Beyond Mobility proposes a 3-part strategy for the US DOT to encourage more sustainable transportation spending at the state and local levels: 1. Institute a performance-based rating system to rank state DOTs and projects using sustainability metrics, providing accountability. 2. Expand educational efforts through programs like TPCB to increase awareness among planners and officials about sustainable approaches. 3. Highlight for the public the social, economic, and environmental impacts of transportation decisions through expanded data on issues like health, equity and costs/benefits of different modes.

1. Beyond Mobility
A New Strategy for Sustainable Transportation
by
Alan Falk
falk_alan@bah.com
Matt Metcalfe
metcalfe_matthew@bah.com
Stephanie Sand
sand_stephanie@bah.com
Minna Friedlander
friedlander_minna@bah.com

3. Beyond Mobility: A New Strategy for Sustainable Transportation
Importance of Sustainability • Allows the basic access and developmental needs
Traditionally, transportation projects have been defined by of individuals, companies, and society to be met
mobility or ease of physical movement, which has led to safely, enhancing livability in a manner consistent
a system of roadways threading through every town and with human and ecosystem health; for example,
hamlet in our nation. The primary goal of these projects has US DOT Secretary Ray LaHood described a livable
been to alleviate local traffic congestion and provide faster, community as a place “where if people don’t
more efficient routes for automobiles and people to get want an automobile, they don’t have to have one.
from Point A to Point B—mainly by building new roads and A community where you can walk to work, your
expanding existing ones. doctor’s appointment, pharmacy, or grocery store.
Or you could take light rail, a bus, or ride a bike”1
But with each passing year, it has become increasingly
obvious that this mindset is myopic and often fails to • Offers a choice of transport modes and supports
deliver the intended result. After many decades of following a competitive economy and balanced regional
this transportation template, the United States finds development
itself facing a raft of problems—an overdependence on • Limits emissions and waste within the planet’s
automobiles and fossil fuel; an expanding carbon footprint; ability to absorb them, uses substantial renewable
economic dislocation for many small retailers; urban and resources, and uses nonrenewable resources only
suburban sprawl and concomitant degradation of air and to the degree that renewable substitutes are not
water quality; deteriorating public transportation—that can available, while minimizing impact on land use and
be linked directly to the traditional transportation approach. noise generation.
Because of their very real environmental, economic, and For sustainable transportation systems to become
social costs, these issues are too serious to be neglected. more commonplace, the US DOT will need to play
Consequently, local public and private transportation a leadership role. It is the primary financial backer
organizations, along with the US Department of of transportation projects nationwide. However, the
Transportation (US DOT), are increasingly seeking a more existing formula-based grant funding process, which
balanced set of answers to transportation issues—a more primarily awards transportation grants to state
sustainable solution. These answers must begin to address DOTs based on demographics (e.g., size of state
the transportation shortfalls that increasingly plague virtually or metropolitan area and its population), severely
every region of our nation and must create transportation limits the US DOT’s ability to influence spending on
systems that will meet the needs of the future. sustainable transportation projects. Because recent
attempts to change the funding formula have been
“Sustainable” Transportation unsuccessful, a complementary approach is needed
In the context of transportation systems, the term that, in effect, will enable the US DOT to motivate
“sustainable” encompasses environmental, social, and public officials and planners to consider and propose
economic considerations. As defined by the American sustainable transportation projects.
Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials and the Transportation Research Board,
sustainable has three characteristics:
1 indlay, Christie. “Who Wants to Own Two or Three Cars?” AARP Bulletin, October 1, 2009.
F
Available at http://www.aarp.org/home-garden/housing/info-10-2009/living_in_a_post_car_world.html.
1

4. A Sustainable Transportation Strategy GreenLITES, Greenroads, American Society of
Taken as a whole, Booz Allen’s proposed sustainable Civil Engineers infrastructure ratings, and Federal
transportation approach is designed to complement Highway Administration’s Sustainable Highways
the existing formula-based funding mechanism. This Self-Evaluation Tool. All these approaches, systems,
three-part strategy, described in the following sections, and tools demonstrate a good starting point for
addresses the interests of the US DOT, regional and the US DOT to develop a consistent and accepted
local officials and agencies, project stakeholders, and standard to evaluate a transportation project’s degree
the public. of sustainability. Numerous measures could be
incorporated into these performance-based ratings, the
Strategy 1: Encourage Accountability for Sustainable most relevant of which include the following:
Transportation Spending at State and Local Levels • Energy Use—Measures energy consumption per
To create incentives for state and local planning mile traveled or transportation system energy
authorities to focus on sustainability and give consumption per capita and gives preference to
the public tangible data with which to hold local projects or systems that are more energy efficient,
transportation officials accountable for environmental including the effects of mass transit, bicycle
and livability concerns, the US DOT should institute options, or pedestrian areas; primarily focusing on
a performance-based rating system. In the form of the environment and resource use, this measure
an official report card, this system would rank state also has economic implications (e.g., cost of
transportation agencies and projects using a select set transportation) and social implications (e.g., health
of sustainability metrics. With this yardstick, planners effects attributed to air emissions)
and the public could better evaluate the life-cycle costs
and benefits of transportation projects using not only • Accessibility—Measures the degree to which a
conventional criteria (e.g., vehicle miles traveled) but project or system enables access to the places that
also social, economic, and environmental benefits. people and goods need to go (e.g., major centers,
Establishing a clear set of sustainability metrics that services, or open space) and the degree to which
can be incorporated into cost/benefit analyses would transportation projects or systems serve disparate
give transportation planners and decisionmakers a social groups equally; although access primarily is a
financial basis for justifying sustainability projects. social measure focused on improving individual quality
The scorecard concept would provide an objective of life through choice and equality, it also has financial
way for the US DOT to publically recognize state and benefits as a driver of economic development
local planning authorities for their accomplishments in • System Effectiveness—Measures the expected level
sustainable transportation. of service quality and the ability for a transportation
The performance-based scorecard concept has proven project or system to meet these standards
successful in other areas of activity. One of the best consistently and reliably; measures of system
known examples is the US Green Building Council’s effectiveness include average trip time, time spent in
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) traffic, travel time reliability, and point-to-point costs
rating system. In the absence of regulation, LEED, a (e.g., tolls, fuel, and transit fare); these metrics
voluntary nongovernment program, has become a de generally are economic calculations that calculate
facto standard for evaluating green buildings in public costs and productivity gains or losses, but each has
and private sector development. associated social and environmental implications
for local communities: quality of life, health-related
Numerous sustainable transportation scorecards issues (e.g., levels of obesity and stress), air quality,
have emerged recently, including the LEED-inspired
energy consumption, and carbon footprint.
Sustainable Transportation Access Rating System,
2

5. Strategy 2: Enhance the Awareness of Public Strategy 3: Expand Community and Public
Officials and State and Local Transportation Understanding of the Full Life-Cycle Benefits of
Planners About the Benefits of, and Approaches to, Sustainable Transportation
Sustainable Transportation The public’s demand for sustainable transportation
Moving from a paradigm in which transportation has grown considerably during the past decade. The
program success is measured by the number of public has demonstrated its preferences through
highway miles created to a system that defines action and survey responses. During each of the last
success by the degree to which environmental and 4 years, mass transit use has increased more than
socioeconomic conditions are enhanced now and in automobile travel. According to a survey of users of
the future requires leadership support. Ultimately, a 30 local transit systems nationwide, people who had
paradigm shift relies on convincing public officials automobiles available made about one-third of mass
and state and local transportation planners of the transit trips. Numerous surveys also have indicated
importance and value of a more balanced approach. that people view investments in public transportation
After all, they are the front line at the regional level, positively. The 2010 US Census found that young
and their support or resistance could make the professionals in their 20s and 30s would choose
difference in whether a project is implemented. walkable and bikeable communities with access to
Therefore, education is essential. Educational efforts transit over automobile-bound locales. This opinion is
aimed at planners and public officials must emphasize not unique to a younger demographic; the American
the benefits sustainable transportation provides to Association of Retired Persons reports that 71 percent
their communities and constituents. of older households also prefer to live within walking
distance of transit.
The US DOT has excellent resources and existing
programs to facilitate these educational efforts. Although the public might express a preference for more
For example, the agency’s Transportation Planning livable communities, real data and tools with which to
Capacity Building (TPCB) program is a popular make sustainable transportation choices and apply
clearinghouse for information relevant to transportation pressure on decisionmakers would be very helpful. This
professionals. The TPCB program supports workshops, information should encompass the following:
peer-to-peer information exchanges, and the use of
• Expansion of mode choice options and associated
analytical methodologies (e.g., scenario planning).
benefits to local communities
The TPCB should expand its offerings and develop
a corresponding communications strategy that • Costs of sprawling development facilitated by road
highlights such topics as long-range sustainability expansion and the resulting fiscal, environmental,
planning, sophisticated cost-benefit analyses that and public health impacts
consider environmental and social impacts, effective
• Incorporation of travel costs and travel time into
mechanisms for encouraging transportation mode
residential location decisions
shifts, and enhanced methods for financing alternative
transportation infrastructure. • Potential for short-term increases in transportation
capacity (e.g., expanding highways) to be self-
These activities will enhance the understanding
defeating, as high levels of service attract new trips,
of sustainable transportation planning, link the
resulting in more congestion
transportation planning process to community goals,
and profile exemplary cases of effective transportation • Economic development generated by having multiple
planning practices. modes of transportation feeding into concentrated
commercial areas.
3

6. Exhibit 1 lists the social, environmental, and economic impacts of transportation decisions that public outreach
could highlight.
Exhibit 1 | Social, Environmental, and Economic Transportation Impact
Social Factors
Physical Health Mental Health Mortality Equity Security
Among physically able adults, Increased neighborhood Each year, 43,000 Transit ensures that the Personal cars and
average annual medical walkability is associated with Americans are killed elderly, the disabled, trucks account for
expenditures are 32 percent lower a reduction in the odds of and 2.7 million people children, and other 40 percent of US
for those who achieve physical having significant depressive are injured seriously nondrivers can participate oil consumption
activity targets (Litman, 2010). symptoms, particularly in in more than 6 million fully in the economy and (Baxandall, 2008).
Transportation can affect the older men (Berke, 2007). motor vehicle crashes. society (Baxandall, 2008). Unstable supplies,
achievement of these targets. For This is particularly important Motor vehicle crashes Users from low-income attributed in part
instance, train commuters walked in evaluating demographic also are the leading households made most to escalating
an average of 30 percent more trends associated with cause of death for transit trips. On average, international conflict,
steps per day and were 4 times the aging baby-boomer Americans aged 5 to people from households create questions
more likely to walk 10,000 steps population. Many commuters 44. On the other hand, with incomes of less than regarding demand
per day than car commuters report that they find high- public transit has only $20,000 per year made and expose the
(Wener and Evans, 2007). Further, quality public transit travel to about one-twentieth the about half of transit trips United States to
a typical white male living in a be less stressful than driving passenger fatality rate (APTA, 2004). significant price
compact, mixed-use community (Litman, 2010). as automobile travel volatility.
weighs on average 10 pounds (Beck, 2007).
less than a similar male living in a
diffuse subdivision (Harder, 2007).
Environmental Factors
Air Quality Water Quality Climate Land Use
Studies show that concentrations of Runoff pollution In 2006, passenger cars contributed about one-third Highways contribute
air pollutants that commuters and currently is the number (34 percent) of the transportation-induced CO2 significantly to the
other roadway users experience are one threat to water emissions (BTS, 2008). Public transportation in fragmentation of wildlife
substantially higher than ambient quality in the United the United States already saves an estimated 6.9 habitat (Baxandall, 2008).
air measured in typical urban air. States (NRDC, 1999). million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually (ULI,
Consequently, the time a person 2007). Heavy rail transit produces about 75 percent
spends in a vehicle significantly less greenhouse gas emissions per passenger mile
affects her or her overall exposure compared with an average single-occupancy vehicle.
(EPA, 2007). Light rail transit produces 57 percent less and bus
transit 32 percent less (FTA 2009).
Economic Factors
Economic Losses Property Value Consumer Costs Business Development
In 2005, transit prevented 541 million hours of traffic Studies have shown The cost of owning and With new transportation
delay in the nation’s 437 urban areas. The monetary that land in immediate operating private vehicles centers comes the need for
value of those savings was $10.2 billion (Schrank and proximity of transit stops tends to be higher than increased services clustered in
Lomax, 2007). Between 1980 and 2006, the proportion is generally more valuable using public transit these locations. Governments
of workers driving alone to work increased from just than land farther away (Bailey, 2007). have an opportunity
under two-thirds to more than three-quarters. The average (Diaz, 1999). to encourage business
commuter spent 6 minutes longer driving to or from work development through asset-
in 2001 than in 1983 (Baxandall, 2008). Per $1 billion building techniques such as
of annual investment, public transportation investment targeted redevelopment and
over time can lead to more than $1.7 billion of net revitalization strategies
annual additional gross domestic product (GDP) as a (Iams and Kaplan, 2006).
result of cost savings. This amount is in addition to the
$1.8 billion of GDP supported by the pattern of public
transportation spending (Weisbrod and Reno, 2009).
Source: Booz Allen Hamilton
4

7. Conclusion
The current formula-based grant system presents a
significant challenge to encouraging investment in
sustainable transportation that better supports the
public’s needs. To shift current transportation spending
patterns at the state and local levels, Booz Allen’s
three-part strategy incorporates the latest thinking
on effective multimodal sustainable transportation
systems that meet current and future needs. Our
strategy leverages the insights and experiences of
experts who have supported similar large, complex,
strategic communications and transformation efforts
that cut across numerous industries and stakeholder
groups. In particular, Booz Allen’s strategy builds on
existing efforts by the US DOT, regional transportation
authorities, and private and non-profit organizations,
enhancing these efforts where necessary and
incorporating them into a coordinated, comprehensive
approach.
5

8. About Booz Allen
Booz Allen Hamilton has been at the forefront of and resources, and deliver enduring results. By
strategy and technology consulting for nearly a combining a consultant’s problem-solving orientation
century. Today, Booz Allen is a leading provider of with deep technical knowledge and strong execution,
management and technology consulting services Booz Allen helps clients achieve success in their
to the US government in defense, intelligence, and most critical missions—as evidenced by the firm’s
civil markets, and to major corporations, institutions, many client relationships that span decades. Booz
and not-for-profit organizations. In the commercial Allen helps shape thinking and prepare for future
sector, the firm focuses on leveraging its existing developments in areas of national importance,
expertise for clients in the financial services, including cybersecurity, homeland security,
healthcare, and energy markets, and to international healthcare, and information technology.
clients in the Middle East. Booz Allen offers clients
Booz Allen is headquartered in McLean, Virginia, employs
deep functional knowledge spanning strategy and
more than 25,000 people, and had revenue of $5.59
organization, engineering and operations, technology,
billion for the 12 months ended March 31, 2011. Fortune
and analytics—which it combines with specialized
has named Booz Allen one of its “100 Best Companies
expertise in clients’ mission and domain areas to
to Work For” for seven consecutive years. Working Mother
help solve their toughest problems.
has ranked the firm among its “100 Best Companies for
The firm’s management consulting heritage is Working Mothers” annually since 1999. More information
the basis for its unique collaborative culture and is available at www.boozallen.com. (NYSE: BAH)
operating model, enabling Booz Allen to anticipate
needs and opportunities, rapidly deploy talent
To learn more about the firm and to download digital versions of this article and other Booz Allen Hamilton
publications, visit www.boozallen.com.
6

9. Contact Information:
Alan Falk Matt Metcalfe Stephanie Sand Minna Friedlander
Principal Senior Associate Associate Senior Consultant
falk_alan@bah.com metcalfe_matthew@bah.com sand_stephanie@bah.com friedlander_minna@bah.com
301-825-7878 202-346-9199 703-377-8341 703-377-9802
7

10. Principal Offices
Huntsville, Alabama Indianapolis, Indiana Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Sierra Vista, Arizona Leavenworth, Kansas Charleston, South Carolina
Los Angeles, California Aberdeen, Maryland Houston, Texas
San Diego, California Annapolis Junction, Maryland San Antonio, Texas
San Francisco, California Hanover, Maryland Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Colorado Springs, Colorado Lexington Park, Maryland Alexandria, Virginia
Denver, Colorado Linthicum, Maryland Arlington, Virginia
District of Columbia Rockville, Maryland Chantilly, Virginia
Orlando, Florida Troy, Michigan Charlottesville, Virginia
Pensacola, Florida Kansas City, Missouri Falls Church, Virginia
Sarasota, Florida Omaha, Nebraska Herndon, Virginia
Tampa, Florida Red Bank, New Jersey McLean, Virginia
Atlanta, Georgia New York, New York Norfolk, Virginia
Honolulu, Hawaii Rome, New York Stafford, Virginia
O’Fallon, Illinois Dayton, Ohio Seattle, Washington
The most complete, recent list of offices and their addresses and telephone numbers can be found on
www.boozallen.com
www.boozallen.com ©2012 Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.
01.127.12