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.
Sustainable transport in Victoria: developing,
financing and implementing a state plan
Institute of Transport and Logistic...
High level generic sustainability goals
› Outcomes
- Economic competitiveness (e.g. support agglomeration
economies, manag...
Critical land transport issues
›Economic productivity
›Congestion
›Climate change
›Social exclusion
›Energy security/peak ...
The future of Victoria’s transport GHG
emissions: BAV analysis in 2009
4
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
1990 2...
One way for 2020 Aust land transport GHG
emissions to be 20% < 2000 (from 2007)
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2005 2010...
How are we going on GHG?
› Stabilised, helped by declining
per capita car use in our cities
› PT mode share increasing wel...
Sustainable transport: based on MPS
experience
› Bipartisan support vital but difficult in our highly
politicized environm...
State 
and
Land use/transport integration (Stopher and Stanley 
2014, Fig 16.1)
Particularize your high level goals with spice, for
regional distinctiveness: e.g. Melbourne
› What we want to achieve (va...
Set land use directions first, to support these
outcomes/goals (Melbourne example)
 More compact city (e.g. Hard urban bo...
Generic urban land transport policy
directions for sustainability
Encourage efficient settlement patterns
Land use/transpo...
Place-based transport directions
(some Melbourne examples)
› Centre/inner core
- PT capacity, walk, cycle
› Middle suburbs...
Example: JS SmartBus proposals not in
PlanMelbourne (short to medium term)
13
Regional issues
› Support land use directions, e.g.
- Access to jobs, education, services, friends, recreational and
cultu...
Regional social exclusion: higher than
Melbourne
15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
W
arrnam
bool
G
reaterDandenong
M
elbourne
G...
State plan development
› We need long term strategies linked to short to medium term
implementation plans
› Intergovernmen...
Key challenges
› Power sharing between levels of government
› Empowering the community to get involved
› Establishing and ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Sustainable Transport Seminar - John Stanley, The University of Sydney

592 views

Published on

Professor John Stanley, Adjunct Professor at the Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies of The University of Sydney, presented at our seminar entitled 'Sustainable Transport in Victoria: Developing, financing and implementing a state plan', on Thursday 8 May, 2014 in Melbourne.

Held as part of our Sustainability Leadership Series, this seminar brought together experts and practitioners from across business, government and civil society to discuss how we can achieve a sustainable transport plan for Victoria and how it would be financed and implemented.

For more information about this seminar and the UNAA Sustainability Leadeship Series please visit www.unaavictoria.org.au/education-advocacy/masterclasses/

Published in: Services, Technology, Real Estate
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Sustainable Transport Seminar - John Stanley, The University of Sydney

  1. 1. Sustainable transport in Victoria: developing, financing and implementing a state plan Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies | Faculty of Economics and Business Adjunct Professor John Stanley
  2. 2. High level generic sustainability goals › Outcomes - Economic competitiveness (e.g. support agglomeration economies, manage congestion) - Social inclusion (support capabilities) - Ecological footprint (part of a process of recognizing future generations and rights of other species) - Process - Giving people a genuine say in matters that impact them (up the top end of the engagement ladder, not tokenism) - Sustainable transport - Is transport that makes the most cost-effective contribution to these social goals 2
  3. 3. Critical land transport issues ›Economic productivity ›Congestion ›Climate change ›Social exclusion ›Energy security/peak oil ›Road safety ›Obesity 3
  4. 4. The future of Victoria’s transport GHG emissions: BAV analysis in 2009 4 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Emissions (Mt CO2e) Business as usual 5% below 2000 by 2020 (CPRS) 80% below 2000 by 2050 Proposed initiatives and external factors
  5. 5. One way for 2020 Aust land transport GHG emissions to be 20% < 2000 (from 2007) 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2005 2010 2015 2020 Emissions (Mt CO2e) Reduce truck emissions intensity  by 25% Reduce freight transport energy  demand by 20% Reduce car emissions intensity  by 23% Increase urban car occupancy  from 1.4 to 1.5 Increase urban public transport  mode share from 9% to 20% Shift 5% of urban car trips to  walking/cycling Reduce urban travel by 5%
  6. 6. How are we going on GHG? › Stabilised, helped by declining per capita car use in our cities › PT mode share increasing well in Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth › But result is well short of requirements › And our transport plans do not target cutting GHG emissions › Conclusion: neither the previous nor current national or Victorian Governments have been seriously interested in cutting land transport GHG emissions 6 http://chartingtransport.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/australia‐ transport‐emissions‐22.png
  7. 7. Sustainable transport: based on MPS experience › Bipartisan support vital but difficult in our highly politicized environment › The high level sustainability goals mean you must start with land use - With a vision of the kind of region (or city) you want › Use transport infrastructure and services to help get you there › This needs an integrated, long term strategic focus (25-40 years) - Which is pursued over the long term, like in Vancouver › Linked to short to medium term funded implementation plans (5-10 years) - Draft PlanMelbourne has missed this vital linkage - Vancouver does it well 7
  8. 8. State  and Land use/transport integration (Stopher and Stanley  2014, Fig 16.1)
  9. 9. Particularize your high level goals with spice, for regional distinctiveness: e.g. Melbourne › What we want to achieve (valued outcomes) - Principle 1: A distinctive Melbourne - Principle 2: A globally connected and competitive city - Principle 3: Social and economic participation - Principle 4: Strong communities - Principle 5: Environmental resilience 9
  10. 10. Set land use directions first, to support these outcomes/goals (Melbourne example)  More compact city (e.g. Hard urban boundary)  Slow growth on fringe and encourage more growth in middle suburbs (inc. Precinct scale urban renewal  Focus on Transit Oriented development  Promoting agglomeration economies in the central city and in a small number of selected urban nodes  Improving accessibility for outer urban residents  Strengthening Melbourne’s and Victoria’s competitive advantages in freight and logistics, tourism and in trade- exposed business  Support strong communities/neighbourhoods  Improving the integration between city and regions  Better managing growth in the peri urban area  Most of these directions will scale down to the larger regional centres 10
  11. 11. Generic urban land transport policy directions for sustainability Encourage efficient settlement patterns Land use/transport integration to support a polycentric/more compact city and reduce sprawl Reduce the demand for travel (trip lengths rather than trips) Land use planning (density, co-location) Maximise walking and cycling Mode shift to low carbon modes Cars > Public transport, walking and cycling Trucks > Rail Improve vehicle utilisation Higher car occupancy More efficient freight movements Improve mobility options for transport disadvantaged people Minimum PT service levels More compact city Reduce vehicle emissions intensity More efficient vehicles (the largest single contributor – mandatory fuel economy standards required) Smaller vehicles Alternative fuels (problematic at present) Intelligent transport systems Better driving practices 11
  12. 12. Place-based transport directions (some Melbourne examples) › Centre/inner core - PT capacity, walk, cycle › Middle suburbs - Circumferential movement, esp. serving nodes/clusters - Means good arterial road capacity, SmartBus networks, freight corridors, NE link › Outer areas - Overcome backlogs - Connect to jobs-rich areas › Everywhere = support local accessibility for strong neighbourhoods - Weak in MPS 12
  13. 13. Example: JS SmartBus proposals not in PlanMelbourne (short to medium term) 13
  14. 14. Regional issues › Support land use directions, e.g. - Access to jobs, education, services, friends, recreational and cultural opportunities and the like - Similar need for corridor/nodal approach (connect to Melbourne, regional centres, town centres, etc) - Support regional/local resource/tourism/other business opportunities › Larger focus on social inclusion and local public transport - Need for new delivery models • Such as the Warrnambool social enterprise model we have helped establish 14
  15. 15. Regional social exclusion: higher than Melbourne 15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 W arrnam bool G reaterDandenong M elbourne G eelong Hobart Canberra Kms/pc PT service kms comparison 2004
  16. 16. State plan development › We need long term strategies linked to short to medium term implementation plans › Intergovernmental agreements required up front to set out process and obligations › Local government at regional level an equal partner with the state (MPA a poor model here) › Canberra must be engaged › Multi-stakeholder Regional Advisory Committees to produce Draft Plans with options, with State support (like UK LEPs) › Draft plans debated and final regional plans prepared by RACs › State level process for resolving conflicts and maximising value for the State › Keep the politicians and their advisers at arm’s length until decision time, to increase chance of bipartisanship 16
  17. 17. Key challenges › Power sharing between levels of government › Empowering the community to get involved › Establishing and empowering Regional Advisory Committees › Being prepared to commit to 5-10 year implementation plans › Taking tough decisions on funding, esp. road pricing reform › Undertaking a genuinely integrated study › Keeping the politicians at arm’s length until decision time › Vancouver is a good model - Metro Vancouver (GVRD) and Translink 17

×