Urban Transport

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Videos showing autonomous or self-driving vehicles weaving in and out of crossroads at speed without colliding suggest this technology will solve traffic problems. You almost never see pedestrians or cyclists in these videos. The reality is that they don’t fit.
The vision of autonomous traffic is either of a large convoy of vehicles just a metre apart moving along road corridors at 100km/h, or of vehicles in an urban setting where their sensors are picking up every pedestrian movement and slowing or stopping. In the first case, the vehicles form an impenetrable barrier to pedestrians or cyclists (who, like on a freeway, will probably be banned). In the second case, pedestrians and cyclists are able to ruin traffic flow and are <a href="https://theconversation.com/nothing-to-fear-how-humans-and-other-intelligent-animals-might-ruin-the-autonomous-vehicle-utopia-114504" target="_blank">likely to just take over streets</a>.
It occurs to me this is a really good thing for our cities. I worried that the vision some had (mostly car makers, I suspect) was of a city completely taken over by self-driving vehicles.
All public transport would be gone as thousands of these vehicles scattered along every street looking for on-demand passengers. Historic centres and tram corridors would be ruined and we would no longer be able to appreciate their walkable character.
However, we may instead be able to take the best features of autonomous mobility technology to create cities that are more productive, liveable, inclusive and sustainable.
How would we do this?
The first thing is to realise that for 20-30 years cities around the world have been <a href="https://islandpress.org/books/end-automobile-dependence" target="_blank">getting rid of cars in their centres</a> and subcentres, drawing on the ideas of urban designers like <a href="https://islandpress.org/books/cities-people" target="_blank">Jan Gehl</a>. This trend includes Australian cities. These centres are where the knowledge economy workers who drive innovation want to live and work.
Cities are not going to easily give up their cherished walkability to thousands of self-driving vehicles. Cities mostly are planning more walkable centres with even more public transport and fewer cars; they are unlikely to yield to autonomous vehicle ideology.
It’s more likely cities will ban self-driving vehicles from these centres, with just one small entry and exit point to enable vehicle access. Cities will not want to kill off the economic and social golden goose of walkable centres, let alone abandon climate change plans to reduce car use.
The second thing is that these active walkable centres are being heavily supported by quality public transport. Fortunately, autonomous technology is also being applied to transit services such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-trackless-trams-are-ready-to-replace-light-rail-103690" target="_blank">trackless tram</a>. These are guided but not driverless, like <a href="https://urbantransportnews.com/worlds-fastest-high-speed-driverless-bullet-train-starts-service-in-china/" target="_blank">high-speed rail</a> and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-31/driverless-trains-embraced-around-the-globe-what-could-go-wrong/11155858" target="_blank">metros</a>, as they need drivers at times.
Not only could autonomous technology improve transit services, it could also take over some major road corridors that are failing at peak times. This could create an alternative rapid transit route <a href="https://theconversation.com/going-down-the-same-old-road-driverless-cars-arent-a-fix-for-our-transport-woes-50912" target="_blank">carrying the equivalent of six to eight lanes of traffic</a>.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.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/303670/original/file-20191126-112512-11owrk3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Data source: author provided
The ‘movement and place’ approach
Around the world and in Australia, cities are looking to make roads into combined “<a href="https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/guidance/movement-and-place" target="_blank">movement and place</a>” sites – some places will remain highly walkable and some will be just for movement but special corridors will be for both so they <a href="https://transport.vic.gov.au/our-transport-future/movement-and-place-in-victoria" target="_blank">keep people and goods moving and are places for people to live, work and enjoy</a>. This approach gives priority to fast public transport using light rail or trackless trams combined with higher-density development around their stations.
The big issue on such corridors is how to get rid of cars so mass transit services have a fast, free lane to travel along as well as walkable station precincts to enter. Such a system would be much more efficient in traffic terms, but car users don’t easily give up their right to space.
However, the inherent problem with self-driving vehicles is that they will make a corridor impenetrable and travel through a dense precinct ridiculously slow and unpredictable. The politics will therefore shift towards a fast transit corridor along main roads together with walkable, car-free station precincts.
Self-driving cars can help make the fast corridor work as they are ideal for bringing on-demand passengers to the precincts where people can access local services and transfer to the fast transit line. This integrated service enables the best of both mobility solutions: fast and effective access, without destroying either the corridor or centres, and an on-demand local service as shown below.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.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/299399/original/file-20191030-154675-qyah35.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Author provided
Each centre will have micro-mobility options feeding into the transit system and the station precinct services. These options will provide “first mile-last mile” connectivity on demand. They include walking, electric bikes, scooters, skateboards and autonomous shuttles or cars that travel to and from the centre along a specific isolated route.
Certain main roads would have to be declared as clearways for autonomous electric transit, with a set of stations serving high-density centres for urban regeneration. Autonomous vehicles could reign supreme out in the suburbs that were built around the car, but would not interfere with existing or new transit corridors as well as the historic and new centres where pedestrians would reign supreme. Such is the vision of the City of Liverpool for a <a href="https://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/development/major-projects/fifteenth-avenue-smart-transit-fast-corridor" target="_blank">trackless tram route to Western Sydney Airport</a>.
This vision is not anti-autonomous vehicles. It is enabling innovations to serve us rather than being our master. We cannot simply give up our cities to cars just when we are learning to overcome such dependence.
To make the most of autonomous vehicles’ advantages and avoid the disadvantages, we must choose to shape our cities. Autonomous transit services with feed-in autonomous cars and micro-mobility can achieve the walkability and civility we need for a good city in the future.
Peter Newman, Professor of Sustainability, Curtin University.
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/driverless-vehicles-and-pedestrians-dont-mix-so-how-do-we-re-arrange-our-cities-126111" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Driverless vehicles and pedestrians don’t mix. So how do we re-arrange our cities?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
We all know the feeling. You’re on your way to an important appointment when disaster strikes.
A glitch in the transport matrix leaves you <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-11/sydney-train-delays-after-signal-failure/11592818?pfmredir=sm&amp;sf221276741=1" target="_blank">waiting for a train that never arrives</a>, or in <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/sydney-melbourne-coming-to-a-standstill-as-infrastructure-struggles-20190812-p52g9n" target="_blank">bumper-to-bumper traffic</a> with little chance of making it to your destination on time. If you are like me, you may wonder: why are our transport systems so fragile, and how could we make them more resilient?
The answer may lie in the infrastructure we provide for the <a href="https://www.cbinsights.com/research/report/micromobility-revolution/" target="_blank">emerging trend of micro-mobility</a> – devices that are small, light and usually electric-powered. Greater investment in a micro-mobility network could improve the reliability of our current transport system, which offers two main networks in road and rail for journeys that are not walkable. This micro-mobility network can be developed by greatly improving the fragmented bicycle networks in our cities.
To understand how this could improve our overall transport system, we must first look at how transport projects are funded and how diversification and redundancy can make up for shortcomings in this process.
<h2>Selecting the best transport projects</h2>
When deciding which projects to build, transport agencies rank projects using a benefit-cost ratio (BCR). This number is the predicted benefits of a project divided by the predicted costs.
Unfortunately, benefit-cost ratios are often <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-restore-the-publics-faith-in-transport-planning-73684" target="_blank">misused to suit political motives</a>. They are inherently flawed and uncertain for at least three reasons:
<ol>
<li>modelling often <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-fewer-drivers-are-likely-to-use-westconnex-than-predicted-38286" target="_blank">miscalculates future traffic volumes</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/modelling-for-major-road-projects-is-at-odds-with-driver-behaviour-63603" target="_blank">inaccurate assumptions are used</a> to estimate the dollar value of costs and benefits</li>
<li>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-closer-look-at-business-cases-raises-questions-about-priority-national-infrastructure-projects-94489" target="_blank">many uncertain costs and benefits are simply ignored</a>.</li>
</ol>
Reducing investment risk through diversification
In the financial sector, uncertainty is simply a risk to be managed. This can be done with diversification, which is achieved by bundling different assets into a portfolio. For example, bundling shares from different industries reduces the risk that these “diverse” investments will all suffer losses at the same time.
Similarly, investing in a variety of transport modes is a form of diversification. This makes our transport systems more resilient to long-term changes in the economy, the climate, technology, energy and so on. For example, a transport system that provides alternatives to car travel is resilient to increases in the price of fuel or the cost of emissions.
Transport diversification reduces investment risk, so we are likely to get a more stable return on our transport investment. But diversification alone does not prevent a traffic accident blocking a motorway, or a power outage shutting down a railway line.
To tackle those problems, we should consider approaches the technology sector has been using to manage component failures for decades. It can provide <a href="https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2019/01/amazon-ecr-announces-99-9--service-level-agreement/" target="_blank">services with 99.9% availability</a>. That would be quite an achievement for the transport network!
Managing component failure using redundancy
The technology sector uses redundancy to ensure service is maintained even when one part of the system fails. IT managers keep local and cloud backups so data can be retrieved even if the office burns to the ground. Aircraft designers install multiple flight control systems so the failure of a single system does not cause a crash.
In the transport sector, redundancy is achieved when several modes can be used to make the same journey. While the technology sector can offer redundancy through duplicate systems, providing a duplicate train line “just in case” the first one fails is simply too costly. Instead, we rely on the train network to move people when a road crash halts traffic and we rely on the road network to move people when a train line is closed.
Unfortunately, Australian transport networks do not offer enough capacity or alternatives when one mode is crippled. The predictable result is a fragile transport system with unplanned but not entirely unexpected faults causing frequent delays.
Tapping into micro-mobility solutions
A new wave of mobility solutions is on the horizon. Many are described as “micro-mobility”: electric scooters, electric bicycles and automated delivery pods fit this description, as do conventional bicycles.
These devices are perfect for short trips in crowded cities. They are used for individual mobility and micro-freight (such as small packages and takeaway food).
These devices travel faster than pedestrians, so can be <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-scooters-on-collision-course-with-pedestrians-and-lawmakers-99654" target="_blank">unwanted on footpaths</a>. However, they are slower than motor vehicles, so can be unwanted on roadways. And as people using micro-mobility devices are <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-the-rise-in-cycling-injuries-and-deaths-in-australia-116660" target="_blank">not protected from collisions</a>, they are often reluctant to mix with motor vehicle traffic.
The logical place for micro-mobility devices is on a network that is designed for unprotected humans to travel at around 10-30km/h. In other words, the bicycle network.
The benefits of a bicycle (or “micro-mobility”) network
The <a href="https://theconversation.com/cutting-cycling-funding-is-economic-non-sense-7547" target="_blank">evidence for investment in bicycle infrastructure is strong</a>. It has the benefits of tackling big challenges including obesity, emissions and traffic congestion.
This article highlights three additional benefits that are not included in traditional benefit-cost ratio analysis:
<ol>
<li>providing a bicycle network increases transport diversification and therefore minimises investment risk</li>
<li>a bicycle network provides redundancy to keep the transport system functioning when other networks fail</li>
<li>bicycle networks support the emerging micro-mobility market.</li>
</ol>
However, investment in bicycle networks in Australia has been miniscule for decades. For example, in 2015-16, <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2018/files/infrastructure-statistics-yearbook-2018-booklet.pdf" target="_blank">A$25.1 billion was invested in roads</a> and <a href="https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2018/yearbook_2018.aspx" target="_blank">A$8.7 billion in rail</a>. But only <a href="http://www.bicyclecouncil.com.au/publication/national-cycling-strategy-implementation-report-2016" target="_blank">A$121.8 million was spent on the bicycle network</a> – just 0.36% of transport infrastructure spending, or A$5.27 per capita.
The bicycle networks in Australian cities are therefore fragmented and incomplete, as seen below in the map of Sydney.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/296141/original/file-20191009-3910-qqlfms.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/296141/original/file-20191009-3910-qqlfms.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Sydney bicycle network. <a href="https://opendata.transport.nsw.gov.au/dataset/cycleway-data" target="_blank">Author using Transport for NSW data</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY</a>
Without a functioning bicycle network, the overall transport system is susceptible to investment risk and network failure. We will also be left behind as micro-mobility options proliferate and our transport system becomes less and less fit for purpose.
So let’s build a comprehensive bicycle network fit for scooters, delivery pods, bicycles and more, and let’s do it quick smart.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/124895/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Tony Arnold, PhD Candidate, University of Sydney.
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/to-bolster-our-fragile-road-and-rail-system-we-need-to-add-a-micro-mobility-network-124895" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

To bolster our fragile road and rail system we need to add a ‘micro-mobility’ network

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
You’re smiling as your e-scooter whispers along the riverside path. Without the helmet, the wind can blow through your hair – and it looks good! You hear a shout, “Pull over!”, and turn to see police heading towards you with your helmet in hand.
Police conducted a <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-30/electric-scooters-riders-fined-safety-breaches-brisbane-qld/10956110" target="_blank">blitz on safety breaches</a> by eletric scooter riders in Brisbane over the weekend. And employees of operator Lime tell us safety issues have been persistent in <a href="https://theconversation.com/limes-not-lemons-lessons-from-australias-first-e-scooter-sharing-trial-108924" target="_blank">Australia’s first trial of a shared e-scooter scheme</a>.
How do we educate users about helmets and safe riding behaviour? And how can helmets be distributed cost-effectively?
As with other disruptive tech companies with mass appeal, the safety and regulatory issues raised by e-scooters – including <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-scooters-on-collision-course-with-pedestrians-and-lawmakers-99654" target="_blank">rider and pedestrian safety</a> and being <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-e-scooters-solve-the-last-mile-problem-theyll-need-to-avoid-the-fate-of-dockless-bikes-102633" target="_blank">left in inappropriate places</a> – are attracting attention. A closely related issue is helmets and their role in rider safety.
Scooter operators have come under <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/better-helmet-compliance-needed-for-lime-scooters-lord-mayor-says-20190212-p50xcs" target="_blank">pressure to encourage riders to wear helmets</a>. The RACQ has <a href="https://live.racq.com.au/2019/03/majority-of-scooter-riders-going-too-fast/" target="_blank">called on Lime</a> “to ensure every scooter put out has a helmet attached”.
A day in the life of a helmet
Ultimately, responsibility for public safety and compliance with civic cleanliness rests with the individual mobility provider. Lime accepts this and has announced it will <a href="https://www.li.me/respect-the-ride" target="_blank">distribute 250,000 helmets</a> worldwide.
Each day fully charged scooters, with helmets, are placed on footpaths. At the end of each day, the tally of scooters and helmets does not add up. This is known in the industry as helmet churn – the constant loss and replacement of helmets. Unlike the scooters themselves, which have smart tracking technology, helmets are kept cheap to minimise the cost of these losses.
Let’s try to unpack the issue of helmet churn.
It is agreed that not wearing a helmet plays a part in the problem. Some riders simply leave it behind. Aside from being unsafe, this separates the helmet from the scooter, so it becomes unavailable for the next scooter user.
New insights are emerging as we begin to study this phenomenon. Reasons for helmet churn are linked to a reluctance to share them – we believe some riders worry about hygiene – and it being a disposable product. It seems there may even be feelings of ownership, with some perceiving the helmet to become their property through paying for the ride.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264308/original/file-20190318-28483-1pxl1jp.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/264308/original/file-20190318-28483-1pxl1jp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Assumed reasons for helmet churn. Peter Townson/QUT Chair in Digital Economy
Limits of deterrence
Two main compliance mechanisms are in place to discourage riders from contributing to helmet churn: police and Lime.
In Queensland, the <a href="https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/wheeled-devices/personal-mobility-devices" target="_blank">fine for not wearing a helmet is A$130</a>. In <a href="https://www.rsc.wa.gov.au/Rules-Penalties/Browse/Cyclists" target="_blank">other</a> <a href="https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-rules/penalties/fines" target="_blank">states</a> and <a href="https://police.act.gov.au/road-safety/traffic-fines" target="_blank">territories</a> fines range from as little as <a href="https://nt.gov.au/driving/driving-offences-and-penalties/cycling-penalties" target="_blank">A$25</a> to as much as <a href="https://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/go-together/faqs" target="_blank">A$337</a>.
<a href="https://eprints.qut.edu.au/110376/" target="_blank">Research into deviant consumer behaviour</a> tells us this tactic of appealing to fear of punishment extends only to riders wearing helmets. It does not have an effect on the broader issues of vandalism and theft.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267495/original/file-20190404-131434-s370no.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/267495/original/file-20190404-131434-s370no.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
The penalty for not wearing a helmet in each state. Peter Townson/QUT Chair in Digital Economy
The <a href="https://eprints.qut.edu.au/110376/" target="_blank">research</a> also suggests the “fear of punishment” approach makes two critical assumptions:
<ol>
<li>that people agree the behaviour is wrong (“yes, this is dangerous”)</li>
<li>riders think there is a real risk of being caught (“catch me if you can”).</li>
</ol>
Given this is not always the case, a risk-based approach to deterrence is limited.
Lime also plays a part in curbing helmet noncompliance. Its current strategy, aside from providing the helmets, is the <a href="https://www.li.me/respect-the-ride" target="_blank">Respect the Ride</a> education program. It aims to foster a community and culture of safe mobility, underpinned by a personal pledge each rider is encouraged to make.
This approach is appropriate for trying to change the behaviour of not wearing a helmet. It does not target people who are taking advantage of publicly available helmets.
These measures still do not fully solve a pervasive problem.
You have a disruptive mobility company in the spotlight because of safety concerns. The company has a duty of care to supply helmets and ensure riders are safe. Riders are disregarding, disposing of, defacing and destroying helmets.
How do we solve this tough, intractable, social problem?
A shift in thinking – ecosystem view
If helmet churn exists for Lime scooters, then it exists for all other ride-share operators in that area. If a helmet isn’t available, riders will often borrow from other services such as share bikes.
Helmets are sometimes considered “free for grabs” across different mobility providers. Should the duty of care that requires helmets be provided rest on each mobility service operator, when the noncompliance of one undermines them all?
While these personal transport providers are in competition with one another, they have an opportunity to relinquish their individual burden of helmet churn by working together on the problem.
A shift in thinking – personalised view
If the one constant across various mobility services is the rider, we should also consider a “bring your own helmet” approach. This approach possibly started in technology companies (“bring your own device”, allowing employees and customers to use their own devices to interact with an organisation) and has spread to other areas. For instance, environmentally conscious coffee lovers bring their own cups, while still having the option of using a paper cup.
Could a similar option work for helmets? <a href="https://www.ecohelmet.com/" target="_blank">Disposable helmets – made of cardboard – are being tested</a> as a concept. And personalised helmets that look and feel like a beanie can be <a href="https://antiordinary.co/" target="_blank">pre-purchased from a start-up created by QUT students</a>.
Cyclists still carry their own helmets when they commute on their own bikes, so the acceptance of this BYO approach should be simple. The difference is users need only provide a helmet, without having to worry about finding safe parking and storage places for the day or overnight.
Adapting to disruption
The meaning of a helmet has shifted significantly from individual property to a shared utility, as has the meaning of many modes of transport, including bikes and scooters. There are two paths from here: ecosystem, with ubiquitous helmets available for everyone; and personalised, with riders bringing their own helmets.
Either of these is different from the world we know today. The bigger picture is a collaborative effort to achieve the goal of rider safety.
Peter Townson, Senior Designer, Chair in Digital Economy, Queensland University of Technology
Marek Kowalkiewicz, Professor and Chair in Digital Economy, Queensland University of Technology
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/helmet-churn-adds-to-challenges-of-e-scooter-disruption-113754" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: Lime is working on ways to overcome the problem of ‘helmet churn’ on its e-scooters. Marvin Fox Photography, Author provided
</body></html>

Helmet churn adds to challenges of e-scooter disruption

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
E-scooter mania is sweeping cities around the world. Fun, accessible and cheap to rent, shared electric scooters are one of the biggest technology stories this year.
Their main appeal is that they are so easy to ride. A <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/23/the-electric-scooter-wars-of-2018/" target="_blank">flood of startups</a> offer on-demand services. Simply download an app, scan the barcode, ride and drop at your destination.
While this is a simple idea, it has caused a few problems.
When they reach their destinations, riders leave them and walk away. The scooters, <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-e-scooters-solve-the-last-mile-problem-theyll-need-to-avoid-the-fate-of-dockless-bikes-102633" target="_blank">like dockless share bikes before them</a>, end up cluttering pavements, cause friction with pedestrians and provoke <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIEKWxYp240" target="_blank">controversy</a> and debate.
E-scooters are the future of city transport and will reduce private car use, say the enthusiasts. They will ease congestion and help cities achieve their environmental and road safety targets, according to the optimists.
But for every supporter of these e-boosted contraptions, a dissenting voice says they are annoying and dangerous. Critics argue that e-scooters litter our footpaths, menace pedestrians and cause <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/01/25/electric-scooters-send-more-people-hospital-than-bicycles-walking-new-study-finds/?noredirect=on&amp;utm_term=.df3477b2b7ae" target="_blank">crashes and injuries</a>. One group in San Diego has even <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/03/04/698768297/disability-rights-group-sues-san-diego-over-scooters-on-sidewalks" target="_blank">filed a law suit</a> claiming that scooters discriminate against people with disabilities.
Some <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/9/10/17631318/electric-scooters-bird-city-regulations-sustainability" target="_blank">cities have banned</a> e-scooters. In Australia, Brisbane City Council, while extending a <a href="https://theconversation.com/limes-not-lemons-lessons-from-australias-first-e-scooter-sharing-trial-108924" target="_blank">trial of e-scooters operated by Lime</a>, has <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-30/electric-scooters-riders-fined-safety-breaches-brisbane-qld/10956110" target="_blank">warned safety must be improved</a> before a permanent permit is granted.
Tiny vehicles, big impacts
The emergence of “tiny vehicles” includes not only e-scooters, but also e-bikes and other electric, low-speed, micromobility solutions.
If we take them seriously, these could be a huge deal for our cities. These emerging modes of transport can be quite effective for “first and last kilometre” travel (e.g. between home and your nearest train station). They can also help with short commuting distances less than 10 kilometres. An <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0.55.001%7E2016%7EMain%20Features%7ECommuting%20Distance%20for%20Australia%7E1" target="_blank">estimated 20% of trips</a> from home to work in capital cities are 5-10km long.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264254/original/file-20190317-28487-12hrqvi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
E-scooters could be “<a href="https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2019/02/23/electronic-scooters-safety/" target="_blank">disruptive</a>” in that they would cut the number of short trips taken by private vehicles today.
In Sydney, around <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0.55.001%7E2016%7EMain%20Features%7EFeature%20Article:%20Journey%20to%20Work%20in%20Australia%7E40" target="_blank">67% of these short commuting trips</a> (on average) involve private vehicles. The proportions are even higher in Melbourne (76%), Brisbane and Darwin (both 80%), Canberra and Perth (both 83%), and Adelaide and Hobart (both 84%). Across the nation, more than 85% of drivers who commute by private car don’t share with other commuters.
Shifting even a small percentage of these trips would help reduce reliance on cars, ease congestion and improve amenity.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264255/original/file-20190317-28505-7gfu51.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Most commuters do not carry much on their journey to work – a purse, a backpack or similar. That makes tiny vehicles more appealing for the short commute because they do just the one thing: <a href="https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/06/welcome-to-the-tiny-vehicle-age/563342/" target="_blank">provide personal mobility</a> from A to B. Leather seats and posh interiors are not an option!
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264190/original/file-20190316-28505-q6t0ma.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
E-scooters can help with first and last kilometre travel and short commuting trips. Volkswagen
Clearly, we are nowhere near mass adoption. That would require more <a href="https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/06/welcome-to-the-tiny-vehicle-age/563342/" target="_blank">variety of tiny vehicles</a> to suit all types of people, trips and weather conditions.
Nevertheless, there is no shortage of <a href="https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/03/20190305-vwmicro" target="_blank">ideas</a> to solve these challenges. Many <a href="https://lastmile.zone/en/vehicles/streetscooter-and-vw-launch-their-own-cargo-e-bikes" target="_blank">solutions</a> will undoubtedly be imagined. Some might actually work!
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/i3q44cnSFoI?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
 Startups are working on a variety of tiny vehicle solutions for different uses.
A regulatory sandbox approach
Regulation remains a major hurdle. Policymakers recognise that micromobility could be a driving force of change for our cities, but safety cannot be an afterthought. Instead of banning the emerging technology, many cities are adapting their approaches to handle it.
Rather than making up new rules without evidence, policymakers are using a <a href="http://www.govtech.com/opinion/E-Scooter-Bans-Show-Cities-Are-Hesitant-to-Embrace-Innovation" target="_blank">regulatory sandbox</a> approach. Borrowed from <a href="https://asic.gov.au/for-business/your-business/innovation-hub/regulatory-sandbox/" target="_blank">fintech regulation</a>, this approach allows startups to test new technologies for a specified period.
Businesses can learn quickly and respond to problems as they arise. Regulators can collect data to make informed decisions and prioritise interventions.
We already have examples of these partnerships.
<a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/6/26/17490378/scooter-sharing-companies-san-francisco-legal-permits" target="_blank">Companies are offering to pay cities a fee per scooter</a> to build protected scooter and bike infrastructure. Others have committed to providing <a href="https://sf.streetsblog.org/2018/09/21/return-of-the-scooter/" target="_blank">financial incentives</a> to encourage riders to park scooters properly. One company is offering a free ride to customers who park their scooters well ten times in a row.
To keep footpaths safe, businesses are also working with local governments to test ideas such as <a href="https://youtu.be/BmkRjtdtygk" target="_blank">retractable locks</a>, <a href="https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/03/electric-scooters-parking-charging-docks-lime-bird-lyft-spin/584332/" target="_blank">solar-powered parking</a>, <a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/6/26/17490378/scooter-sharing-companies-san-francisco-legal-permits" target="_blank">designated on-street drop-off zones</a> – even a <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90316775/is-it-time-for-scooters-to-be-put-in-their-place" target="_blank">“dock for dockless”</a> solution!
What’s next for the e-scooter market?
These products are not toys and investors know it. Venture capitalists are riding a wave of public acceptance and adoption.
E-scooter growth, in particular, has <a href="https://www.curbed.com/2018/7/24/17607698/electric-scooter-bird-lime-spin-adoption-transit" target="_blank">exceeded first-year adoption rates</a> for similar services such as bike-sharing and ride-hailing. In <a href="https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article226640274" target="_blank">Sacramento</a>, where the same company offers both bike and car services, the use of shared e-bikes exceeded ride-hailing rentals by a 53-47% margin.
Businesses are betting that shared e-scooters will do to short-distance travel what ride-hailing did to the taxi industry. Globally, investors have <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/micromobilitys-15000-mile-checkup" target="_blank">poured more than US$5.7 billion</a> into micromobility startups since 2015. New business models are emerging, with some companies considering annual memberships that include free ride time per day.
As with other fast-moving innovations, policymakers need to adapt their approaches. They also need to rethink bans and regulations that undermine the viability of e-scooters.
Tech companies need to prioritise rider safety over growth. They need to work with governments to preserve the sanctity of the footpath as a safe public space.
Without this, our cities will miss out on the potential of tiny vehicles and the opportunities they offer to reduce private car use.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113111/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;">
Hussein Dia, Chair, Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology
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/banning-tiny-vehicles-would-deny-us-smarter-ways-to-get-around-our-cities-113111" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: Conceptual design of a vehicle parking bay as a designated drop-off zone for tiny vehicles. Lyft
</body></html>

Banning ‘tiny vehicles’ would deny us smarter ways to get around our cities

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Soon after becoming prime minister last year, Scott Morrison appointed a minister for “congestion busting”, signalling the importance he attaches to this issue. The large number of Google search results on “traffic congestion in Australian cities 2019” (9.5 million) and “traffic congestion in Australian cities costing the economy 2019” (8.3 million) seems to support his opinion.
But what if this concern for traffic congestion is based more on “groupthink” than a careful look at the relevant data? What if congestion is not such a big social or economic problem? What if congestion costs are overemphasised?
In thinking about these questions, it should be recognised that there is always an underlying demand for driving, which exceeds the road space available, so building more roads induces more traffic. Congestion soon returns but with more vehicles affected than before. In addition, congestion is likely to increase with rising population and living standards.
Is traffic congestion a problem for the economy?
The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) estimated the “avoidable social costs” of traffic congestion for Australia’s eight capital cities at A$16.5 billion in 2015. While the estimate is carefully calculated, there is scope to consider other relevant factors such as:
<ol>
<li>traffic congestion is usually a problem only for commuters in or near metropolitan CBD areas – for other road users, their average time delay is a relatively minor problem</li>
<li>the BITRE estimate is a small proportion (about 1%) of Australia’s 2015 GDP</li>
<li>more than one-third of the A$16.5 billion estimate is for private time costs that aren’t factored into GDP calculations</li>
<li>except perhaps for congestion charging, avoiding the BITRE cost estimate would require capital expenditure, reducing the net benefit that action to reduce congestion costs could capture</li>
<li>the BITRE estimate gives insufficient attention to changes in travel behaviour and location decisions in response to congestion.</li>
</ol>
There is evidence that road users, both private and business, adapt to congestion by changing travel route and time of travel, as well as changing location. In addition, the effects of the so-called Marchetti travel time budget (time saved on one route tends to be used for more travel elsewhere rather than for non-travel purposes) does not seem to have been considered in the BITRE calculations.
Using congestion to guide development
While the avoidable social costs of road congestion are arguably not a big deal, it’s pretty clear congestion plays a significant role in structuring urban areas.
Urban planners in Vancouver recognised this some 40 years ago. Rather than trying to reduce traffic congestion, they consciously used that congestion to limit commuter car access to the city centre. They went so far as to say “congestion is our friend”.
A “carrot and stick” approach was adopted in Vancouver. Traffic congestion was used to discourage commuting by car from the suburbs to the CBD. At the same time, complementary urban planning and design policies were enacted to make the inner city a more attractive place to live for all family types including those with young children. High-quality public transport (particularly the SkyTrain metro system) to the CBD was expanded to cover more of the metropolitan area, providing an attractive alternative to commuting by car.
Of course, congestion management can be used to support other land use planning strategies, such as metropolitan decentralisation. Again this would require a “carrot and stick” approach.
Congestion narrative fuels ‘the infrastructure turn’
Urban researchers have identified what has been called “the infrastructure turn”. This is an excessive focus on building infrastructure, particularly large transport infrastructure, rather than on integrated strategic land use and transport planning.
The infrastructure focus is a simplistic response to growing city populations. Importantly, it fails to manage travel demand towards a more sustainable long-term result, such as metropolitan decentralisation like Sydney’s “three cities” approach.
Emphasising congestion and its estimated costs reinforces a sense that urgent action is needed, and supports the “infrastructure turn”.
Planning for the city we desire
A best practice approach to metropolitan planning requires that transport planning and land use planning work together to achieve a desired future for the city. And community deliberation determines this desired future. The performance of the transport system should be measured mainly by how well this desired future is being achieved, rather than by the level of traffic congestion.
While traffic congestion is real and annoying to many (and also a worry for politicians like the prime minister), it’s not a big social or economic problem. Instead, the congestion could be managed – rather than just catering to projected demand – so our cities become more like the places we want them to be.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111614/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;">
Brian Feeney, Adjunct Fellow, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland
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/rethinking-traffic-congestion-to-make-our-cities-more-like-the-places-we-want-them-to-be-111614" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Rethinking traffic congestion to make our cities more like the places we want them to be

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Perhaps buoyed by a 67% increase in the sale of electric cars in Australia last year – albeit coming off a low base – the federal government this month announced a A$6 million funding injection for a network of ultra-fast electric vehicle recharging stations.
Eighteen stations will be located no more than 200km apart on the main highway linking Brisbane, Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne and Adelaide. A further three stations will be built near Perth. All will be powered by renewable energy.
The network will address the issue of “range anxiety” – the fear that your car will run out of puff before reaching its destination – that particularly concerns motorists in a country as big as Australia. If your electric vehicle needs charging every 200km or so, that’s a lot of stopping between Sydney and Melbourne – and what if you can’t find a charging station?
The newest electric vehicles can cover up to 594km on a single charge. That improvement, together with the new charging network, will do much to address range anxiety. But as is often the case, the devil may be in the detail.
We don’t yet know how many fast-charging ports will be available at each station, but the number of ports is often limited due to high infrastructure costs. Even a fast charge takes about 15 minutes, so queues are likely. If a 10-minute wait at your local petrol station irritates you, imagine waiting an hour or more at an electric recharge station.
But the new network is undoubtedly a step forward, and such progress is necessary to keep electric-curious prospective motorists in the game. Of that 67% increase in electric vehicles sales mentioned earlier, the vast majority are business fleet vehicles. Private car buyers are still slow to take the plunge.
Australia is in the midst of a classic chicken-and-egg situation when it comes to growing the electric vehicle market, with the result that we’re well behind where we should be. Buyers want to see more infrastructure and perhaps some government-funded incentives (just look what a A$2,000 subsidy scheme did for the LPG market). But governments need to be confident that people will definitely buy electric cars before taking the plunge.
The power you’re supplying… it’s electrifying
Now that there’s some movement afoot from both parties, there’s a third player to consider: the electricity utilities.
If most electric vehicle owners plug in their vehicle when they get home from work of an evening – just as many of us let our phone run down during the day and then throw it on the kitchen-bench charger when we walk in the door – this could pose significant problems for the electricity grid.
According to one British estimate, as few as six cars charging at the same time on a street at peak times could lead to local brownouts (a drop in voltage supply). That might sound extreme, but it’s fair to say that daily electric car charging collectively shortens the life of electricity infrastructure such as transformers.
For this reason, my colleagues and I have researched smart charging strategies aimed at preventing the peak load period for electric car charging from overlapping with the residential peak.
The issue is even more acute when using domestic renewable energy, because of the “duck curve” – which shows the timing imbalance between peak demand and peak renewable energy production. As the name suggests, the graph is shaped like a duck.
The duck curve can be smoothed out with the help of power storage technologies such as batteries, and by behavioural change on the part of consumers (such as temporal load shifting).
The right network
Our model can also help electric vehicle owners find a nearby charging station with the least estimated waiting time and cost, in real time. This also opens up a new avenue for the electric utilities, which can work with charging service providers to adjust the prices at different charging locations so as to to distribute the load evenly across the charging network, and reduce waiting times into the bargain.
Unfortunately the utility companies don’t seem particularly interested yet, perhaps because it’s not an immediate problem. But it soon will be if the take-up of electric vehicles continues on its current trajectory.
It’s unfortunate that Australia is lagging behind other developed countries when it comes to electric vehicle adoption. But this can work in our favour if we learn from other countries and take a more systematic approach. A lot can be achieved through proper planning.
In Australia we’ll need to see continued and better marketing of both the advantages of reducing emissions (electric vehicles are essential for the long-term decarbonisation of the electricity and transport sectors), as well as clearer cost-benefit analysis of the economic savings that can be made through personal and government investment in electric vehicles.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105509/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;">
Iftekhar Ahmad, Associate Professor, Edith Cowan University
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/the-new-electric-vehicle-highway-is-a-welcome-gear-shift-but-other-countries-are-still-streets-ahead-105509" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

The new electric vehicle highway is a welcome gear shift, but other countries are still streets ahead

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Sections of cities all over the world are being demolished to meet increasing demand for transport infrastructure. The process of building new roads, harbour crossings, metro systems and light rail lines seems unending. Large-scale construction includes loss of public space, housing and backyards.
Historic suburbs, such as Sydney’s Haberfield, have suffered. And then there’s the issue of cost blow-outs and traffic gridlock. There are rumblings, too, about environmental impacts and equity of access. But there is actually one public transport option that can mitigate many of these concerns: cable cars.
Cable cars now grace many urban skylines, including some of the world’s most populous, congested and poorest cities, such as Colombia’s city of Medellin, but also the US city of Portland. These cities have integrated cable cars with existing transport networks. The newer versions are cheap, quick to build and solar generating. Perhaps it’s time for Australia to start looking skyward for solutions.
What are cable cars?
Cable cars are also known as aerial trams, gondolas, wires or ropeways. They are well known at ski resorts, but some cities are now including them as a form of public transportation. A pioneering example is the Colombian Medellin Cable, built in 2004. This was the first in the world to be fully integrated into the urban public transport system.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234196/original/file-20180830-195316-1jzii6o.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/234196/original/file-20180830-195316-1jzii6o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
The Medellin Cable has been credited with helping reduce the high crime rate in the Colombian city. <a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ryananderton/44280479791/in/photolist-bPMjeX-2asV2W8-eYbxoJ-8K88Yp-C4XwEe-eXZyDk-Czec9G-CRLjZq-Ybhrae-21KWeuw-Nby1G3" target="_blank">Ryan Anderton/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY</a>
Medellin triggers images of modern-day gangsters (including the drug baron Pablo Escobar) and high murder rates. But in 2016, the city won the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize for extreme reduction in violent crime. This was attributed to a multi-targeted approach to sustainable urban redevelopment, with a focus on accessible transport.
The cable car was the main feature of this transport system. This has improved the lives of many in the poorer parts of the city by providing transport out of impoverished areas to employment and other opportunities.
The Mexicable in Mexico’s city Ecatepec in Morelos, opened in 2016. The journey, which spans 4.8 kilometres, used to take over an hour on the roads below. Now up to 30,000 passengers a day travel along the route of 17 minutes. It is solar powered and cost just A$US72 million to build.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y1Besasn8-E?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
With a limit of 10 people per car, commuters feel safer. One explained: "bandits go after buses but leave the cable cars alone."
Cable cars are equipped with high-tech surveillance security, including cameras.
Another commuter, a woman this time, told Al Jazeera: "most of all I like the feeling of security … when travelling by bus I never know what my children would experience."
There are many other recent examples of urban transit cable cars including the Portland Arial Tram in the United States, built in 2007. Each of the tram’s two cabins has the capacity to hold 79 people.
The aerial tram travels a journey of just over 1 kilometre and cost US$57 million to construct. In comparison, a 1.6 kilometre stretch of an urban four-lane freeway costs US$60-$300 million. Cable cars require less land, less infrastructure and are quick to build.
There is also the Telepherique de Brest in France, completed in 2017. There are plans for an 11 kilometre cable car for Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic and a 10 kilometre span for Istanbul, Turkey.
Australia could be next
According to Stephen Graham, a cities professor at the UK’s Newcastle University, city planning has traditionally tended to occupy a horizontal plane and adopt a flat perspective.
A geographer at University College London, Andrew Harris, considers this horizontal thinking as somewhat ironic, given that the 21st century’s urban age “has stimulated and necessitated three-dimensional urban growth with the construction of new overhead and underground infrastructure…”
We need to think three-dimensionally, and look skyward as well as underground. While the cable car industry is currently in a selling frenzy in cities all over the world, Australian cities have not engaged with this form of urban public transport.
Cable cars in Australia are mostly found in the ski fields or as tourist attractions. Those in the planning stages also follow the tourism model (such as for the Mount Wellington Cable Car in Hobart) rather than contribute to mass transit.
Cable cars are not constrained by the urban landscape and require minimal land or property acquisition. They are capable of providing mobility where other technologies are unworkable at street-level. Many are built over existing main roads and provide a direct public transport option to sitting in traffic. Most modern examples are user-friendly and easily accessible. The Mexicable has wheelchair access at every station.
Just think how Australian cities might be transformed. Imagine highly congested urban transport routes with an aerial tram moving almost silently, high above. This is the reality for an increasing number of urban commuters, globally.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101829/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;">
Wendy Shaw, Associate Professor, UNSW
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/look-up-australia-cable-cars-could-ease-our-traffic-woes-101829">original article</a>.
Main photo: The Telepherique de Brest was completed in 2017. <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:T%C3%A9l%C3%A9ph%C3%A9rique_de_Brest_Capucins_01-2017.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a>. 
</body></html>

Look up Australia, cable cars could ease our traffic woes: Wendy Shaw

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Scientists, engineers and economists have used equations to solve real-world problems since the invention of basic addition and subtraction. Not sure how to price your apple harvest? Use a supply-and-demand equation to find the ideal price. It seems there’s an equation for everything in life.
Equations are great for modelling well-defined problems where the rules do not change, and as such have been the backbone of pure science. But in today’s ever-growing, fast-shifting society, many problems are too complex to model with a single equation. So how do we deal with complex phenomena such as traffic, the subject of this Conversation series? To that end, Descartes gave us a hint many years ago: "Divide each difficulty into as many parts as feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Agent-based modelling (ABM) is an approach that encapsulates this philosophy and has been gaining in popularity for the past decade. Instead of treating the problem as one entity, ABM looks at modelling the behaviour of each of the smaller elements (agents) within the system.
It is a bottom-up approach where macro outcomes are derived from the activities of individual micro actors. As the agents interact, you gain a better understanding of the system as a whole.
So how does this work for traffic?
Let’s take the example of a traffic jam. Conventionally, scientists have used sophisticated analytical approaches, such as equations, that treat traffic like a flow of liquid. Interestingly, we can replicate the same traffic phenomena by modelling individual cars with two simple rules:
<ol>
<li>
If there’s a car in front of you, slow down.
</li>
<li>
If there aren’t any cars in front of you, speed up (while obeying the speed limit).
</li>
</ol>
These rules are essentially descriptions of what a rational person would do while driving. One could presume that to cause a traffic jam we would need an additional factor such as police checks or traffic accidents. Traffic jams do not just happen by themselves – or do they?
It turns out that those two rules are enough to naturally cause a traffic jam. A traffic jam can occur purely out of internal interactions between cars, and not because of any external factor. In this phenomenon, a congestion “shockwave” travels in the direction opposite to the direction of the cars.
Researchers from several Japanese universities recreated this phenomenon with real cars back in 2008, as shown in the video below.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Suugn-p5C1M?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
A shockwave traffic jam recreated.
When an unexpected phenomenon results from the interactions between individuals (agents), this is called emergent behaviour. It is this unique property of agent-based modelling that gives it an advantage over conventional models.
Another benefit is that it is very intuitive to develop an agent-based model. Instead of having to understand the mechanics of traffic jams, all you need to do is define the rules that govern the behaviour of individual cars. It shouldn’t be too surprising that two high school students from Boston originally built the earlier traffic jam model more than 20 years ago.
A good example that demonstrates ABM’s intuitive nature is the modelling of flocking behaviour in birds. It’s fantastically difficult to model mathematically, but flocking behaviour can be replicated in agent-based modelling using three simple governing rules:
1. Separation: steer to avoid crowding local flockmates
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/155/01-Separation-v2.gif?1528257919" width="100%">
Adapted from original graphicby Craig Reynolds.
2. Alignment: steer towards the average heading of local flockmates
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/157/02-Alignment-v2.gif?1528257919" width="100%">
Adapted from original graphicby Craig Reynolds.
3. Cohesion: steer to move towards the average position of local flockmates.
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/156/03-Cohesion-v2.gif?1528257919" width="100%">
Adapted from original graphicby Craig Reynolds.
The resulting model is remarkably similar to real life. The three rules successfully bring out the emergent phenomenon of flocking behaviour.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MvmN5o6dZ8s?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
Daniel Shiffman’s implementation of Craig Reynold’s Boids program to simulate flocking. Each bird steers itself based on rules of avoidance, alignment and cohesion.
<h2>From playful toy to policy tool</h2>
In addition to traffic management, agent-based modelling has practical applications in other fields. For example, to understand how infectious diseases such as MERS spread through a city, the author has developed a large-scale ABM simulation that models each individual living in his home town, Suwon, in South Korea.
The governing rules are simple:
<ol>
<li>In the daytime, individuals go to work (or school, depending on their age) and interact with their colleagues (or classmates).</li>
<li>At night, individuals return home to spend time with their family.</li>
<li>Individuals can become infected when interacting with a sick person.</li>
</ol>
Through this simple set of interactions, a vast network of secondary contacts is formed, through which a disease can spread. To ensure that the results represent the city accurately, we carefully selected each individual’s age, gender, family members, and home and work locations, to ensure that they matched regional census statistics on housing, labour and education.
The results revealed that prevention efforts should focus on key schools, where most of the disease spread takes place.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213063/original/file-20180404-189801-w2wpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Close-up of Suwon city showing all residential buildings. Individuals spend their time with their family within each house, and interact with neighbours from nearby. Author provided
Beyond the above examples, ABM has practical applications in marketing, traffic management, and biomedical fields. As computational power increases, this modelling approach is limited only by imagination in its implementation and use.
Yohan Kim, Research Principal, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney
Jay Falletta, Research Assistant, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney
Scott Kelly, Research Principal, University of Technology Sydney
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/traffic-is-complex-but-modelling-using-deceptively-simple-rules-can-help-unravel-whats-going-on-92833" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Traffic is complex, but modelling using deceptively simple rules can help unravel what’s going on

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Cities worldwide face the problems and possibilities of “volume”: the stacking and moving of people and things within booming central business districts. We see this especially around mass public transport hubs.
As cities grow, they also become more vertical. They are expanding underground through rail corridors and above ground into the tall buildings that shape city skylines. Cities are deep as well as wide.
The urban geographer Stephen Graham describes cities as both “vertically stacked” and “vertically sprawled”, laced together by vertical and horizontal transport systems.
People flow in large cities is not only about how people move horizontally on rail and road networks into and out of city centres. It also includes vertical transport systems. These are the elevators, escalators and moving sidewalks that commuters use every day to get from the underground to the surface street level.
Major transport hubs are where many vertical and horizontal transport systems converge. It’s here that people flows are most dense.
But many large cities face the twin challenges of ageing infrastructure and increased volumes of people flowing through transport hubs. Problems of congestion, overcrowding, delays and even lockouts are becoming more common.
Governments are increasingly looking for ways to squeeze more capacity out of existing infrastructure networks.
Can we increase capacity by changing behaviour?
For the last three years, Transport for London (TfL) has been running standing-only escalator trials. The aim is to see if changing commuter behaviour might increase “throughput” of people and reduce delays.
London has some of the deepest underground stations in the world. This means the Tube system is heavily reliant on vertical transport such as escalators. But a long-standing convention means people only stand on the right side and allow others to walk up on the left.
In a trial at Holborn Station, one of London’s deepest at 23 metres, commuters were asked to stand on both sides during morning rush hour.
The results of the trials showed that changing commuter behaviour could improve throughput by increasing capacity by as much as 30% at peak times. But this works only in Tube stations with very tall escalators. At stations with escalators less than 18 metres high, like Canary Wharf, the trials found the opposite – standing would only increase congestion across the network.
<img src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/147/escalator-hype-sml.gif?1527814909" width="100%">
By standing only, 30% more people could fit on an escalator in the trial at Holborn Station.
The difference is down to human behaviour. People are simply less willing to walk up very tall escalators. This means a standing-only policy across the network won’t improve people flow uniformly and could even make congestion worse.
Is people movement data a solution?
With the introduction of ticketless transport cards it’s now possible to gather more data about people flow through busy transport hubs as we tap on and off.
Tracking commuters’ in-station journeys through their Wi-Fi enabled devices, such as smart phones, can also offer a detailed picture of movement between platforms, congestion and delays.
Transport for London has already conducted its first Wi-Fi tracking trial in the London Underground.
Issues of privacy loom large in harvesting mobile data from individual devices. Still, there’s enormous potential to use this data to resolve issues of overcrowding and inform commuters about delays and congestion en route.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/K-FwqFVqQY4?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
London’s transport authority hopes the data from tracking users’ phones will help ease congestion, plan better timetables and improve station designs.
Governments are also increasingly turning to consultancy firms that specialise in simulation modelling of people flow. That’s everything from check-in queues and processing at terminals, to route tracking and passenger flow on escalators.
Using data analytics, people movement specialists identify movement patterns, count footfall and analyse commuter behaviour. In existing infrastructure, they look to achieve “efficiencies” through changes to scheduling and routing, and assessing the directional flow of commuters.
Construction and engineering companies are also beginning to employ people movement specialists during the design phase of large infrastructure projects.
Beijing’s Daxing airport, due for completion in 2020, will be the largest transport hub in China. It’s also the first major infrastructure project to use crowd simulation and analysis software during the design process to test anticipated volume against capacity.
The advice of people movement specialists can have significant impacts on physical infrastructure. This involves aspects such as the width of platforms, number and placement of gates, and the layout and positioning of vertical transport, such as escalators.
Movement analytics is becoming big business
People movement analytics is becoming big business, especially where financialisation of public assets is increasing. This means infrastructure is being developed through complex public-private partnership models. As a result, transport hubs are now also commercial spaces for retail, leisure and business activities.
Commuters are no longer only in transit when they make their way through these spaces. They are potential consumers as they move through the retail concourse in many of these developments.
In an era of “digital disruption”, which is particularly affecting the retail sector, information about commuter mobility has potential commercial value. The application of data analytics to people flow and its use by the people movement industry to achieve “efficiencies” needs careful scrutiny to ensure benefits beyond commercial gain.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92827/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">At the same time, mobility data may well help our increasingly vertical cities to keep flowing up, down and across.
Andrea Connor, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University
Donald McNeill, Professor of Urban and Cultural Geography, Western Sydney University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/growing-cities-face-challenges-of-keeping-the-masses-moving-up-down-and-across-92827" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Growing cities face challenges of keeping the masses moving up, down and across

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Australian governments are set to spend more on transport infrastructure than ever before. Federal and state infrastructure spending, driven largely by transport projects, was expected to total $31.6 billion in 2018, increasing to $38 billion in 2021, even before the latest Commonwealth spending announcements. Will all this construction make it easier for us to get around, our journeys more enjoyable, or our cities more liveable for a growing population?
Since the 1950s, spending on transport infrastructure has largely been justified on the basis of its ability to increase travel speeds or reduce travel times. For example, the New South Wales government estimates its $17 billion WestConnex toll road will deliver travel time savings motorists would value at about $13 billion. But new tolls will largely cancel out any benefit. This means the ultimate beneficiary will be the toll road corporations.
As early as the 1960s, however, it become evident that prioritising speed above all else is counterproductive. It’s making our cities less efficient and liveable, and consigns many people to stressful and unhealthy daily commutes.
Faster travel does allow people to move further from work and other destinations – and not have to spend any more time travelling. It’s also true that many households value the ability to move to outer suburbs, where lower land values mean they can afford a home (or a larger one).
But when thousands of households migrate to low-density suburbs, we end up with urban sprawl. This is bad not only for productivity and public health, but also makes public transport less viable. Sprawl entrenches dependence on cars. This limits access to economic and social opportunities for those unable to drive.
High vehicle speeds and longer driving distances create multiple other problems. These include more traffic noise, more road trauma, higher transport costs and neighbourhoods too dangerous for children to venture outdoors on their own.
Rethinking the need for speed
The need for speed is being questioned in other aspects of modern life. The Slow Food Movement urges us to savour and enjoy our meal times, rather than view eating as an unwelcome interruption to our busy days.
For my PhD research, I asked a similar question of our travel time. What if it’s seen not only as a cost to be minimised, but as valuable time that can be used to work, exercise or relax?
It’s important to note that average daily travel times don’t decline no matter how much is spent on transport infrastructure. How then can investment be prioritised to make our travel time more enjoyable and productive, while at the same time improving access to economic and social opportunities?
Choosing to take the ‘slow road’
I had observed that many people willingly choose a slower, more pleasant journey over a faster, less pleasant one. For example, research shows that, after a new cycleway opened in Sydney in 2014, some people switched to cycling from driving and public transport, even though this meant their journeys could take longer. Some people who already cycled opted for a longer route via the cycleway.
Based on such observations, I developed a cost-benefit analysis tool that captures the value people place on having the option to cycle to local destinations and transport interchanges in a traffic-free environment – regardless of whether their travel time changes.
Using this tool to assess the City of Sydney’s proposed 200-kilometre cycling network, I forecast it would increase the proportion of local residents (aged 18-55) commuting by bicycle from 4.5% to 10.7% – freeing up significant space on roads and public transport. The estimated benefit-cost ratio was 3.4. That’s better than many of the multibillion-dollar transport projects on the national Infrastructure Priority List.
Unfortunately, it’s not yet possible to validate these forecasts. Since 2013, the NSW government has done little to promote healthy transport. It has allowed the City of Sydney to build only about five kilometres of new cycleway, demolished one of the busiest cycleways in the CBD to create space for more traffic, and increased fines for trivial cycling offences. It’s not surprising the proportion of people cycling has hardly changed.
What do we want of our cities?
The next step will be to adapt the tool for assessing other transport and land use initiatives that could improve the usefulness and enjoyment of travel time – and access to economic and social opportunities – without necessarily increasing speed. Possible examples include:
<ul>
<li>extra train services to reduce crowding</li>
<li>automated vehicles, which could allow passengers to work while travelling</li>
<li>jobs growth in suburban centres, as in the Greater Sydney Commission’s Metropolis of Three Cities plan</li>
<li>ambitious affordable housing policies, enabling more low-income households to live closer to work.</li>
</ul>
Of course, cost-benefit analysis is just one (far from perfect) tool for informing decisions on transport and land use proposals. Before these proposals are developed, perhaps we need to give more thought to what kind of city we want to live in.
Do we want a city that’s easy and pleasant to get around, with inviting public spaces? Or one where we have to endure stressful and expensive journeys to get anywhere, and the public realm is devoted to traffic, not people?
Christopher Standen, Transport Research Analyst, University of Sydney
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-need-for-speed-transport-spending-priorities-leave-city-residents-worse-off-94166" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Urban Transport

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Urban Transport

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News