Cities and innovative urban transport policies
Giuliano Mingardo
Department of Regional, Port and Transport Economics, Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam; European Institute for Comparative Urban Research (EURICUR), Rotterdam, The Netherlands
PP: 269 - 281
Abstract
Successful modern cities must combine high levels of accessibility and quality of life. These aims may conflict with each other: increasing accessibility could be detrimental to the urban environment while the improvement of urban air quality might mean restricting the accessibility of the city.
The challenge for cities in the 21st Century is to maintain economic growth, stay accessible and improve quality of life at the same time. The aim of this paper is to increase understanding of how cities should address their transport policies. Examples from London (UK) and Gothenburg (Sweden) are used to emphasize the character of innovative urban transport policies.
Keywords
innovative policies, urban transport, decoupling, mobility management, health, marketing
Article Text
The second half of the 20th Century was characterized by the strong relationship established between economic growth and growth in transport activities. It was generally accepted by analysts that the first was not achievable without the second. Over time, however, the negative externalities caused by transport, mainly emissions and pollution, have posed a serious constraint on further economic development.
Transport is responsible for 26% of CO2 emission at global level and is one of the few sectors where emissions are still growing (Chapman 2007). In the European Union, (EU-15) one fifth (21%) of total greenhouse gas emissions are now caused by transport, especially road transport. The period 1990-2004 saw greenhouse gas emissions decrease in many sectors, notably in energy supply, industry and agriculture, but not in transport. In contrast, over the same period, emissions from transport increased by more than a quarter (26%). With 93% of the transport sector share, road transport is by far the biggest emission source within that sector. Emissions from passenger road transport increased 27% between 1990 and 2004; those of freight road transport increased of 51% in the period 1990-2003 (Europe Environment Agency 2007).
In particular, road vehicle transport is a major cause of urban smog (Kahn 2008). Transport-related emissions of this kind are the single most important factor in determining air quality in many urban regions, depending on the altitude and thus the dispersion pattern of emissions (DCMR Milieudienst Rijnmond 2007). In most major urban areas, air pollution is now badly affecting quality of life and the improvement of air quality has become a priority for most cities in developed countries. Worldwide, initiatives such as the C40 cities included in the Clinton Climate Initiative (www.c40cities.org) and the Climate Alliance (www.climatealliance.org) confirm the importance of this issue for city managers. Failure to improve air quality can have dramatic consequences for cities in terms of image and economic development. Innovation in transport is therefore critical.
Successful cities in the knowledge economy are places which provide economic growth, easy access and a good and healthy environment (van den Berg et al 2005). These aspects of city life often conflict with each other in such a way that increasing a city's accessibility, for instance, might be detrimental to the environment and, vice versa, the improvement of urban air quality might restrict the accessibility of the city.
One of the central challenges for 21st Century city managers is therefore to find ways to maintain economic growth and the associated high levels of wellbeing of citizens while reducing the negative effects of transport on many aspects of city life. Development of policies to decouple transport intensity from economic growth is now a spearhead of most transport policies, both at European level and at the level of individual countries.
This paper uses two innovative transport policies developed by two European cities - London in the UK and Gothenburg in Sweden - to illustrate ways to move out of the economic growth-easy access and environmental results dilemma.
Section 2 below presents a number of fundamental developments that have changed the way cities should address their transport policies. Section 3 presents the innovative transport policies selected and used by London and Gothenburg. Section 4 presents the conclusions. ...continues...
References
Banister D and Stead D (2002) Reducing Transport Intensity, European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 2(3-4): 161-178.
Beaverstock J-V, Smith R-G and Taylor P (1999) A roster of world cities, Cities 16(6): 445-458.
Bertolini L, le Clercq F and Straatemeier T (2008) Urban transportation planning in transition, Transport Policy 15(2): 69-72.
Black J, Mason C and Stanley K (1999) Travel Demand Management: Policy context and an application by the University of New South Wales (UNSW) as a Large Trip Generator, Transport Engineering in Australia 5(2): 1-11.
Blauwens G, De Baere P and Van de Voorde E (2006) Transport Economics 2nd edn, Antwerp: De Boeck
Branca F, Nikogosian H and Lobstein T (2007) The challenge of obesity in the WHO European Region and the strategies for response, Copenhagen: World Health Organization.
Brög W (1998) Individualized Marketing: Implications for Transportation Demand Management, Transportation Research Record, Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1618(1998): 116-121.
Business Region Göteborg (BRG) (2007) Facts & Figures 2007 in the Göteborg Region, Business Region Göteborg AB, Göteborg, November 2007.
Chapman L (2007) Transport and climate change: A review, Journal of Transport Geography 15: 354-367.
Coleman C and Curtis C (1997) Reducing Car-based Journey to Work: What potential is there and whose responsibility is it? Local Environment 2(1): 19-37.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC) (2001) European Transport Policy for 2020: Time to Decide [COM(2001)370], Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC) (2006) Keep Europe Moving - Mid-term review of the European Commission's 2001 transport White paper, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Commission of the European Communities (CEC) (2007) Green Paper - Towards a new culture for urban mobility [COM(2007)551], Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Crombie H (2008) ‘Transport and Health', European Conference on Mobility Management (ECOMM) 2008, London.
DCMR Milieudienst Rijnmond (2007) Lucht in cijfers 2006: De luchtkwaliteit in Rijnmond, Schiedam.
European Environment Agency (EEA) (2007) Transport and Environment: On the way to a new common transport policy, EEA Report No 1/2007, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
European Spatial Planning Observation Network (ESPON) (2004) Transport services and networks: Territorial trends and basic supply of infrastructure for territorial cohesion, Luxembourg: ESPON Coordination Unit.
Fujii S and Taniguchi A (2006) Determinants of the effectiveness of travel feedback programs: A review of communicative mobility management measures for changing travel behavior in Japan, Transport Policy 13(5): 339-348.
Giljum S, Hak T, Hinterberg F and Kovanda J (2005) Environmental governance in the European Union: Strategies and instruments for absolute decoupling, International Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1-2): 31-46.
Goodwin P-B (1998) Unintended effects of transport policy, in Banister D (ed) Transport policy and the environment. London: Spon, pp.114-130.
Goodwin P-B (2003) Unintended effects of policies, in Hensher D and Button K (eds) Handbook of Transport and the Environment, Oxford: Elsevier, pp.603-614.
Greater London Authority (2008) InformationLondon, London, February 2008.
Kahn M-E (2008) Air Pollution in Cities, in Arnott R and McMillen D (eds) A Companion to Urban Economics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp.502-514.
Mackie P (2005) The London congestion charge: A tentative economic appraisal. A comment on the paper by Prud'homme and Bocajero, Transport Policy 12(3): 288-290.
Mingardo G and van Haaren J (2007) Understanding the relation among transport, environment and economy: A survey of European cities, in Transport, Mobility and Regional Development, in Conference Proceedings of the Regional Studies Association Winter Conference November 2007, Seaford UK.
Mingardo G (2008a) Effecten van P&R in Rotterdam, Rotterdam: EURICUR.
Mingardo G (2008b) Gebruiksonderzoek regionale P&R locaties in de regio Haaglanden (forthcoming), Rotterdam: EURICUR
Mingardo G, van den Berg L and van Haaren J (forthcoming 2008) Transport, Environment and Economy at urban level: The need for decoupling - A comparative study of four European cities: Rotterdam, London, Gothenburg and Hamburg, Rotterdam: EURICUR.
Parkhurst G (2000) Influence of bus-based Park and Ride facilities on users' car traffic, Transport Policy 7(2): 159-172.
Potter S (2008) ‘A cross-sectoral approach to mobility management and climate change', European Conference on Mobility Management (ECOMM) 2008, London.
Pred'homme R and Bocarejo J-P (2005) The London congestion charge: A tentative economic appraisal, Transport Policy 12(3): 279-287.
Quddus M-A, Bell M-G-H, Schmöcker J and Fonzone A (2007) The impact of the congestion charge on the retail business in London: An econometric analysis, Transport Policy 14(5): 433-444.
Quinet E and Vickerman R (2004) Principle of Transport Economics 2nd edn, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
Raux C (2005) Comments on ‘The London congestion charge: A tentative economic appraisal', Transport Policy 12(4): 368-371.
Rietveld P (2007) 'Transport en duurzaamheid; ontkoppeling, rebound effecten, adaptatie', Transumo Conference 2007, Utrecht, 11 April 2007.
Sassen S (2001) The Global City, New York, London, Tokyo: Princeton University Press.
Stead D (2008) Institutional aspects of integrating transport, environment and health policies, Transport Policy 15(3): 139-148.
Tapio P (2005) Towards a theory of decoupling: Degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001, Transport Policy 12(2): 137-151.
Transport for London (TfL) (2006a) Transport 2025 - Transport vision for a growing world city, TfL Group Transport Planning and Policy, London, November 2006.
Transport for London (TfL) (2006b) Workplace cycle parking guide, TfL Group Publishing, London, October 2006.
Transport for London (TfL) (2008a) A new way to work - Corporate, TfL Group Publishing, London, March 2008.
Transport for London (TfL) (2008b) Environment Report 2007, TfL Group Publishing, London, March 2008.
van den Berg L, Pol P-M-J, van Winden W and Woets P (2005) European Cities in the Knowledge Economy. Aldershot: Ashgate
Van Goeverden C, Rietveld P, Koelemeijer J and Peeters P (2006) Subsidies in Public Transport, European Transport 32: 5-25.
Wright C and Egan J (2000) De-marketing the car, Transport Policy 7(2): 287-294.
eContent Home
