Air Pollutionfrom Motor Vehicles The World Bank, Washington.Fletcher, E. (1998) ADVA report on Transportation in IsraelADVA Centre, Tel-Aviv.Ito, K. and Thurston, G.D. (1996) “Daily PM/MortalityAssociations: An investigation of at-risk sub-populations” JExposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiology 6: 79-95.Katsouyannji, K., Touloumi, G., Spix, C. et al. (1997) “Shortterm effects of ambient sulphur dioxide and particulatematter on mortality in 12 European cities: results from timeseries data from the APHEA project” BMJ 314: 1658-63.Kitchen, M. and Damico, W. (1992) “Development ofconversion factor for heavy-duty bus engines g/bhp-hr tog/mile” Technical Report EPA-AA-EVRE-92-01, EnvironmentProtection Agency, Washington.Lewis, C.A. and Gover, M.P. (1995) “Life Cycle Analysis ofMotor Fuel Emissions” COST 319 - Estimation of pollutantemissions from transport Proceedings of the workshop, 27-28November. European Commission, Brussels.Ministry Of Health (1997) Hospitalisation and other tariffsfrom 1/7/97 Director General’s Agreement No. 5/97. MinistryOf Health, Jerusalem (in Hebrew).Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment(1997) “Vehicle technology and fuels” Research Report97646/b/12-97 Den haag, The Netherlands.

Moore, M.J. and Viscusi, W.K. (1988) “The quantity adjustedvalue of life” Economic Inquiry 26: 369-388.Ostro, B.D. (1987) “Air pollution and morbidity revisited: aspecification test” J Environ Econ Manage 14: 87-98.Pope, C.A., Thun, M.J., Nambooriri, M.M., Dockery, D.W.,Evans, J.S., Speizer, F.E., and Heath Jr., C.W (1995)“Particulate air pollution as a predictor of mortality in aprospective study of U.S adults” Am J Resp Crit Care Med151: 669-674.Richter, E. (1998) “Eradication of road death and seriousinjury. A perspective from environmental epidemiology”European Epi Marker 1-7 (January).Schwartz, J. and Morris, R. (1995) “Air pollution andcardiovascular hospital admissions” Am J Epidemiol 142:23-35.Small, K.A. and Kazimi, C. (1995) “On the costs of airpollution from motor vehicles” Journal of TransportEconomics and Policy 29: 7-32.Tartakovsky, L., Gutman, M., Zvirim, Y., Allumikov, Y. andSerry, A. (1997) Estimation of emission factors from Israelivehicular fleet Technion University, Haifa, Research Report97-249.Tel-Aviv-Jafo Municipality (1996) Statistical Yearbook 1996No.36 Tel-Aviv-Jafo Municipality Centre for Economic andSocial Research.Thurston, G., Ito, K., Hates, C., Bates, D. and Lippmann, M.(1994) “Respiratory hospital admission and summertimehaze air pollution in Toronto, Ontario: Consideration of therole of Acid aerosols” Environmental Research 65: 271-290.UK Emission Factors Internet Databasehttp://www.london-research.gov.uk/emission/petall.htmUS-EPA (1995) Profile of the Petroleum Refining IndustryUnited States Environmental Protection Agency,Washington.____ (1997) The benefits and costs of the clean air act 1970to 1990 Appendix I-5 United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency - Office of Air and Radiation, Washington.WHO (1996) A methodology for estimating air pollutionhealth effects Office of Global and Integrated EnvironmentalHealth, World Health Organisation, Geneva.Wordley, J. , Walters, S. and Ayres, J.G. (1997) “Short-termvariations in hospital admissions and mortality andparticulate air pollution” Occupational and EnvironmentalMedicine 54: 108-116.


Abs tr a ctHigh Occupancy Vehicle lanes have beenwidely promoted and constructed in the USA ina belief that the provision of such facilitieswould improve transit performance, stimulatecar and vanpool formation, and improve landuse and air quality in urban areas. Critics,especially among environmentalists andalternative transportation advocates, assert thatHOV lanes are merely highway expansionswhich promote more driving, weaken transit,increase air pollution, and facilitate suburbansprawl. This article demonstrates that,generally, HOV lanes are effective only to theextent that they are designed to fill transit andformal carpool program needs. Questions arealso raised about the efficacy of HOV criteria,and the extent to which these programs areshaped by ideological and politicalconsiderations, rather than by careful analysisand planning.

K eyw or dsHOV lanes, Transport investment, USA.

Introdu ct i onFor several years, decades in some localities,over twenty urban regions in the United Statesof America have embarked upon programs ofdeveloping specially designated highway lanesto be shared by transit and carpool vehicles.These lanes almost always are within existingroadway rights-of-way, usually immediatelyadjacent to general lanes, and are called ‘HighOccupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes’. A minority ofthese lanes are separated from general flowlanes by physical barriers. Most are simplydemarcated by paint and signage, andoccasionally a narrow buffer space separatingthem from general traffic. Almost all such laneshave been created by new construction or theopening of formerly transit-exclusive lanes toother vehicles. Many of these lanes have beenbuilt in bits and pieces, often do not connectwell with other roadways, and often do notform a system of special lanes. Theassumptions, sometimes explicit - oftenimplicit - in these programs, are that such lanes

will provide improved flow for their users,increase reliability while decreasing duration oftrips, and stimulate shifts of travel mode fromSingle Occupancy Vehicles (SOVs) to HOVtransit and carpooling (Fuhs, 1993; Turnbulland Hubbard, 1994).

While no precise tabulation of HOV lanekilometres seems to exist, the extent of HOVlanes is enormous. In the Seattle (WA) areaalone some 267 km of expressway HOV havebeen constructed. Another 210 km are plannedor under construction (Parsons Brinckerhoff etal., 1997). Many other Seattle area HOV laneshave been constructed or are planned on roadswhich are not expressways. In the Los Angelesmetropolitan area approximately 1000 freewayHOV lane miles (1600 km) have beenconstructed or are in various stages of planningand development (Fuhs, 1993; Turnbull andHubbard, 1994). It is likely that approximately3200 HOV lane km are in continuous (24 hour)operation at present in the USA (Fuhs 1993,p. 16). Some additional HOV lanes exist only atpeak traffic period times or in peak trafficperiod directions. Another 1600 lane km maybe in one form or another of planning ordevelopment.

Depending on acquisition and constructionissues the cost of HOV may range from $6million to $60 million per km. HOV wasintroduced in the USA in the 1970s followingthe huge program of highway building in the1950s and 1960s. After several years ofexperience it was found that such HOVhighway treatments needed special access-egress ramp treatments as well as specialinterchanges at the intersections of two or morehighways in order to function well. This hastriggered costly programs of rebuilding rampsand interchanges. Not uncommonly, theconstruction costs of ramps and interchangesexceeds the construction costs of an entire HOVlane segment. One HOV interchange plannedfor downtown Bellevue, an ‘Edge City’ suburbof Seattle is estimated at $126 million. AnotherHOV and general lane interchange for theWashington (DC) area is estimated at $320million (Rathbone, 1998).

Promoters of HOV lanes promise greatbenef its from them. Traffic congestion is

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes: Highwayexpansions in search of meaning

Aspects of this paperare based in part uponan earlier 1994 collabo-ration with ChristopherLeman and KristinPauly, “RethinkingHOV”. The authortakes full responsibilityfor current conc lusionsor analyses.

Address for correspondence:Adjunct FacultyCenter for Canadian-American StudiesWestern WashingtonUniversityBellinghamWA 98225-9110e-mail:[email protected]

Preston L. Schiller, Ph.D.Center for Canadian-American Studies, Western Washington University

Schiller: High Occupancy Vehicle(HOV) Lanes: Highwayexpansions in search of meaningWorld Transport Policy & Practice4/2 [1998] 32-38

[ 32 ]

expected to lessen, transit ridership and carpoolformation is expected to increase, energyefficiency is anticipated to improve whilevehicular pollution decreases. Environmentallyand transit-minded critics of HOV lanes refutesuch claims (Johnston, 1991; Leman, 1992;Replogle, 1993; Vuchic, 1994; Leman, Schillerand Pauly, 1994) while highway proponentscriticise HOV lanes and wonder whether itwouldn’t be better to build a general laneinstead of an HOV lane? Or, better, two generallanes (Dahlgren, 1995) or simply convertexisting HOV facilities for general traffic (NewJersey Star-Ledger). Advocates of deregulationand privatisation see underused HOV lanes asprime candidates for conversion to mixed HighOccupancy/Toll facilities open to solo driverswith the ability to pay for greater privilege(Fielding and Klein, 1997).

This paper will address several of the keyissues surrounding the spread of HOV lanes.Foremost among these are the policy basis, orlack thereof, for HOV lanes, their performance,and the extent to which they help or hinderproven high-occupancy modes, i.e. transit. Theextent to which HOV promotion constitutes anideological, rather than analytical, outlook willalso be examined.

The history o f HOVThe discussion of the history of HOV lanesneeds to start with a distinction betweenridesharing or group transport and the sorts offacilities intended to accommodate suchactivities. Transport in common has existedsince the time of the two person litter, throughthe days of the horse-drawn omnibus, and intothe modern era of trains and buses. Ridesharingin the form of ‘carpooling’, the deliberatesharing of a vehicle in order to increaseoccupancy and reduce the demand for extravehicles, long predates the HOV lane - in fact, itpredates by decades the invention of the term‘high occupancy vehicle’.

In the early years of the automobile, mostvehicles were operated as high occupancyvehicles. In fact, the larger passenger capacity ofmany cars was designed to accommodategreater ridesharing. Economic necessity madecarpooling a routine part of life for mostfamilies and individuals. Neighbours wouldshare the ride to work, school, groceryshopping, and the movies. Wartime gasolinerationing encouraged ridesharing, as didexplicit publicity campaigns. One World War IIera advertisement of the U.S. Governmentportrays the grim message, “If you ride alone,you ride with Hitler!”

As the number of cars per household

increased, carpooling steadily declined. Averagevehicle occupancy has been declining since the1960s. According to the 1990 census, averagevehicle occupancy for commuting has droppedto 1.09, the lowest level ever recorded. Between1980 and 1990, the nation’s daily carpools forcommuting declined from 19 million to 15million, with the largest drops occurring incarpools of three or more occupants (Pisarski).

Explicit government efforts during peacetimeto promote ridesharing first began in the energycrises of the 1970s. Corresponding with thisincrease in governmental promotion ofridesharing was the emergence in the 1970s ofthe term ‘high occupancy vehicle’. The termhigh occupancy vehicle is an attempt toencompass car pools, van pools, and buses inthe same term; as discussed in later sections, itis an awkward fit on the road, just as it is interminology. Initially the minimum number ofoccupants per high occupancy vehicle wasdefined as being three (or even four, as in thecase of the Shirley Highway). However, thisnumber has increasingly been defined as beinga minimum of two.

Special facilities such as exclusive rights-of-way for transit, especially on roadways, beginswith the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.Early urban and suburban rail systems,beginning with the horse-drawn tram of thenineteenth century, were accorded specialrights-of-way, often in the middle of existingroadways in town. Roadway lanes set aside forthe exclusive use of buses also have a longhistory in the United States. As rails werepaved over to create more motor vehicle lanes,and as the buses that replaced the streetcarsbegan to suffer from the growing trafficcongestion, special transit lanes weredeveloped. The earliest in the United States wasin 1939, when more than a mile of lanes in eachdirection on Chicago’s North Sheridan Roadwere converted to bus-only during peak trafficperiods; local traffic was still allowed on thelanes. The number of bus-only lanes increasedthroughout the country in the 1960s and 1970s,with some on a 24-hour basis (Levinson et al.,1973).

Freeway lanes and ramps also began to be setaside for buses. One of the first (1970) was amorning bus-only lane on the New JerseyTurnpike (I-495) approaching the LincolnTunnel into Manhattan. At the same time a buslane (1970) and two carpool lanes (1971) wereset aside on I-80 on the eastern approach to theSan Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. The firstU.S. freeway lane built solely for buses wasprobably the Shirley Highway Transit Lane onI-395 in northern Virginia (1969). In 1973, thislane was opened to carpools, apparently the

[ 33 ]


first U.S. instance in which buses and carpoolsofficially shared a long-haul HOV lane (Fuhs,1993). Thus commenced a long process ofdowngrading transit-only facilities to carpool,and even beyond to solo drivers.

HOV versus transitHOV lanes appear to have been the creature ofthe era of freeway and sprawled suburbandevelopment. They seem to be an afterthought,a late acknowledgment that it might be wise tomaintain reliable bus schedules in the face ofmounting traffic congestion. They also came ofage in an era when transit agencies feltthemselves to be under siege. Ridership wasfalling. Costs were rising, due in large part tothe expense of orienting services to longersuburban commuter routes rather than moreprofitable in-city routes. More new jobs werelocating in distant suburban officedevelopments than in urban cores. Transitagencies began to think of ways which theymight better service such a suburban clientele.One of these ways might be to assist in thepromotion, if not formation, of car andvanpools. It seemed logical to such transitplanning minds that bus lanes could be sharedwith carpools. It also won friends for the transit

Table 1: Performance of Selected North American HOV-Transit lanes

AM Peak Hour Inbound Passengers (1988)Location HOV/Bus Facility Bus Van/Carpool Total Bus (%)

Union City, NJ/NY Route 495 34,685 0 34,685 100Ottawa, Ontario O-C Transitway 11,000 0 11,000 100Pittsburgh, PA East Busway 5,892 0 5,892 100Pittsburgh, PA South Busway 2,098 0 2,098 100Vancouver, BC H-99 1,081 0 1,080 100New York, NY Gowanus Expressway 8,686 173 8,859 98New York, NY Long Island Expressway 7,838 214 8,052 97Houston, TX I-45N (pre-carpool) 2,810 416 3,226 87Seattle, WA SR520 (W) 3,140 498 3,638 86Seattle, WA I-90 1,250 229 1,479 85Seattle, WA I-5N (pre-2+) 2,605 1,105 3,710 70Fort Lee, NJ/NY I-95 1,800 919 2,719 66San Francisco, CA US 101 1,995 1,490 3,485 57Houston, TX I-10 (Katy) 1,820 2,595 4,415 41Los Angeles, CA I-10 (San Bern.) 2,750 4,352 7,102 39Washington/N.VA I-395 (Shirley) 5,621 9,483 15,104 37Wash./Fairfax Co.,VA I-95 1,226 5,336 6,562 19San Francisco, CA Oakland Bay Bridge 3,535 8,273 11,808 30Houston, TX US 290 (NW) 600 3,248 3,848 16Miami, FL I-95 (1985 data) 350 2,460 2,810 12San Diego, CA I-15 350 2,686 3,036 12L.A./Orange Co. CA I-405 120 3,705 3,825 3L.A./Orange Co. CA Route 91 0 3,112 3,112 0

TOTAL (bus only) 54,756 — — 100TOTAL (all facilities): 101,252 50,294 151,546 67TOTAL (facilities open to carpools): 46,496 50,294 96,790 48

(adapted from Leman, Schiller and Pauly, 1994)

community in highway planning andconstruction circles.

This friendship was generally notreciprocated, however, when new HOV laneswere planned or constructed. Many HOV laneshave been built without reference to the needsof transit services - or existing service patterns.Others have been designed in ways that createobstacles to use by buses. Some HOV lanes havebeen located alongside the medians of freewayswhich necessitates that buses entering from theother side of the expressway must weave acrossseveral general lanes in order to gain access tothem. The dominance of the highway and carmentality in the design and construction ofHOV lanes is quite unfortunate. Transitdeserves foremost consideration because it isthe workhorse of many urban freeway HOVlanes.

Table 1 compares the performance of busesand carpools on selected North American HOVand bus-only facilities. These facilities wereselected for comparison because almost all ofthem are considered successful by HOVstandards; they move at least as many, orsubstantially more, persons than comparablegeneral traffic lanes. The most impressiveperformance is on bus-only lanes which clearlyoutperform almost all the mixed bus andcarpool HOV lanes. The nation’s mostproductive road lane of any kind is the bus laneon New Jersey’s Route 495, which in themorning peak carries more than 35,000 peopleinto the Lincoln tunnel. The lane serves 30% ofall trans-Hudson River commuters, more thanthe combined total of all 12 general purposelanes next to it (Home and Quelch, 1991). Alsoimpressive is the Ottawa-Carleton area’snetwork of transitways, which help OC Transpocarry 30% of all vehicle-based travel and 70%of peak hour trips to downtown (Bonsall, 1987).Overall, buses carry 67% of the traffic of theHOV-Transit lanes depicted in Table 1. In lanesopen to buses and carpools, buses still carryalmost half (48%) of all passengers.

A few of the HOV lanes included in Table 1serve carpooling populations well. Those in theWashington (DC) area specifically serve largeemployment facilities, such as the Pentagonmilitary complex, where each weekdaythousands of staff form orderly processionsentering large vans at 15 minute intervals frommid-to-late afternoon. The apparently excellentperformance of carpools on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is due in part to the largenumbers of commuters who are informallypicked-up at bus stops by solo drivers seekingto qualify for the bridge’s toll-free carpool lanes.Such arrangements, referred to derogatorily as‘slugging’, should be viewed as a setback for

[ 34 ]


transit agencies and the toll authority ratherthan a ‘triumph of carpooling’. Other‘successful’ carpool lanes where few, if any,buses fear to tread (towards bottom of Table 1)probably testify more to the difficulty of servingsprawled areas with transit - and the lack of co-ordination between highway constructioninterests and transit agencies - than to thepower of carpool formation.

HOV criteria and travel behaviour: Adate i s not a carpool!Carpools are generally defined as arrangementswhereby two or more persons share a ride fromone destination to another, ostensibly reducingthe number of vehicles which might otherwisebe used for such travel. The construction ofHOV lanes is expected to increase theproportion of persons riding transit orcarpooling by allowing better and more reliabletravel times. As discussed above some of theearliest HOV lanes were originally transit-onlylanes which were opened, or downgraded, tocarpools. The criterion for carpools, in the earlystages of HOV, was generally three or morepersons (‘3+’) to a vehicle. Since many newlyconstructed HOV lanes were not necessarilybuilt in areas where there were jobconcentrations or carpool programs, thiscriterion was generally lowered to 2+ in orderto have any appreciable use made of the lanes.Because of political pressures, or lagging ratesof carpool formation, some 3+ lanes have beendowngraded to 2+ in recent years. In some casesa 2+ criterion was applied in the belief that itwould be easier to stimulate carpool formationat this level and that the criterion could beeasily raised to 3+ as the lane became crowdedwith 2+ vehicles.

There are several problems inherent in theseassumptions about carpool criteria and motiva-tion for ridesharing. First, the travel timesavings while in a vehicle must be significant inorder to overcome the time penalty paid byparticipants in carpools. That is, mostcarpoolers must either wait for the carpool toarrive, or must spend some time in travel (oftenby car) to a rendezvous location, whichundermines the time saved travelling in theHOV lane. Secondly, just as there are some‘inconveniences’ associated with transit travel,as compared to personal vehicular travel, thereare inconveniences associated with carpooling:adhering to a fixed schedule when work hoursmay vary, inability to change plans or runerrands, or even disdain for the type of musicpreferred by the driver have been cited asobjections to carpooling.

The assumption that, given the right

environment and incentives, SOVs wouldevolve into 2 person carpools (HOVs) whichwould further evolve into 3 person carpoolsover time is a curious instance of Darwinianthought applied to urban transport. Uponexamination it turns out that almost half (43%)of 2+ vehicles in general or HOV lanes areoccupied by members of the same household.(Fielding and Klein, 1997) The extent to whichthese vehicles move out of a general lane into anewly provided HOV lane is merely a matter ofrearranging the furniture on the freeway. It isnot a triumph of shift from one modal status toanother. That the designation ‘High OccupancyVehicle’ is given to 2 person cars is yet anotherexample of how far down the road past Orwell’s1984 double-think language American highwayplanners have gone. That a date is not a carpoolis obvious to most casual observers of HOVlanes. The ultimate mixing of Americantransportation and political values occurredwhen a pregnant woman cited for driving soloin a 2+ HOV lane contested her Seattle areatraffic citation. Asserting that a fetus is a humanbeing she claimed status as a carpool. The courtfound otherwise.

More calling into question of the beliefsystem underlying the highway HOVconstruction program occurred in 1991 whenthe Washington State Legislature pressured theState’s Department of Transportation intodowngrading the I-5(N) freeway HOV lane from3+ to 2+ minimum carpool occupant criterion.Since there were still a few empty spaces leftbetween buses and 3 person carpools (and themotorcycles which are also allowed in the lane,even though generally driven by just oneperson), policy makers evidently thought that alowering to 2+ would stimulate some of the solodrivers in general lanes to mate and issue forthcarpools — and reduce SOV traffic congestionin the general lanes.

The results of a careful evaluation byresearchers at the University of Washington andthe Texas Transportation Institute showedotherwise. The downshift from 3+ to 2+resulted in a large increase in vehicles in theHOV lanes without a significant reduction ofvehicles in the general purposes lanes. In fact,there was a decrease in the freeway’s overallaverage vehicle occupancy and an increase inthe proportion of SOVs. People left buses (nowslowed by the traffic) for carpools, and leftvanpools and larger carpools for 2+ carpools.They also shifted onto the freeway from parallelarterials, and travelled more at peak periods.And they took trips that formerly they wouldhave not made at all (Ulberg et al., 1992). Therealso appeared to be an increase incongestion-causing traffic incidents related to

[ 35 ]


these cases. There was public outcry, but theconversions were not managed well or mar-keted to anticipate and address it. And theconversions that were cancelled did succeed ata number of their immediate goals. Forexample, the HOV lanes that were converted onthe Santa Monica Freeway for 21 weeks in 1976carried nearly as many people as the other lanescombined, and helped the freeway carry morepeople in fewer vehicles than it ever had before.Carpools and bus ridership both more thantripled and were increasing further, and theydropped when the lane was discontinued(UMTA, 1977).

The standard objection to conversion ‘thatcongestion will be increased in the remaininggeneral-purpose lanes’ should not enddiscussion. Additional steps can mitigate orprevent the worsened congestion. Toronto’sDepartment of Public Works and theEnvironment showed imagination inimplementing the Bay Street Urban Clearway,an HOV lane shared by buses, taxis andbicycles. According to the Department’sevaluation the addition of turn restrictions at anumber of intersections and the prohibition ofstopping at curbside actually increased thevolume of general-purpose traffic and reducedthe levels of congestion on Bay Street.

HOV versus the environmentEnvironmental benefits, such as reduced airpollution, improved transit performance, andbetter land use are often claimed by proponentsof HOV lane construction. Federal funds forHOV lanes in the U.S. have been available evenin cities not in attainment with the Clean AirAct through the Congestion Mitigation - AirQuality (CMAQ) program of the IntermodalSurface Transportation Efficiency Act - ISTEA1991 (Schiller, 1997) and the recently passedTransportation Equity Act for the 21st Century -TEA-21.

Representatives of several environmental andalternative transportation organisations thinkotherwise. Their analyses points to theincreases in roadway capacity and driving,especially longer commutes, stimulated by HOVlane construction. The time savings offered byHOV lane travel, or the temporary relief ofgeneral lane congestion, generally facilitate alonger commute which results in greatersuburban sprawl. Areas of urban sprawlgenerate more motor vehicle trips thantraditional cities, and are more difficult to serveby transit (Replogle, 1993).

Computer models analysing HOV laneconstruction in the Sacramento (CA) areademonstrated increased solo driving and

[ 36 ]

the increase in the amount of traffic on the road.Perhaps the most egregious harm done by

HOV lanes is the extent to which they undercuttransit performance. Except in those fewinstances (see Table 1) where transit exclusivitypreceded HOV designation or where HOV laneshave been designed and operated with transitbenefit in mind, the net effect of HOV lanesappears to have been to hinder transitperformance, drain transit revenues, and reduceridership. In 1995 the Virginia DOTdowngraded an HOV lane from 3+ to 2+ on ahighway (I-66) running adjacent to theWashington (DC) Metro Orange Line. As ridersdeserted transit for the newly accessible (and‘free’) highway space, either as solo motorists or2+ carpools, transit revenues plummeted.Virginia DOT has been requested to pay thetransit service $1.6 million annually tocompensate for revenues lost to the highway(Washington Post, 1995).

HOV by conversionOne might ask of promoters of HOV lanes, ‘ifHOV is so good, why not just convert someexisting general lanes to HOV - especially giventhe drawbacks and expense of constructing newHOV lanes?’ In fact, most bus-only lanes now inexistence - and there are hundreds, if notthousands, around the world - were conversionsfrom traffic or parking lanes. A few freewaylanes, too, have been converted for bus orcarpool use. But generally the planning of HOVlanes ignores the conversion alternative. Cost-benefit studies compare HOV construction withthe construction of general purpose lanes,without analysing the alternative of convertingan existing general purpose lane. Conversionsare subject to some restrictions not faced byconstruction projects. A number of statehighway departments in the USA prohibitconversion outright, or impose tighterpreconditions and analytical requirements.

The rare analyses of HOV by conversion ofexisting lanes often use the alarming term ‘take-a-lane’, and sometimes even ‘take-away a lane',as if general purpose were the highest and bestuse (Parsons Brinckerhoff et al., 1992; Bechtel,Parsons Brinckerhoff, 1992, p. 27). Official useof the term take-a-lane is fostered by the (USA)Transportation Research Board’s Committee onHOV Systems, whose glossary claims that thestep is ‘rarely applied’ (reprinted in Fuhs,1993). ‘Optimize-a-lane’ would be at least as faira term. At the very least the more neutral term‘lane conversion’ should be employed.

A few of the past conversions of generalpurpose lanes to HOV use were later reversed,but the wrong lessons have been drawn from


car-oriented land uses. By the year 2010 carbonmonoxide levels would be little better, andoxides of nitrogen levels would actually beworse than if the freeways had not beenexpanded at all. In the longer run, the airquality results would almost certainly be muchworse (Johnston, 1991). In the San FranciscoBay Area the Sierra Club challenged anddelayed the construction of HOV lanes on partof I-80 when it demonstrated that the laneswould stimulate more solo driving, longer trips,more sprawled development and worse airquality (Holtzclaw and Lewis, 1996). In theNew York City metropolitan area the groupTransportation Alternatives has publishedcriticisms asserting that ‘HOV = HOAX’, andthe Environmental Defense Fund and theTri-State Transportation Campaign havesuccessfully challenged several regional HOVproposals, advocating instead a combination ofimproved transit and road tolls.

HOV as global highway ideology: f romAmsterdam to Taipei to Toronto andVa ncou verDespite a lack of demonstrable value oreffectiveness, HOV planning and constructionspreads across the countryside of the USA. Itappears to be gaining friends in other parts ofNorth America and on other continents as well.Transit-rich Netherlands opened ‘Europe’s firstHOV lane’ for buses and carpools on HighwayA-1 near Amsterdam in 1993 (Turnbull andHubbard, 1994, pp.20-22). Taipei refers to itsbus lanes as ‘HOV’ (Turnbull and Hubbard,pp.83-84) Can the inclusion of carpools andtaxis in them be far behind? Canada’s citieshave resisted sprawl and maintained goodtransit services relative to their counterparts in

the USA (Schiller, 1994, 1996) Rates of transitridership, and the quality of services andintermodal connections in Toronto andMontreal rival those of many European andAsian centres. Recent years have seen thegrowth of HOV lane construction in Canada,most notably in the Toronto and Vancouverregions (Turnbull and Hubbard, pp.23-24, 81-82).

Because the validity of the claims for greatertransportation efficiency and transit andcarpool improvements remain unproven orcontested, one has to wonder whether suchclaims are based more on ideology and beliefrather than upon analysis and experience.Because HOV lanes are neither ‘fish nor fowl’,i.e. neither true transit nor true automobilefacilities, they attract a fair amount of politicaland media criticism (New York Times ). Becausediscussions of transportation policy are oftennot very sophisticated in the USA, HOV hasbecome a convenient target of mediademagoguery (New Jersey Courier News, NewJersey Star-Ledger ).

As this article and related environmentalcritiques have shown, transit accounts for mostof the effectiveness the few successful HOVlanes in North America can claim. Overall,HOV by new construction seems to hinderrather than help urban areas in their goals ofimproving transit ridership, stimulating car andvanpool formation, decreasing air pollution,and optimising land use efficiency. Thequestion needs to be asked if HOV is a beliefdesperately seeking validation, a highwayexpansion in search of meaning? Meanwhile thedifficult details of improving transit and landuse, and reducing pollution and globalgreenhouse gases are being overlooked in therush to build more lanes to nowhere.

[ 37 ]


[ 38 ]

Re fe r e n ce s

Bechtel, Parsons Brinckerhoff (1992) ‘High-OccupancyVehicle Feasibility Study for the Southeast Expressway(I-93) and Route 3’ Draft Final Report prepared for theMassachusetts Highway Department.Bonsall, J.A. (1987) “Transitways: the Ottawa Experience’ inProceedings of the Second National Conference onHigh-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes and Transitways.Dahlgren, J. (1995) “Are HOV lanes really better?” in AccessNo. 6, pp. 25-29.Fielding, G.J ., Klein, D.B. (1997) “Hot Lanes: Introducingcongestion-pricing one lane at a time’ in Access No. 11,pp.10-15.Fuhs, C.A. (1993) Preferential Lane Treatments forHigh-Occupancy Vehicles, Synthesis of Highway Practice,NCHRP Synthesis 185, National Co-operative HighwayResearch Program, Transportation Research Board, NationalAcademy Press, Washington, D.C.Holtzclaw, J. and Lewis, S. (1996), personalcommunications, Sierra Club, San Francisco, CA.Home, L.L., Quelch, G.E. (1991) “Route 495 Exclusive BusLane: A 20-Year Success Story’ in ITE Journal, April.Johnston, R.A. (1991) “Comments on the California AirResources Board document on HOV Systems Plans as AirPollution Control Measures” Division of EnvironmentalStudies, University of California at Davis, Davis, CA 95616.Leman, C.K. (1992) “Does HOV Lane Construction ReallyClean the Air?” in HOV System Notes, TransportationResearch Board, September.Leman, C.K., Schiller, P.L. and Pauly, K. (1994) RethinkingHOV: High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes and the Public InterestChesapeake Bay Foundation, Annapolis, MD.Levinson, H.S. et al. (1973) Bus Use of Highways: State ofthe Art, Report no. 143, National Co-operative HighwayResearch Program, US Highway Research Board (now theTransportation Research Board).New Jersey Courier News (1998) “HOV lanes driving uscrazy”, “HOV lane success spotty” June 8.New Jersey Star-Ledger (1998) various articles attackingHOV lanes and advocating their conversion to general lanes,June 24.New York Times (1995) “Pressure builds on H.O.V. rules”May 7.____ (1996) “HOV: Debating the new freedom of movementmovement” “In Virginia, 8 miles between success andfailure” January 21.Parsons Brinckerhoff et al. (1992) “Take-a-Lane Study’ forRegional Transit Project, Metro Transit, Seattle, WA.____ (1997) Puget Sound HOV pre-design studies, finalreport. Washington State DOT, Office of Urban Mobility,

Seattle, WA.Pisarski, A. (1992) New Perspectives in Commuting , USDOT.Rathbone, D.B. (1998) Urban Transportation Monitor vol.12, nos. 10, 12.Replogle, M. (1993) Transportation Conformity and DemandManagement: Vital Strategies for Clean Air Attainment ,Environmental Defense Fund, Washington, DC.Schiller, P.L. (1994) “Toronto’s good transit and goodplanning -are they enough?” in Transportopia Bulletin,Spring.____ (1997) Green Streets: the 1991 Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act and the greening oftransportation policy in the United States. SurfaceTransportation Policy Project, Washington, DC.Schiller, P.L. and Kenworthy, J.R. (1996) “Prospects forsustainable transportation in the Pacific Northwest: issuesand trends in Vancouver (BC), Seattle (WA), and Portland(OR)” in Proceedings OECD Conference on SustainableTransport, Vancouver, BC.Toronto Department of Public Works and the Environment(1991) “The Bay Street Urban Clearway: Six MonthPreliminary Evaluation Report” Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Transportation Alternatives (1993) “HOV = HOAX, canadding new highway lanes really reduce car traffic?”Auto-Free Press New York, vol. 4, no. 5, May-June.Tri-State Transportation Campaign various publications1995-1998, 240 West 35th Street, 8th floor, New York, NY10001Turnbull, K.F. and Hubbard, S.M. (1994)WorkshopProceedings 7th National Conference on High OccupancyVehicle Systems, Transportation Research Board, NationalResearch Council, Federal Transit Administration, June 5-8,Washington, DC.Ulberg, C. et al. (1992) “I-5 North High-Occupancy VehicleLane 2+ Occupancy Requirement DemonstrationEvaluation” prepared by the University of WashingtonTransportation Research Center and the TexasTransportation Institute for the Washington State DOT, 1992UMTA (1977)The Santa Monica Freeway Diamond Lanes ,Vol. 1: Summary, Urban Mass TransportationAdministration, Washington, DC.Vuchic, V. et al. (1994) “Negative impacts of HOV facilitieson transit” in Proceedings 7th National Conference on HighOccupancy Vehicle Systems, Transportation ResearchBoard, National Research Council, Federal TransitAdministration, June 5-8, Washington, DC.Washington Post (1995) “I-66 HOV-2 pulls riders fromMetro” June 27.

Abs tr a ctMore car sharing organisations are beginning toappear throughout Europe and North America.The use of existing and new technologies in aninnovative way offers tremendous opportunitiesfor this industry to grow.

K eyw or dsBusiness planning, Car sharing, Innovation

Introdu ct i onDuring this century several transportationmodes, including transit, personal automobiles,and aeroplanes, have competed for marketshare. Despite this competition, the personalvehicle has become the dominant form ofmobility in many countries throughout Europeand North America. In turn, public transporthas found it increasingly difficult to attract andretain passengers. This paper describes animportant movement towards new ‘MobilityManagement’ in which competition no longerfavours a particular mode. Rather, this newmobility framework could be used to increasethe demand for multimodal transportation bylinking new transportation business models andincentives (e.g. convenience and cost savings)with advanced technologies (e.g. cell phonesand smart cards that can facilitate intermodaltransfers and payment). In the future, theintegration of collective and private transporta-tion modes could lead to energy savings and amore sustainable approach to mobility.

In this model, customers would construct aset of transportation tools to accomplish theirmobility goals that reflect their individual set ofmobility criteria, such as time and cost savings,convenience, and comfort. MobilityManagement can be likened to a shoppingcentre that offers its customers a range ofmobility services and options. This form of‘one-stop’ transportation shopping canempower individuals by offering them a choiceof modes that best fits their needs on a dailybasis. On Monday, this might mean taking thetrain and a bike; car sharing on Tuesday;telecommuting Wednesday through Friday; andwalking on weekends. Everyday is a new

Address for correspondenceConrad WagnerConsulting ManagerStrategy and DevelopmentMobility CarSharingSwitzerlandMuehlenplatz 10CH-6000, Lucerne 5Switzerlande-mail: [email protected]

Susan ShaheenPh.D. CandidateInstitute of TransportationStudiesUniversity of California, DavisOne Shields AvenueDavisCA 95616-8762e-mail:[email protected]

Car Sharing and Mobility Management: Facing newchallenges with technology and innovative businessplanning

Conrad WagnerMobility CarSharing Switzerland

Susan ShaheenInstitute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis

Wagner & Shaheen: Car Sharingand Mobility Management:Facing new challenges withtechnology and innovativebusiness planningWorld Transport Policy &Practice 4/2 [1998] 39-43

[ 39 ]

choice, depending on the needs and goals of theindividual.

At present, advances in electronic andwireless communications are makinginnovations in transportation products andservices possible. Due to these developments, aswell as the congestion and air pollutionassociated with the automobile, the success ofthe personal vehicle may begin to diminish. Inthe future, personal vehicles are likely to play asignificant role in transportation; however, theirimportance could shift. In contrast to theircurrent status as a ‘dominant’ mode,automobiles might be viewed as just onealternative among a wide range of attractivemobility options. With the same enthusiasmthat planners invested in personal automobilesin the past, transportation planners and policymakers now have an opportunity to‘re-engineer’ transportation into a diverse set ofmobility services by employing advancedtechnologies. Car sharing is one important stepin this process.

During the past decade, car sharing hasexperienced a successful pioneering stage inEurope. At present, car sharing has begun atransformation into a professional andprofitable business framework, which includesmobility services, in a number of regionsthroughout Europe. Car sharing is offered as oneservice in a broader context of mobilityservices, such as car rentals and transitlinkages. Car sharing offers an alternative tosatisfying the demand for individual mobility,while encouraging collective transportationwhen it is convenient and cost effective for theindividual. In Europe, many car sharingcustomers already rely upon intermodaltransportation. With time and experience, manycar sharing participants employ shared-usevehicles less and use other modes oftransportation more often, such as transit andcycling.

Car sharing systems: The basicsCar sharing is a system where customers time-share vehicles located at car sharing lots orstations. Customers use car sharing vehicles bythe hour or day and pay on an hourly and

kilometre basis each month. The principle ofcar sharing is simple. Individuals gain thebenefits of private cars without the cost andresponsibilities of ownership. Instead of owningone or more vehicles, a household has access toa fleet of vehicles on an as-needed basis. Carsharing may be thought of as organisedshort-term car rental. Car sharing is moresuccessful when access is easy and assured,costs are low, payment is straightforward, andvehicle choices are plentiful. Individuals gainaccess to car sharing by joining organisationsthat maintain a fleet of cars and light trucks,which are often distributed throughout anetwork of vehicle locations.

There are many car sharing organisations(CSOs) in Europe and North America. InSwitzerland and Germany, car sharing hasoffered a transportation service for over 10years. At present, Mobility CarSharingSwitzerland serves over 20,000 people at 600stations in 300 cities and towns throughoutSwitzerland and manages a fleet of 900 cars.

Using a car sharing system involves threesteps. First, customers place a reservation for avehicle. Individuals can typically make atelephone reservation on a 24-hour basis byspeaking directly with a car sharing operator orplacing a computerised ‘Interactive VoiceReservation System’, using a touch-tonetelephone. Recently, Mobility CarSharingintroduced an Internet reservation system.Reservations can be made days or weeks inadvance. For example, an individual can makea vehicle reservation for a doctor’s appointmentthat he or she has in two weeks. In Europe,most reservations are made spontaneously atthe immediate time the vehicle demand occurs.In Switzerland, each car sharing station usuallymaintains two to five vehicles. Stations arelocated in residential areas, work sites, trainstations (i.e. for intermodal use), gas stations,car dealerships, and shopping areas.

During the second step, an individual travelsto the car sharing station where his or her carhas been reserved and accesses the vehicle keyfrom a manually-operated key box. Every userhas access to this box by a personal key. At thecar sharing station, a customer takes the key fora specific car and drives off. In late 1998 orearly 1999, this manual box system will bereplaced by on-board computers that will beinstalled in every car and a smart card will bedistributed to each user for accessing vehicles(i.e. opening the car door).

Advances in electronic and wirelesstechnologies are helping to provide security,reliable access to vehicles, and data tracking.This automation makes sense for a high volumeof shared-use vehicles. The quickly developing

market for navigational devices, such as globalpositioning systems (GPS), will likely have asignificant impact on car sharing businessesand the market for Mobility Management.

However, car sharing is not the only productprovided by new mobility services. As aconsequence of technological advances andnew demands of lifestyles, customers will beable to take advantage of a range of productsand services that best satisfy their changingmobility demands. Already, some mobilityservices exist in Europe, such as Autodate inthe Netherlands, which services over 85,000customers. At present, many transit agencies,CSOs, and mobility centres are beginning toprovide a variety of car sharing products andother mobility services based on smart cardsand communication technology. Some examplesinclude:

Car sharing organisations, like MobilityCarSharing and several other organisations inGermany, Austria, and the Netherlands, thatare expanding the scope of their services;Traditional car rental companies that are alsocombining mobility packages with carsharing and transit;Car-lease-sharing, for example ‘CashCar’ inBerlin;Car pooling or van pooling; andTaxi or collective taxi services.Finally, the third step in car sharing is the

monthly billing of all customers. InSwitzerland, hourly rates for a medium-sizedcar are 1.30 ECU/hour (11.00 pm - 7.00 am isfree of charge) and kilometre rates are.25 ECU/km (rates are slightly cheaper forlonger distances). All costs for the car arecovered, inc luding insurance, gasoline, mainte-nance, and depreciation. To use a shared-usevehicle, customers can choose from threeoptions:

‘Member’: Deposit of 600- ECU (refundablewhen leaving the system) and an entrance feeof 120- ECU (non-refundable). The customerobtains the best rates per hour and kilometrewith this package.‘User’: Annual fee of 60- ECU/year (non-refundable). The customer pays slightlyhigher rates per hour and kilometre.‘User special’: Annual fee of 40- ECU/year(non-refundable) in combination with anannual transit pass.

Car sharing in Europe and worldwi deIn 1987, Switzerland began car sharing. Basedon a merger of existing companies in 1997,Mobility CarSharing Switzerland emerged asone nationwide car sharing company. Theuniform standards and quality services

[ 40 ]

•

•

•

••

•

•

•


[ 41 ]

provided by Mobility CarSharing have helpedthis organisation grow significantly over thepast ten years. At present, this organisationholds almost 50 percent of the market share forall car sharing users in Europe and is currentlyincreasing its market share. Based on theprinciple of partnership management, MobilityCarSharing now serves over 20,000 customersand is expecting to grow by 100% within thenext year. Partnership management is abusiness framework in which car sharingproviders partner with other businesses, such astransit operators, gas stations, and car rentalcompanies, to offer a combined mobilitypackage that enhances their products andservices.

Due to different standards and operations,German CSOs have experienced slower growth.In contrast, many German CSOs are still in apioneering stage, which emphasises grassrootsorganisations, local strategies, and operations.Average growth in Germany is only about10% - 20% per annum due to relatively highmonthly fees and regular membership attrition.At present, there are approximately 25,000 carsharing participants in Germany. However,Germany may soon find its way to an increasedmarket share due to the recent merger of two carsharing umbrella organisations (i.e. EuropeanCar Sharing Deutschland and BundOrganisierter Autoteiler), and the incorporationof StattAuto Berlin and StattAuto Hamburg inan effort to ‘standardise’ operations andservices.

Other European countries providingprofessional car sharing services are theNetherlands and Austria. In addition, new carsharing businesses will soon be launched inSweden, Denmark, Italy, and the UK.Furthermore, several interesting and advancedcar sharing developments are taking place inthe USA. Many of these operations are eitherresearching or considering advanced car sharingtechnologies and services. In February 1998,CarSharing Portland began offering services. Inthe fall of 1998, the City of Seattle plans tolaunch a large car sharing operation. Later thisyear, the Institute of Transportation Studies ofthe University of California, Davis (inconjunction with its partners: the Bay AreaRapid Transit District (BART); American HondaMotor Company, Inc.; Lawrence LivermoreNational Laboratory (LLNL); Teletrac, Inc.; andINVERS) will launch the ‘CarLink: Smart carsharing system’ program. The purpose of thisdemonstration project is to implement andevaluate a smart car sharing program,emphasising advanced technologies (i.e.compressed natural gas Honda Civics, a smartcar sharing management system, and an

automatic vehicle location unit), multiple carsharing stations, and reliability. In addition,several other US cities have proposed carsharing projects, mainly cities with populationsabove 500,000 people.

Car shari ng: Success factorsBased on their experience and knowledge oftechnological developments, the authorsrecommend several important factors forimplementing car sharing in the future. Thesefactors include:

Complement Existing Transportation Systemsand Services:Mobility packages are based on a variety oftraffic modes, which can be used by customersin conjunction with car sharing. Partnershipswith existing transportation institutions (forexample, gas stations, car rental companies andtransit agencies) are an important success factorfor car sharing operators and businesses.For instance, car sharing is complementary tocar rental and can be used to supplement thedemands of car sharing users when their travelneeds exceed one to two days when car rentalbecomes more economical than car sharing. Carsharing services can be used for a few hours aday, and car rentals can be used for one or moredays for special occasions like business trips orvacations.

Maintain a Balanced Mix of Users andLocations:Maintaining a ‘balanced’ mix of users isimportant to car sharing success. For instance,neighbourhood users typically reserve vehiclesfor evenings and weekends. In contrast,business users generally reserve vehicles fromMonday to Friday, during daytime hours.Hence, these two user groups complement eachother.Since car sharing has to compete with privatelyowned vehicles, car sharing vehicles must bedistributed in a decentralised manner to satisfya wide range of customer needs. In such a smallcountry as Switzerland, providing over 600stations has been a critical factor to the successof car sharing.

Design Smooth Interfaces and MultimodalInterchanges:Modal interfaces (e.g. smart cards that allowcustomers to access vehicles and transit) shouldbe designed to reduce intermodal switchingtimes, so that modal transfer requirements donot exceed three minutes (e.g. returning vehiclekeys and paying for a transit pass). Theattractiveness of stations and locations to


select different travel m odes and integrate themto m eet their variable m obility dem ands andgoals. When needed, individuals can evenconsult with a m obility counsellor to determ inethe best m ix of m odes and services.

In a sense, each individual has his or herown ‘m obility painting ’, which is based on theirindividual needs. ‘Mobility Managem ent’ canalso be thought of as ‘travel blending’, sim ilar toa blend of tea, coffee, or tobacco. Anindividual’s ‘travel blend’ would becharacterised by its ability to reflect the valuesof each custom er and to provide convenientoptions and m ore financial choices. Oncem obility services are m ore widely available,these services will likely com pete with thepersonal vehicle.

Mobility Packages: Som e Exa m plesfrom SwitzerlandIn the future, various transportation optionswill be com bined into m obility packages andservices to satisfy custom er needs for sim pler,effective transportation. In Switzerland,Mobility CarSharing is already developing ,testing , and evaluating several m obility packageprogram s, including ‘Fahrpass,’ ‘Zuri Mobil’,‘Zuger Pass Plus’, ‘Auto auf Abruf’, and ‘MAX-Car’. Most of these projects are based oncollaboration with transit organisations and aresupported with start-up funding bygovernm ental institutions. However, nosubsidies are provided for their actualoperation.

‘Integration of use’ is the innovative m essagelinked to all of the program s listed above. Oneof the prim ary goals of these program s is tocom bine and integrate different travel m odes toencourage interm odality. Between 1996 and1997, ‘Zuri Mobil’ attracted over 3,000individuals, who joined this Zurich-basedprogram . At present, the population of Zurich isapproxim ately 360,000 people. After paying anannual fee of 60- ECU to join, custom ers cantake a second person along with them on publictransport at no extra charge; access traditionalrental cars at lower rates and preferred status;and gain access to over 150 shared-use vehiclesat 80 stations in Zurich and an additional 900shared-use cars at 600 stations m anagedthroughout Switzerland. In Zurich, custom ershave access to car sharing on every third street,and m ost car sharing lots are closely linked totrain and bus stations.

In com parison, the ‘Zuger Pass Plus’ (ZPP)program goes one step further. In addition tointegrating a variety of m obility providers intoone m obility package, ZPP includes otherretailers, such as food distributors. ZPP offers a

[ 42 ]

Figure 1: The mobility gap: Car sharing completes the service

facilitate m odal interchanges can reduce acustom er’s perceived ‘transaction’ costs (i.e. theperceived tim e and hassle required in m aking atransfer) and increase his or her subjectiveperception of the service (e.g . com fort, prestige,and a wide range of services). Sm art cards (i.e.an electronic purse that can be linked to a bankaccount and used to pay for m ultiple servicesthroughout a day) can facilitate theseinterm odal changes and reduce the perceivedtransaction costs associated with renting andaccessing a shared-use vehicle.

Consider Advanced Electronic and WirelessTechnology:New technologies can provide real-tim e accessto inform ation, reservations, ticketing , andbilling . Furtherm ore, these technologies cansupport operators in providing their productsand services and satisfying the custom ers’dem and for flexibility, spontaneity, and reliableaccess. Not surprisingly, new businesschallenges for car sharing and m obility serviceswill grow from the added capabilities thatadvanced technologies can bring to serviceproviders. Som e new opportunities include‘instant vehicle access’ without a reservation orconventional key, ‘open-ended reservations’,‘one-way rentals’, and even ‘virtual carstations’.

Market Standards and Marketing :In the future, national or even internationalstandards for products and services will beincreasingly im portant, so that custom ers caneasily access m obility services in m ultiplelocations (e.g . during a business trip orvacation).

New Lifestyles and Mul tim odal MobilityWe define new Mobility Managem ent asaccessibility that not only incorporates theshared usage of cars, but also reflects the ‘m ixedusage’ of various transportation m odes. Basedon a variety of travel options, individuals can


such as high parking costs and trafficcongestion are pervasive; car ownership costsare high; and alternative modes oftransportation are easily accessible.

As car sharing takes root, an interestinggrowth dynamic can be observed. Morebusiness-oriented CSOs thrive by acquiringthose that fail or lack strong leadership anddeveloping a broader range of services. To retaincustomer loyalty, they continue to improveservices and/or reduce costs. Two linkedstrategies are being followed: co-ordinate andlink with other mobility services, andincorporate advanced communication,reservation, and billing technologies. Butadvanced technologies are expensive, andlinking with other services is successful only ifthe customer base is large. Consequently, manyCSOs either remain quite small or follow aspiralling growth trajectory.

Taking a longer view, CSOs may be theprototype of an entirely new business activity:mobility service companies. As vehicleownership proliferates and vehicles becomemore modular and specialised, entrepreneurialcompanies may see an opportunity to assumethe full care and servicing of a household’s oran individual’s mobility needs inneighbourhoods, work sites, transit stations,shopping centres, etc. These new mobilitycompanies might handle insurance, registration,and maintenance, and could substitute vehiclesas a household’s situation changes. In thefuture, both the pioneering CSOs of Europe andNorth America could combine their knowledgeof operations with advanced technologycompanies to create mobility services thatcontribute to our social, economic andenvironmental well being.

We conclude that car sharing will play asignificant role in helping to redefine mobilitypatterns, modal decision making, and mobilitybehaviour. If mobility service companiesguarantee vehicle accessibility and reliability,customers will likely follow this new trend.Nevertheless, it is important to keep thefollowing points in mind. First, it is critical toeducate and excite customers about newtransportation options, such as car sharing andmobility services. Second, it is important toanticipate the need for future mobility productsand services, such as those demanded bymodern lifestyles. Finally, advanced electronicand wireless technologies should be consideredthoughtfully as useful tools for improving thequality of transportation services, modifyingcurrent transportation options, and ultimatelyshaping travel behaviour.

broader range of services and benefits tocustomers, particularly those that drive. Byexpanding the scope of partners beyondtransportation providers, ZPP implements astrategy that bundles diverse businesses into amobility service package. ZPP has helpedMobility CarSharing evaluate the concept ofMobility Management and further explore theidea of a mobility shopping centre, wherecustomers can access a variety of products andservices.

On 1st September 1998, Mobility CarSharingwill launch a nationwide mobility package incollaboration with the Swiss National RailwaySystem. Through this new program, railpassengers will gain easy access to car sharingand traditional rental car vehicles that arelocated throughout Switzerland. Approximately1/2 of all 700 Swiss train stations will providecar sharing lots. Hence, intermodal vacationtrips or travel blending will be possi-ble from most Swiss cities and towns. As aresult of this new program, Mobility CarSharingexpects to attract 20,000 to 30,000 newcustomers, a growth of 100% in the company’scar sharing market (i.e. a new customer base ofat least 40,000 individuals).

A four-year project, known as ‘MAX-Car’ inLucerne, also evaluates intermodaltransportation. Soon it will begin testing newcar concepts, such as electric and low emissionvehicles, that can be used as shared-use cars.These vehicles will be deployed from the maintrain station located in Lucerne. It is hoped thatthe short walking distance from trains andbuses to the shared-use vehicles will motivatebusinesses and households to shift tomultimodal transportation.

Other collaborations might includepartnerships with the car industry. In the future,car manufacturers and dealerships also enlargetheir field of car sales by providing mobilityservices. For example, ‘SMART’, the small two-seater produced by a joint venture betweenDaimler-Chrysler and Swatch, already providesmobility services to select suburban areas inEurope.

Concl us i onUntil the past decade, almost all efforts atorganising car sharing organisations resulted infailure. For a variety of reasons, a new era beganin the late 1980s in Europe. Several car sharingorganisations are now firmly established and onsteep growth trajectories. Experience fromEurope has shown that car sharing programs aremost successful where environmentalconsciousness is high; driving disincentives

[ 43 ]


World Transport Policy &...

Documents

Transcript of World Transport Policy &...