costs vs. benefits of cycling development promotion
DESCRIPTION
A presentation by Dr. Piotr Kuropatwinski (Gdansk, Poland) at the Veloforum 2011 Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine (www.veloforum.org)TRANSCRIPT
PSWE
COST VS. BENEFITS OF CYCLING DEVELOPMENT
PROMOTION
COST VS. BENEFITS OF CYCLING DEVELOPMENT
PROMOTION
Kyiv, Veloforum 5 June 2011.
Dr Piotr Kuropatwiński, University of Gdańsk, Pomeranian Association „Common Europe”
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
2AGENDA
SOME PHILOSOPHYSOME PHILOSOPHY
EXAMPLES OF APPROACHES ADOPTED ELSEWHEREEXAMPLES OF APPROACHES ADOPTED ELSEWHERE
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONSCONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONS
PSWE SOME PHILOSOPHY
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
4Some philosophySome philosophy – – price vs. valueprice vs. value
• Economic definition of a cynic:
• Someone who knows the price of everything but the value of none
• Not all economists are cynics, even if they are often accused to be like them
• Value may be perceived from different perspectives, not only from the financial one
• Economics is about management of scarcity, not of minimizing costs at all costs
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
5MANAGEMENT OF MANAGEMENT OF SCARCITYSCARCITY
• Trying to eliminate congestion by extension of the road network is like trying to fight obesity by loosening the belt (Walter Kulash)
• Myopic attempts to eliminate visible problems sometimes leads to underestimation of the invisible, but productive solutions
• Cycling infrastructure, where built, if not explained and promoted, tends to be marginalised in decision making
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
6CYCLING BENEFITS SOCIETYCYCLING BENEFITS SOCIETY
• EVERY KILOMETRE CYCLED PROVIDES A 0.16 € GAIN FOR SOCIETY
• CONVERSELY, SOCIETY INCURS A 0.09€ LOSS FROM EVERY KILOMETER DRIVEN BY CAR
• Source: City of Copenhagen 2008
PSWE CONTEXT
OF ECONOMIC
CALCULATIONS
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
8CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONSCONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONS IN URBAN IN URBAN PLANNINGPLANNING
• Tendency to include only out of pocket costs
• Lack of data about non-motorised traffic
• Rural or poor man’s image of cycling and walking
• Low value attached to leisure time and labour productivity in low income countries
• Health considered as a „free good”, independent of behavioural choices
PSWE EXAMPLES
OF APPROACHES
ADOPTED ELSEWHERE
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
10DIFFERENT EUROPEAN APPROACHESDIFFERENT EUROPEAN APPROACHES
• The Scandinavian approach
• The British approach
• The Austrian approach
• The Central European approach
PSWE THE
SCANDINAVIAN APPROACH
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
12FINLAND – JOHANNA KALLIOINENFINLAND – JOHANNA KALLIOINEN
Circular argumentation in transport planning
The modest volumes of cycling
The large volumes of car transport
Modest resource use to cycling facilities
Substantial resources use to car transport facilities
Weak competitiveness of cycling
Strong competitiveness of car transport
Source: Johanna Kallioinen, INSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF CYCLING IN TRANSPORT PLANNING; Velo-city 2003, Paris
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
13NORWAY – NORWAY – KJARTAN SÆLENSMINDEKJARTAN SÆLENSMINDE
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Hokksund Hamar Trondheim
Other Benefits
Health
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Hokksund Hamar Trondheim
Health - large share of benefitNet benefit/cost ratio
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
14
Gunnar Lind, MoveaGunnar Lind, Movea Christer Hydén, Christer Hydén, LTH, LTH, Ulf Ulf Persson, LTHPersson, LTH
CBA of bicycle infrastructureCBA of bicycle infrastructure
source: Sven Hunhammar, Swedish EPA; Cost Benefit Analyses, of infrastructure for cycling, Velo-City Congress, Dublin 2005
PSWE
THE BRITISH APPROACH
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
16ROD KING – HILDEN vs. WARRINGTONROD KING – HILDEN vs. WARRINGTON
£200 000
£8 000£-
£20 000
£40 000
£60 000
£80 000
£100 000
£120 000
£140 000
£160 000
£180 000
£200 000
£
Warrington Hilden
Annual spend on cycle specific facilities
5%
24%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
%
Warrington Hilden
%age "within town" journeys by cycle
Hilden spends a fraction of Warrington’s cycle spendYet achieves results nearly 5 times greater
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
17ALEXALEX SULLYSULLY PUMA CongressPUMA Congress
• 10 new cyclists are worth spending € 1.2 million
• ₤2 M invested in 2000 – returned in local spend in two years
• In 2006/7 400k bike visits & - ₤ 9 M in local spend
source: Alex Sully (2010) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
18ALEXALEX SULLYSULLY (PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision(PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision
source: Alex Sully (2010) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010
Consider Consider firstfirst
Consider Consider lastlast
Traffic volume reductionTraffic volume reduction
Traffic speed reductionTraffic speed reduction
Junction treatment, hazard site Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic managementtreatment, traffic management
Reallocation of carriageway spaceReallocation of carriageway space
Cycle tracks away from roadsCycle tracks away from roads
Conversion ofConversion of f footways/footpaths ootways/footpaths to shared useto shared use
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
19ALEXALEX SULLYSULLY (PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision(PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision
source: Alex Sully (2010) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010
Consider Consider firstfirst
Consider Consider lastlast
Traffic volume reductionTraffic volume reduction
Traffic speed reductionTraffic speed reduction
Junction treatment, hazard site Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic managementtreatment, traffic management
Reallocation of carriageway spaceReallocation of carriageway space
Cycle tracks away from roadsCycle tracks away from roads
Conversion ofConversion of f footways/footpaths ootways/footpaths to shared useto shared use
Invis
ible
cyclin
g
infra
stru
ctu
re
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
20LYNN SLOMAN – Sevilla CongressLYNN SLOMAN – Sevilla Congress
Earning money for purchase, insurance, repairs fuel, paking
510 hrs/year
Doing tasks: car wash, repair, find parking space, de-icing, walking to car
265 hrs/year
Sitting in car: moving and stationary
425 hrs/year
Paying for extra cost of garage
100 hrs/year
Time devoted to the average private car
Total: 1300 hrs
to get 16,000 km =
‘average speed’ 12kph
source: Sloman (2006) Car Sick: Solutions for our Car-addicted Culture, after Ivan Illich (1974) Energy and Equity
PSWE
THE AUSTRIAN APPROACH
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
22MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011
Costs for the overall economy: bicycle vs.carIndicator
[€-ct/km]Internal External Total
Bicycle Car Bicycle Car Bicycle Car
Health
Noise
Accidents
Running costs
Travel time
Pollutants
CO2
TOTAL
DIFFERENCE bicycle-car
source: Michael Meschik & Gregor Trunk Institute for Transport Studies, BOKU Vienna – Velo-City Sevilla
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
23MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011
Costs for the overall economy: bicycle vs.carIndicator
[€-ct/km]Internal External Total
Bicycle Car Bicycle Car Bicycle Car
Health - - 89.89 - 89.89 -
Noise - - - -1.02 - -1.02
Accidents -6.29 -1.44 -8.42 -1.85 -14.71 -3.29
Running costs 10.20 -38.30 - - -10.20 -38.30
Travel time 66.53 -54.29 - - -66.53 -54.29
Pollutants - - - -0.63 - -0.63
CO2 - - - -0.85 - -0.85
TOTAL -83.02 -94.03 81.47 -4.35 -1.55 -98.38
DIFFERENCE bicycle-car
11.01 85.82 96.83
source: Michael Meschik & Gregor Trunk Institute for Transport Studies, BOKU Vienna – Velo-City Sevilla
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
24GENTLE MOBILITY GENTLE MOBILITY -- GRAZ GRAZ
• Three car parking restriction levels
• Abandonment of car oriented traffic policy
• No more roads built
• The Mayor who proposed to build a tunnel under the city not re-elected
• Tempo 30/50 introduced all over the city after a 6 months explanation campaign
PSWE THE CENTRAL
EUROPEAN APPROACH
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
26
FUNDS DEVOTED TO TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS DEVOTED TO TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN CEE 10+ DEVELOPMENT IN CEE 10+ AT THE NATIONAL LEVELAT THE NATIONAL LEVEL
THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 1/3
Source: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas2007/index_en.htm’
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
27THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 2/3THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 2/3
• Allow for more recreational cycling
• Rhythm replaces strength
• Invite foreign experts and tell them what to tell
• (no-one is considered a prophet in his own land)
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
28THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 3/3THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 3/3
• Promote from below, from above and from the centre
• Avoid militant attitudes – convert cycling promotion groups into an organised, civic movement
• Look for low hanging fruit – eliminate bottlenecks and create attractive medium distance trails/routes Source: http://www.gdansk.pl/ster,1433,18848.html
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
29
• Do not fight directly with routism – dedicated cycle routes along main traffic arteries and along attractive water fronts are O.K.
• Pay attention to education and promotion as much as to infrastructure development
• Address your message to the small and slow: consider families, women and children as a target group
PSWE SUMMARY
& CONCLUSIONS
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
31SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1/2 1/2
• Cycling is a valuable source of revenue
• Promotion of sustainable urban and regional development is a source of important savings
• Promotion of cycling is more important than the development of visible cycling infrastructure
• Develop capacity for partnership co-operation
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
32SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2/2 2/2
• Decision makers pay more attention to chances of success and tend to choose large infrastructure, car traffic oriented solutions
• Promotion of active mobility is more productive than promotion of public transport use and they reinforce one another
• We are in the mind opening business – the issue of transport efficiency is a part of it only
PSWE THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION
COPYRIGHT © 2007 PSWE – WSZELKIE PRAWA ZASTRZEŻONE
34THIS PRESENTATION WAS PREPARED BY A TEAM COMPOSED OF:
TELEPHONE:
E-MAIL:
ANDRZEJ B. PIOTROWICZ +48 502 200 559 [email protected]
Dr PIOTR KUROPATWIŃSKI +48 501 069 616 [email protected]