Transport Policy

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Transport models are often singled out as a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0967070X16306606" target="_blank">barrier</a> to providing more sustainable and equitable transport services. However, abandoning transport models would <a href="https://transportfutures.co/in-defence-of-predict-and-provide-1b990a6566fa" target="_blank">most likely weaken planning</a>, not enhance it. But getting the best out of such modelling requires transparency to overcome the increasing problem of its misuse to justify predetermined political decisions.
On the 50th anniversary of the Melbourne Transportation Plan, we review the role of transport modelling as a planning tool. What are models now telling us about the future of Australian cities?
From rational planning …
The 1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan was based on the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0739456X9001000105" target="_blank">Chicago Area Transportation Plan</a>, an approach that other Australian cities then adopted. A feature was the extensive collection of travel data, often for the first time. Newly available computer models were then used to predict travel demand, which the plan sought to accommodate.
This is often referred to as the “rational” or “predict and provide” approach to transport planning.
By today’s standards, the goals of the ’69 plan sound like a utopian dream of free-flowing freeways and frequent, comfortable public transport services. It assumed a population living in detached housing on quarter-acre blocks.
Melbourne’s “solution”, and that of many other cities, was to build an extensive freeway network. The car took over from the rail system as the primary mode of travel.
Today’s reality shows this has been no solution to the seemingly intractable problems of congestion and overcrowding, coupled with inequitable access to services, jobs and other opportunities.
… to political mandates
In response, it seems Australian transport agencies have abandoned the preparation of comprehensive transport plans. Gone are the days of foreshadowing projects decades into the future, with land for these road and rail projects being reserved in the planning scheme.
We <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-hardly-ever-trust-big-transport-announcements-heres-how-politicians-get-it-right-101246" target="_blank">operate in an era where political mandates</a> have replaced comprehensive planning. Transport models are no longer used to plan for the future. Instead, they are used to justify the most recent announcement.
The nexus between transport models and the justification of controversial projects results in much critical commentary. The models become guilty by association.
It is true model outputs are far from infallible. One problem is that models depend on key input assumptions such as future population. The ’69 plan, for example, assumed Melbourne would reach a population of 3.7 million by 1985, but this didn’t occur until 20 years later.
The early models also <a href="https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/managing-traffic-congestion?section=" target="_blank">ignored the problem of induced demand</a> – the tendency of new transport infrastructure itself to generate additional demand.
Aside from the inherent challenge of predicting the future, models suffer from the problem of “strategic misrepresentation” – more simply, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/833099" target="_blank">lying</a>. This can occur when models are called upon to justify a predetermined political decision.
The best safeguard against such behaviour is transparency. This is achieved by making the detailed modelling results available for peer review. Under these conditions, models can provide useful planning intelligence.
More of the same is a poor plan
A recent Infrastructure Australia <a href="https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/publications/urban-transport-crowding-and-congestion" target="_blank">report</a> predicts worsening road congestion and public transport crowding over the coming decades in all Australian capitals. These predictions are the result of the lack of endorsed strategies to deal with population growth coupled with Australia’s dependence on the private motor vehicle. Indeed, the report highlights many examples where major new road projects will worsen congestion by encouraging more car use.
A lesson from the past 50 years is that Australia’s major capitals occupy large areas by world standards and are ill suited to a transport strategy based on <a href="https://chartingtransport.com/2011/08/20/whats-happening-with-car-occupancy/" target="_blank">low-occupancy vehicles</a>. It isn’t surprising “Europeanesque” inner suburbs based around walking, cycling and public transport are increasingly <a href="https://www.pwc.com.au/press-room/2018/citypulse-melbourne" target="_blank">valued</a> as preferred places to live.
Can modelling be blamed for our collective failure to devise a realistic plan to accommodate our cities’ growing populations? At what point does the reality of everlasting congestion trump predictions of incremental travel time savings?
US President Dwight Eisenhower once <a href="https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-defense-executive-reserve-conference" target="_blank">said</a>: “Plans are worthless, but planning is everything.” Intuitively we know the pressure of population growth and the climate emergency demand a considered response. The recent work of Infrastructure Australia provides a prediction of the scale of this challenge.
We urgently need a sensible discussion about developing a realistic plan to deal with this challenge. Doing more of the same, as we have done over the past 50 years, doesn’t sound like a solution to us.
A public event to mark the 50th anniversary of the Melbourne Transportation Plan will be held on December 12 2019, hosted by RMIT University and supported by Swinburne University, Monash University and the University of Melbourne – <a href="https://cur.org.au/events/looking-back-and-going-forward-the-melbourne-transport-plan-50-years-on/">details here</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/127720/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Eric Keys, PhD Researcher, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University.
Chris De Gruyter, Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellow, RMIT University.
Graham Currie, Professor of Public Transport, Director Public Transport Research Group, Director Monash Infrastructure, Adjunct Professor, Monash Art Design and Architecture, Monash University.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-problem-with-transport-models-is-political-abuse-not-their-use-in-planning-127720">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

The problem with transport models is political abuse, not their use in planning

<html><body>
The new transport projects governments are constantly announcing are expensive. In the recent New South Wales and Victorian elections, the returned state governments’ transport infrastructure promises added up to A$165 billion.
What’s mostly missing from the promised transport solutions is smart technology that provides higher benefits at a fraction of the cost – when retrofitting existing roads in particular. The benefit-to-cost ratio can be more than a dozen times greater than for a new road.
Clearly, infrastructure spending helps to drive the economy. These projects also deliver benefits to the community, including increased road safety, shorter travel times and fewer delays.
The economic merit of these projects is usually captured using a benefit-to-cost ratio (BCR). For example, the BCR of the <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/big-projects-bigger-bills-massive-construction-boom-comes-at-a-cost-20190610-p51w5d" target="_blank">A$15.8 billion</a> <a href="https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/projects/north-east-link" target="_blank">North East Link</a> road project in Melbourne is estimated to be <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/north-east-link-at-risk-of-becoming-financial-disaster-economist-20190726-p52b6a" target="_blank">1.25</a> – for every A$1 invested, A$1.25 is returned in benefits to the economy and community. For the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel, a best-case <a href="https://metrotunnel.vic.gov.au/about-the-project/faq" target="_blank">BCR of 3.3</a> has been reported.
But are we getting good value for money? Could cheaper alternatives deliver more benefits?
<h2>Technology offers smarter, cheaper solutions</h2>
Technology offers transport solutions that provide higher benefits at a fraction of the cost of building new infrastructure. Collectively known as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOMamTXK5T8" target="_blank">intelligent transport systems</a>, these are widely recognised today as better answers for smart transport outcomes.
When <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/infrastructure-productivity" target="_blank">comparing</a> different “congestion-busting” options, “building more roads” provides, on average, a BCR of 3.0. This is dwarfed by the much higher BCR values of tech solutions.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300779/original/file-20191107-10952-17um5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300779/original/file-20191107-10952-17um5x0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
<a class="source" href="https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Low_Carbon_Mobility_for_Future_Cities?id=g8NIDgAAQBAJ&amp;source=kp_book_description&amp;redir_esc=y" target="_blank">Source: Low Carbon Mobility for Future Cities: Principles and Applications (Dia, H. ed, 2017), adapted from Infrastructure Productivity: how to save $1 trillion a year (McKinsey, 2013)</a>, Author provided
<a href="https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc-1/asct.cfm" target="_blank">Adaptive traffic signal control</a> allows <a href="https://youtu.be/lZtOgqbNMVE" target="_blank">traffic signals</a> to change based on actual traffic demand. This yields, on average, a BCR of 40.
Traffic signals along a route can be coordinated to create “<a href="https://youtu.be/PQ-HBC6QGHo?t=12" target="_blank">green waves</a>” for platoons of vehicles to travel without stopping. These solutions are effective for congested cities that experience rapid traffic growth and changing traffic patterns.
<a href="https://www.itsinternational.com/sections/nafta/features/integrated-corridor-management-to-enhance-travel-efficiency/" target="_blank">Corridor management systems</a> use technology to control networks of motorways and urban roads. The average BCR is 24.
On <a href="https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/traffic-management/managed-motorways" target="_blank">managed motorways</a>, <a href="https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/traffic-management/managed-motorways/coordinated-ramp-signals" target="_blank">ramp signals</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aUyMJwZ8_s" target="_blank">variable speed limit signs</a> and <a href="https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/traffic-management/managed-motorways/traveller-information-for-motorists" target="_blank">traveller information systems</a> are <a href="https://youtu.be/iFL2CZfJZD8" target="_blank">proven tools</a> to respond in real time to changing traffic conditions. In <a href="https://www.transmax.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Case-Study_Smart-Motorways-.pdf" target="_blank">one case</a>, a managed motorway reduced travel times by 42% and accidents by 30%.
<a href="https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/traffic-and-road-use/traffic-management/managed-motorways/lane-and-speed-management-for-incidents" target="_blank">Traffic incident management</a>, which has a BCR of 21, includes technologies that aid quick detection and removal of crashes. They also detect other incidents such as broken-down vehicles or spilled loads that reduce road capacity. The systems rely on smart <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968090X97000168" target="_blank">software</a> that analyses sensor data in real time.
<a href="http://ntimc.transportation.org/Pages/NTIMCPublicationsandProducts.aspx" target="_blank">Benefits</a> include a 40% reduction in time to detect incidents. The technology also <a href="http://ntimc.transportation.org/Documents/Benefits11-07-06.pdf" target="_blank">reduces incident duration by 23%</a> and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trid.trb.org/view/481658" target="_blank">road crashes by 35%</a>.
<h2>Combining tech solutions magnifies benefits</h2>
When solutions are combined, benefits are amplified. The <a href="https://sunguide.info/annual-reports/district-six-its-annual-report/" target="_blank">Florida Department of Transportation</a> implements a transport technology program on its networks. The solutions include incident management, ramp signalling, traveller information and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdVDEU5UVb4&amp;feature=youtu.be&amp;t=50" target="_blank">express lanes</a>. Reduced incident duration and traffic delays are among the key benefits.
In 2018, the benefits of this program totalled almost <a href="https://sunguide.info/reports/annual-reports/District-Six-ITS-Annual-Report/2018-District-Six-ITS-Annual-Report.pdf" target="_blank">US$3.1 billion</a> (A$4.5 billion). The costs were <a href="https://sunguide.info/reports/annual-reports/District-Six-ITS-Annual-Report/2018-District-Six-ITS-Annual-Report.pdf" target="_blank">US$70.3 million</a> (A$102 million). That’s a BCR of 43.7.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300555/original/file-20191107-12506-jk28cf.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300555/original/file-20191107-12506-jk28cf.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Benefit-cost ratios of transport technology solutions implemented over a decade by Florida Department of Transportation. Author provided
In the UK, the <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/%7E/media/McKinsey/Industries/Capital%20Projects%20and%20Infrastructure/Our%20Insights/Infrastructure%20productivity/MGI%20Infrastructure_Full%20report_Jan%202013.ashx" target="_blank">cost</a> of implementing technology solutions on the <a href="https://www.roads.org.uk/motorway/m42" target="_blank">M42 motorway</a> was US$150 million (A$218 million) and took two years to complete. Widening the road to produce the same outcome would have taken 10 years and cost US$800 million (A$1.16 billion).
<h2>A shift in priorities is needed</h2>
Considerable investment in transport infrastructure is still required. It should be guided by strong business cases and aligned with community values and expectations.
However, technology is getting to the point where it’s making a serious difference in tackling the mega challenges facing our cities. Its role must be prioritised.
The benefits are compelling. Intelligent technology systems improve the use of existing assets and increase their operational life. They enhance traveller experience and reduce reliance on building new roads. And they deliver superior value for money.
But widespread deployment of these technologies is still limited. To spur change and unlock value, we must move beyond a project-by-project approach.
<h2>Learn from the best</h2>
Governments can be guided by <a href="https://itif.org/publications/2010/01/09/explaining-international-it-application-leadership-intelligent" target="_blank">leading nations</a> in this field such as South Korea, Japan and Singapore. Their citizens experience the benefits every day. Smart transport solutions improve their quality of life through easier travel, less congestion and more reliable services.
The recurring policy themes in these countries include a national vision of smart infrastructure and commitment to funding. They prioritise investment in research and trials, standards development and partnerships with industry. These are key factors in the success of their tech-driven transport solutions.
These are the policies and investments Australia should prioritise. They will modernise our transport systems in innovative ways that lift our economy and living standards.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125718/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hussein-dia-110689" target="_blank">Hussein Dia</a>, Professor of Future Urban Mobility, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767" target="_blank">Swinburne University of Technology</a>
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/smart-tech-systems-cut-congestion-for-a-fraction-of-what-new-roads-cost-125718" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Transport Policy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Transport Policy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News