L’impacte de la gestió de la mobilitat en l’economia

249 views

Published on

Sra. Sarah Martens. Àrea educació i mobilitat. Mobiel 21

Es presentaran un recull dels anomenats modes suaus per influir en el comportament de viatge, no implica grans pressupostos com grans projectes d'infraestructures de transport. En temps de crisi, les petites inversions sobre la gestió de la mobilitat sovint són les primeres en ser rebutjades. No obstant això, les mesures de gestió de la mobilitat que han demostrat ser altament cost-eficients i eficaces en el canvi del comportament. Diversos estudis també han calculat els enormes beneficis econòmics d'aquest canvi de comportament.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

L’impacte de la gestió de la mobilitat en l’economia

  1. 1. Shifting the balance The impact of mobility management on the economy 10th AMTU’s conference - Sabadell
  2. 2.  Impact of MM on modal shift  Impact of modal shift on the economy  The importance of evaluation In this presentation
  3. 3.  Research methodology?  Interaction between measures  Context  Percentage (%) - Percentage points (pp) Limitations
  4. 4. 1. Impact of mobility management on modal shift
  5. 5.  Evaluation of 1,200+ company travel plans - Average reduction in car use -7pp - Up to -34 pp Company travel plans - France
  6. 6.  Federal diagnostic of the commute  Mandatory survey for companies with 100+ employees  Every 3 years  2005 – 2008 – 2011  1/3 of Belgian workers Company travel plans Belgium
  7. 7.  2008: Mobility coordinator is most effective measure Company travel plans - Belgium Without coordinator: +15 pp solo car use
  8. 8.  Evolution of solo car use in companies with a mobility coordinator from 2005 to 2008: - Average reduction of 3.5 pp - Up to -48pp (Smals-MVM in Charleroi)  Importance of supporting measures: - Parking fee: car use -5.1 pp (2005-2011) - Company move: car use -5.5 pp - Financial support from Region or municipality: - 10.7 pp Company travel plans - Belgium
  9. 9. Measure (2008) Cycling in companies with the measure Cycling in companies without the measure Company bicycles 16% 8% Covered bicycle sheds 10% 6% Bicycle maintenance 15% 10% Company travel plans - Belgium
  10. 10. Cycling evolution from 2005 to 2011:  Bicycles available for the commute: +2.6 pp  Rain clothing available: +3.6 pp  Abolishing all cycling measures: -1.1 pp (as opposed to 1pp increase in companies that never took measures) Company travel plans Belgium
  11. 11. Measure (2008) PT use with the measure PT use without the measure Free public transport Train: 17.5% TMB*: 9% Train: 7.5% TMB: 5% Information on public transport Train: 15% TMB: 9% Train: 9% TMB: 5.5% Company travel plans - Belgium  Only 1 out of 4 companies located within 1 km of the station spreads information on trains * TMB = Tram Metro Bus
  12. 12. Measure (2008) Carpooling with the measure Carpooling without the measure Carpooling organised by company 9% 3% Carpooling organised with guaranteed ride home 14.5% 3.5% Company travel plans - Belgium 2011: abolishing all carpool measures: -2.4 pp
  13. 13.  Home to work distance halved to equal national average  Solo car use 12% less than national average  Walking: 2x national average Workhubs - UK
  14. 14.  OBIS: BS replaces car transport by 4% (Berlin) to 77% (Senigallia)  Paris: 20% use the car less often Cycling share increased by 70%  London: ¾ of users encouraged to start cycling (more) in the city Bike sharing
  15. 15.  A shared car replaces 4-8 private cars and 36 to 84 m2 of parking space  Bremen : 6,200+ users = ~1,500 cars less = €25 to 40 million of underground parking  UK: car sharers drive 8,000 kilometres less than car owners per year Car sharing
  16. 16.  Green-Schools Programme  85% of Irish schools (3,551)  Solo car use -27% School travel plans - Ireland
  17. 17. 14 pp increase during 8 pp increase after CONNECT Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, UK
  18. 18. hausse de 12 pts pendant hausse de 8 pts après CONNECT
  19. 19.  Personalised advice reduces car kilometres by 2 to 11%  60% of participants in adult cycle training go on to increase their levels of cycling  17-41% walk more for every-day journeys when they are motivated to walk for leisure  More data: ‘Soft measures – hard facts’ (UK) Individualised mobility advice and training - UK
  20. 20. 2. Impact of modal shift on the economy
  21. 21. Hidden costs of car traffic  Congestion : 200 billion euros in Europe  Physical inactivity: 150-300 € /inhabitant /year  Accidents: 2.5 - 3 % of GNP  Parking: housing costs + 20%  Social costs  Walking and cycling boost local economy  Car ownership, road infrastructure, emissions…
  22. 22.  EU: € 373,284 mio per year Source: TUD – The true costs of Automobility External costs of car use
  23. 23.  On average €190 per houshold per year  Appr. €600 per car-commuting household  Up to €1,157 (London) Congestion costs to households UK, France, Germany Country-wide loss to households UK France Germany Direct (fuel and loss of time) € 3,620 M € 3,883 M € 5,647 M Indirect (higher costs of goods and services) € 1,320 M € 1,674 M € 2,183 M Total € 4,940 M € 5,557 M € 7,830 M Source: The economic costs of gridlock (Cebr) – data from 2011
  24. 24.  Creating a working space costs - 9,000 per year (Netherlands) - 15,000 per year per fte (Switzerland)  Now: 8.41 desks per 10 knowledge workers  By 2020: 6.11  Savings amount to 8.2 billion euros The new way of working the Netherlands
  25. 25.  Denmark: cycling benefits = € 40 million in healthcare costs per year  ECF: External costs of car use: € 0,05 – 0,06 per passenger-km  Health benefits of cycling: € 0,30 – 1,19 /km Health
  26. 26.  Technology & efficiency: 1/3 of EU target  Achieving Denmark’s cycling levels throughout Europe: up to 26% of target  E-bikes substitute for car for 39% of trips Source: ECF Modal shift is necesseray to reach EU emissions targets
  27. 27.  UK: Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) of 2:1 or more = high value for money Cost-Benefit Analysis
  28. 28.  Company TP in Australia  30:1  Area TP in the UK: - on average 4:1 - up to 13:1 Example: travel plans
  29. 29. More priority to MM in transport policy:  Traffic reduction of 11 %  Reduction in urban peak traffic of 21%  BCR 10:1 UK Smarter Choices study (2005) Making Smarter Choices Work
  30. 30. 3. The importance of evaluation
  31. 31. MaxSem:  Pre-contemplation  Contemplation  Preparation/action  Maintenance Stages of behaviour change pre- contemplation contemplation preparation /action maintenance
  32. 32. MaxSumo:  Services provided  Mobility options offered  Overall effect on attitudes, behaviour and society Evaluation on multiple levels Assessment Levels Background Y External factors P Person-related factors Servicesprovided A Project activities and output B Awareness of mobility services provided C Usage of mobility services provided D Satisfaction with mobility services provided Mobilityoption offered E Acceptance of mobility option offered F Take up of mobility option offered G Satisfaction with the mobility option offered Overall effects H Long-term attitudes and behaviour I System impacts
  33. 33.  UK: Travelling to School Initiative (2003-2010) Control group
  34. 34.  Modal split of all European cities over 100,000 inhabitants TEMS – Modal split database
  35. 35. 268 cities > 100,000 54 cities < 100,000
  36. 36. Join us!  National SUMP-network  Customised support for your SUMP  More information: - Grupo de Estudios y Alternativas 21, S.L. - Miguel Mateos Arribas - +34 915 329 660 - mmateos@gea21.com
  37. 37. Sarah Martens Mobiel 21 – Belgium +32 16 31 77 01 Sarah.martens@mobiel21.be Thank you for your attention!

×