Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Bicycle infrastructure assessment for ChileLiterature review and required tools for a new approach1mercoledì 19 giugno 13
Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and BPhases A and B: “Propuesta i...
Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and B3mercoledì 19 giugno 13
Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and BLimitations and problems of ...
Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phase CPhase C: “Plan Maestro de Ciclo-Rut...
Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phase DPhase D: “Red de Corto Plazo”:Engin...
Current assessment methodology in Chile.Benefits and Costs indicators included• Benefits included in the economic and social...
Limitations of current assessment method in Chile• All the most relevant indicators for the benefits of bicycle infrastruct...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
Private benefits found in literature• Less travel costs• Better physical and psychological condition (longer life, personal...
Costs found in literature• Social costs• Investment cost• Maintenance cost• Opportunity cost of capital• Private costs• Di...
General data and assumptions required for the study• Average trips per day, modal split and length• Additional demand indu...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
1. Health savings - reduced healthcare costsThe distinction is between active and inactive population. Active population p...
1. Health savings - life years saved• There is evidence that non-cyclists have a 39% higher mortality rate than cyclists1•...
1. Health savings - data required• Proportion of inactive individuals in Chile• Proportion of obese individuals in Chile• ...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
2. Absenteeism and productivity savings• Norway and Denmark assume a 1% lower absenteeism rate because of general better s...
2. Absenteeism savings - data required• Proportion of work trips on total• Average wage• Absenteeism data19mercoledì 19 gi...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
3. Public transport expansion savingsAn increase in the share of cyclists leads to a decrease in costs for public transpor...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
4. Less future investments in car facilitiesThere is evidence that an investment in cycling infrastructure is the cheapest...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
5. External costs of private transport• External costs of private transport include:• Air emissions• Noise emissions• Wear...
5. External costs of private transport - assessmentThere are two ways of assessing external costs:• Sum of prevention, eva...
5. External costs of private transport - data required• Average external km cost in Chile (including vehicle fleet quality ...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
6. Increased comfort and security• Comfort and security are a fundamental incentives for biking. Antofagasta could be an i...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
7. Reduced parking costs• In one car parking bay it is possible to fit at least 10 bike parkings. In the Netherlands,buildi...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost	• All studies agree that it is very difficult to have a general cause-e...
8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost	Source: (2)34mercoledì 19 giugno 13
8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost	-assessment• Assessment: None of the literature considered had insigh...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
9. Travel time reduction savings• The studies considered don’t include specific ways of assessing time savings, since theya...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
10. Accessibility, employment, business• Accessibility is improved for categories that do not have access to a car. Increa...
10. Accessibility, employment, business• Attractiveness for business is also improved in a cycle-friendly environment. A c...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic• Motorised traffic constitutes a barrier to the ‘natural’ level of cy...
Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years ...
12. School bus transport savings• The nordic studies6,7 suggest that there is an effect on school bus transport to be consi...
“Network” requisites for the creation of a successful bike-friendly city• Existence of a proper network, with numerous con...
New method proposed• It seems that the approach used in Chile (evaluating the costs and benefits for every single axis) is ...
Bibliography1. British Cycling Economy2. CBA Nordic Council3. Value for money UK4. Economic significance ICE5. N. Cavill, A...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ciclovias 1

258 views

Published on

Initial bicycle infrastructure assessment report

Published in: Technology, Sports
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ciclovias 1

  1. 1. Bicycle infrastructure assessment for ChileLiterature review and required tools for a new approach1mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  2. 2. Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and BPhases A and B: “Propuesta inicial de red” and “Propuesta de Plan Maestro de Ciclo-Rutas”• Assessment of 5 factors for the selection of axes:• feasibility of construction (via 15 indicators of physical features of proposed intervention site)• current amount of bike traffic• absolute number of accidents in last three years• interference of bicycles with other means of transport (takes into account current bike traffic, currentvehicle traffic, number of lanes and width of road)• environmental impact (via 20 indicators of potential damage to the natural environment involved)• Each of the 5 indicators result in a high, medium or low score, and some of them are then weighted with a2 or 3 factor. A final score is then computed.2mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  3. 3. Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and B3mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  4. 4. Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phases A and BLimitations and problems of Phases A and B:• the 5 indicators are reduced to three levels (high, medium and low) instead of being standardised toa comparable scale. This was done to mitigate the effect of outlier values, but can also produce adistortion in the evaluation. Perhaps a standardisation of indicators including upper/lower boundsshould be considered, or a more articulated separation in levels should be performed (e.g. 5 or 10levels instead of 3)• the weighing factors appear arbitrary• only current amount of bike traffic is considered, then preventing the possibility of building paths thatcreate shortcuts and thus produce more demand, and similarly under-evaluate routes that are nowavoided by cyclists since they’re deemed too dangerous. Similar discourse can be done for theassessment of interference• absolute number of accidents is considered, instead of weighing it for the amount of motorised andcycle traffic (most studies suggest that bicycle accidents are so sparse and unpredictable that theyshould not be considered for the CBA analysis, let alone the preliminary choice of axes)4mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  5. 5. Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phase CPhase C: “Plan Maestro de Ciclo-Rutas”. A ranking of proposed axes is built, based onthree indicators:• Evaluation of demand (current demand + demand from modal switch from walking)• Early assessment of profitability (following the development of technical and operationalsolutions)• Preliminary evaluation of the network (evaluation of benefits from expected speedimprovements)5mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  6. 6. Current SECTRA - MDS methodology for evaluating bicycleinfrastructure projects. Phase DPhase D: “Red de Corto Plazo”:Engineering of the routes on top of the Plan Maestro, given the ranking of axes and theapplicable restrictions. At the same time the costs of the Red de Corto Plazo are assessedand finally the definitive social and economic indicators are computed.6mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  7. 7. Current assessment methodology in Chile.Benefits and Costs indicators included• Benefits included in the economic and social assessment:• Reduction in transfer time for people switching to cycling from walking, assuming a fixed4.7% of people switching from walking to cycling (lower than in all European and NorthAmerican studies)• Reduction in transfer time for users of other means of transport who benefit from theseparation of fluxes. This assuming that the lane is built right next to a road that willbenefice from less bikes.• Costs included in the assessment:• Actual cost of building single projects. No maintenance costs included.7mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  8. 8. Limitations of current assessment method in Chile• All the most relevant indicators for the benefits of bicycle infrastructure are missing(discussed later)• Time savings are actually a not much relevant indicator. Most studies agree that they areclose or equal to zero, and in the case of modal switch from car to bike, transfer time isgenerally increased• The evaluation applies only to bike lanes built along a road (i.e. not considering stand-alonecycle paths), and it outputs better results the more the road is busy with car and bus traffic.This leads to a prioritisation of busy roads, and a lower score for less busy roads preferred bycurrent cyclists. This could lead to great distance between the routes usually chosen by usersand the projected axes• Maintenance costs are not included8mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  9. 9. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings9mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  10. 10. Private benefits found in literature• Less travel costs• Better physical and psychological condition (longer life, personal satisfaction, etc.)10mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  11. 11. Costs found in literature• Social costs• Investment cost• Maintenance cost• Opportunity cost of capital• Private costs• Discomfort of cycling compared to travelling by car• Possibly longer transfer times11mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  12. 12. General data and assumptions required for the study• Average trips per day, modal split and length• Additional demand induced by cycle infrastructure (in Norway 20%, 5-40% in sensitivityanalysis)• Modal switch from car to bike (in Norway 15% for trips shorter than 5km)• Proportion of bike trips on current cycle track network12mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  13. 13. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings13mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  14. 14. 1. Health savings - reduced healthcare costsThe distinction is between active and inactive population. Active population performs at least 30minutes of physical activity a day, that can also be split into sessions of at least 10 minutes each.According to the different studies, activating an inactive person leads to a 25-50%1 reduction in riskof premature death. Studies in Europe have established a monetary yearly benefit for healthcare costfor activating an inactive person. 880€ (~580k CLP) for Norway, 940€ (~620k CLP) for Sweden.2 Thismeans that only the km that exceed the 30 min threshold should be taken into account for CBA.Illness that are connected with inactivity include3:• cardiovascular disease (- 50%6, 8)• stroke• obesity (-50%6)• cancer7 (five types). Colon cancer (- 40-50%8)• type 2 diabetes (- 25-33%5, - 50%6)• osteoporosis7• depression• hypertension (- 30%6)14mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  15. 15. 1. Health savings - life years saved• There is evidence that non-cyclists have a 39% higher mortality rate than cyclists1• It is possible to produce a km-life year relationship, measured for metabolic equivalentintensity level and kilometres cycled115mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  16. 16. 1. Health savings - data required• Proportion of inactive individuals in Chile• Proportion of obese individuals in Chile• Average treatment costs for said diseases, or for obesity-related diseases• Life year value16mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  17. 17. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings17mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  18. 18. 2. Absenteeism and productivity savings• Norway and Denmark assume a 1% lower absenteeism rate because of general better shapein consequence of an individual becoming “active”. (Elvik 1998)• Additional savings come from productivity savings coming from less exposure to air and noisepollution. Although, since these savings are marginal and difficult to compute, they will beassumed to be included in the external costs of motorised traffic discussed later18mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  19. 19. 2. Absenteeism savings - data required• Proportion of work trips on total• Average wage• Absenteeism data19mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  20. 20. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings20mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  21. 21. 3. Public transport expansion savingsAn increase in the share of cyclists leads to a decrease in costs for public transport becauseof the modal shift from bus to the bike. However, this effect is only relevant in the long term. Ina shorter term, though, it could lead to savings in the expansion of public transport network.This is particularly relevant in Antofagasta where a big public transport infrastructureimprovement is planned (switching from cost-effective minibus system to a non cost-effectiverapid transit system)4Probably impossible to include in the CBA21mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  22. 22. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings22mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  23. 23. 4. Less future investments in car facilitiesThere is evidence that an investment in cycling infrastructure is the cheapest way ofexpanding transit capacity, being cheaper to build and to maintain and much more spaceefficient than increasing car capacity4. Widening a road, building new road connections orparkings can be avoided if bicycle transit capacity is increased.It’s probably not possible to include all of them in the CBA, although it might be possible forthe parking costs (discussed later)23mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  24. 24. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings24mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  25. 25. 5. External costs of private transport• External costs of private transport include:• Air emissions• Noise emissions• Wear of road infrastructure• Environmental costs connected with caruse (disposal of oil, tyres, etc.)• Congestion• In a city like Antofagasta, air pollution mostlycomes from cars (no heating and industries)so reducing car traffic is very effective inreducing emissions• Noise pollution has a cost in terms of mentaldisease, lower productivity, insomnia• Congestion in Antofagasta is a growingproblem. Current car ownership growth ratemight lead to saturation• It is proved that, on average, cyclists are notmore exposed to air pollution than motorists,so modal shift won’t lead to a worse healthcondition of cyclists425mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  26. 26. 5. External costs of private transport - assessmentThere are two ways of assessing external costs:• Sum of prevention, evasion and damage costs4, including everything from promotion ofcycling and healthy lifestyle to positioning of baffle boards for soundproofing, actual healthcosts. (v/km costs standard costs are 35-122 CLP in Norway, 35 CLP in Sweden, 6-13CLP in Finland-air pollution only-, 33 CLP in Denmark)2• Stated preference “willingness to pay” approach. (7.6 CLP in Germany-air pollution only-,12.6 CLP in US Litman study, 17-19 CLP in other US study)426mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  27. 27. 5. External costs of private transport - data required• Average external km cost in Chile (including vehicle fleet quality and composition, cold startkm, average trip lengths, average speed, etc.)• and/or average stated preference car km cost (willingness to pay)27mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  28. 28. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings28mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  29. 29. 6. Increased comfort and security• Comfort and security are a fundamental incentives for biking. Antofagasta could be an idealenvironment in which these aspects could be improved. Apparently, many cyclists ride on thepavement avoiding the road, so the presence of cycle routes would definitely improve safety.Comfort is generally linked to the quality of the infrastructure and weather conditions. A new,good quality infrastructure in a city with such ideal weather conditions could produce a highoutput for this indicator• Assessment: this indicator is exclusively assessed with stated preference “willingness topay” surveys. (40 CLP in Denmark, 175 CLP in Norway, 0-386 in Sweden-mostcomprehensive study)• Data required: stated preference survey in Antofagasta29mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  30. 30. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings30mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  31. 31. 7. Reduced parking costs• In one car parking bay it is possible to fit at least 10 bike parkings. In the Netherlands,building a bike parking costs approximately 5% of the cost of a parking space for a car.• Assessment: the easiest and most effective way to assess parking cost savings is to use theaverage parking rate price paid by firms in town7• Data required: average parking costs, average parking usage31mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  32. 32. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings32mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  33. 33. 8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost • All studies agree that it is very difficult to have a general cause-effect relationship betweenaccidents and the presence of cycling facilities. This is generally due to the very sparse and rarenature of bike accidents, and to the fact that most of them don’t get reported• Data shows that severe injuries or death of cyclists without a contact with a motorised vehicle areextremely rare• Empirical data show that there exists a negative relationship between bicycle km per person per dayand casualties per bicycle km, i.e. countries in which cycling is more common are usually safer onaverage. This might be also due to the presence of more and higher quality cycling facilities• Accidents involving cyclists tend to be less severe, thus producing less hospital treatment costs andmuch less material damage and emergency service costs• Anyway, even if the reduced risk generated by cycle infrastructure is NOT considered, positivehealth effects outsmart higher deaths rates by 20:1 433mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  34. 34. 8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost Source: (2)34mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  35. 35. 8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost -assessment• Assessment: None of the literature considered had insights on the average effect of cyclinginfrastructure on casualties, only a Swedish study has performed a research on a particularsection before and after the construction of the route• Data required: a specific research on the positive effects of a cycle route could be performed,although this would need calculations brought on before and after the construction. Moreover,the low number of cyclists would hardly make possible the production of significant results35mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  36. 36. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings36mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  37. 37. 9. Travel time reduction savings• The studies considered don’t include specific ways of assessing time savings, since theyapply to a whole network of routes. At this level there is no sufficient evidence of animprovement in travel times, because of the heterogeneous nature of paths and streets.• Assessment: for this study, the current method proposed by SECTRA could be used• Data required: data on traffic and roads features37mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  38. 38. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings38mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  39. 39. 10. Accessibility, employment, business• Accessibility is improved for categories that do not have access to a car. Increased mobilityof less wealthy individuals leads to better work opportunities. The use of the bike broadensthe radius reachable by people without the use of private or public transport, so it isparticularly effective in the short/middle range for producing a higher flexibility of workforce.This is relevant in a city like Antofagasta where a consistent share of the workers cannotafford a car. As a side effect, the positive impact on congestion produces better accessibilityfor everyone else• Employment. A study on shops in Utrecht4 has shown that, although cyclists spend less thanmotorists on an average visit, cyclists tend to make much more visits to a single shop andalso to neighbouring ones, boosting the district effect. Evidence in the Unites States (NY, SanFrancisco...) shows that the installation of a protected bike lane has boosted sales by up to50%. In addition to this, bike repair shops are more labour-intensive than automobilemaintenance services, so a switch to a cycle-centric transport share produces positive effectson employment as well39mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  40. 40. 10. Accessibility, employment, business• Attractiveness for business is also improved in a cycle-friendly environment. A compact,cycle- and pedestrian-friendly city is an ideal location for corporate headquarters seeking forbetter quality of life and environmental sustainability of their workers. In Europe citiesassociated with good cycling infrastructure are top in quality of life. In Brazil, Curitiba, with itslow congestion, good public transport, green areas and cycle paths, has attracted majormultinational companies though not being in the Sao Paulo - Rio region that concentrates thecountry’s economic activity• Assessment: assessing improvements in accessibility and in business attractiveness isprobably not possible. Assessing the positive impact on business could be included in thestudy, after performing a research on the consequences of a new cycle lane on the sales ofneighbouring businesses40mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  41. 41. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings41mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  42. 42. 11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic• Motorised traffic constitutes a barrier to the ‘natural’ level of cycling, that prevents peoplefrom cycling and walking as much as they would want to. These costs can be computed byconsidering the output of the other indicators, and thus should not be included in the CBA,but can be useful to discuss the value of traffic calming policies (discussed later)• Assessment: computed from the indicators produced42mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  43. 43. Social benefits found in literaturesorted by approximate importance1. Health savings (reduced healthcare costs, life years saved)2. Absenteeism and productivity savings (general better shape, less minor problems caused by air and noise pollution)3. Public transport expansion savings4. Less future investment on car facilities5. External costs of private transport (including air and noise pollution, wearing of infrastructure, etc)6. Increased comfort and security7. Reduced parking costs8. Accidents reduction and reduced per-accident cost9. Travel time reduction savings10. Accessibility. Positive effect on employment, emerging economy and general attractiveness of business environment11. Fall of barrier costs produced by motorised traffic12. School bus transport savings43mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  44. 44. 12. School bus transport savings• The nordic studies6,7 suggest that there is an effect on school bus transport to be considered.Although, this doesn’t seem to be relevant in Antofagasta (?), so this indicator could bescrapped.• Required data. School bus transit data44mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  45. 45. “Network” requisites for the creation of a successful bike-friendly city• Existence of a proper network, with numerous connections between bike lanes and appropriate capillarity anduniformity in quality• Existence of bike parking facilities. The fear of theft is one of the main factors that prevent people from cycling, soproviding safe parking spots in strategic locations is a big incentive. Also a public bike tagging campaign could help.• Traffic calming interventions. This involves both the theme of “ciclocalles”, i.e. streets where car traffic is sloweddown and the coexistence of bike and car traffic is enhanced, and interventions for turning the trade-off betweenusing the car and the bike more favourable to the bike. This includes: raising car taxation, raising car parking prices,decreasing the offer of car parking spots on the street, closing streets to car traffic, programming traffic lights so thatcar traffic is slowed and made less convenient, simultaneously giving right-of-way to cyclists and pedestrians.• Cycle education activities both in and outside of school institutions• Bike sharing projects. As seen in various european cities, managed with a digital system. Would need a separateCBA analysis.• Public economic incentives to cycling. For example contributions for bike purchases, free warranty extensions etc.45mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  46. 46. New method proposed• It seems that the approach used in Chile (evaluating the costs and benefits for every single axis) is notused anywhere in the cases studied (mainly Europe and USA). The general approach produces an averagecost-benefit ratio, that ranges from about 1:4 to over 1:20 in certain cases, with an average of 1:5/6• One reason is that the biggest effects come from health and other section-independent factors, and thatdemand effects are too unpredictable to be applied to a single section• Another reason might be that this is the network effect can only be captured if the network is consideredas a whole• It is clear that planning on current traffic an infrastructure that has the primary function of attracting newcyclists and induce modal shift might be distortionary• Proposed method: Creation of an average km-benefit relationship that considers only general benefits, sothat the costs for each section can be separately assessed. This relationship is then integrated with site-specific features such as specific time savings, external costs of private transport... in order to be able toprioritise the axes46mercoledì 19 giugno 13
  47. 47. Bibliography1. British Cycling Economy2. CBA Nordic Council3. Value for money UK4. Economic significance ICE5. N. Cavill, A. Davis. Cycling and Health: A Briefing Paper for the Regional Cycling Development Team. Finaldraft, London, 2003.6. THE PEP in Nordic Council report7. Sælensminde8. CBA Pilsen, Czech47mercoledì 19 giugno 13

×