Costs vs. Benefits of Cycling Development Promotion

1,101 views

Published on

A presentation by Dr. Piotr Kuropatwinski (Gdansk, Poland) at the Veloforum 2011 Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine (www.veloforum.org)

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

  • Be the first to like this

Costs vs. Benefits of Cycling Development Promotion

  1. 1. COST VS. BENEFITS OF CYCLING DEVELOPMENT PROMOTION Kyiv, Veloforum 5 June 2011. Dr Piotr Kuropatwiński, University of Gdańsk, Pomeranian Association „Common Europe”
  2. 2. AGENDA CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONS SOME PHILOSOPHY EXAMPLES OF APPROACHES ADOPTED ELSEWHERE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
  3. 3. SOME PHILOSOPHY
  4. 4. Some philosophy – price vs. value <ul><li>Economic definition of a cynic: </li></ul><ul><li>Someone who knows the price of everything but the value of none </li></ul><ul><li>Not all economists are cynics, even if they are often accused to be like them </li></ul><ul><li>Value may be perceived from different perspectives, not only from the financial one </li></ul><ul><li>Economics is about management of scarcity, not of minimizing costs at all costs </li></ul>
  5. 5. MANAGEMENT OF SCARCITY <ul><li>Trying to eliminate congestion by extension of the road network is like trying to fight obesity by loosening the belt (Walter Kulash) </li></ul><ul><li>Myopic attempts to eliminate visible problems sometimes leads to underestimation of the invisible, but productive solutions </li></ul><ul><li>Cycling infrastructure, where built, if not explained and promoted, tends to be marginalised in decision making </li></ul>
  6. 6. CYCLING BENEFITS SOCIETY <ul><li>EVERY KILOMETRE CYCLED </li></ul><ul><li>PROVIDES A 0.16 € GAIN FOR SOCIETY </li></ul><ul><li>CONVERSELY, SOCIETY INCURS A 0.09€ LOSS FROM EVERY KILOMETER DRIVEN BY CAR </li></ul><ul><li>Source: City of Copenhagen 2008 </li></ul>
  7. 7. CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONS
  8. 8. CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC CALCULATIONS IN URBAN PLANNING <ul><li>Tendency to include only out of pocket costs </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of data about non-motorised traffic </li></ul><ul><li>Rural or poor man’s image of cycling and walking </li></ul><ul><li>Low value attached to leisure time and labour productivity in low income countries </li></ul><ul><li>Health considered as a „free good”, independent of behavioural choices </li></ul>
  9. 9. EXAMPLES OF APPROACHES ADOPTED ELSEWHERE
  10. 10. DIFFERENT EUROPEAN APPROACHES <ul><li>The Scandinavian approach </li></ul><ul><li>The British approach </li></ul><ul><li>The Austrian approach </li></ul><ul><li>The Central European approach </li></ul>
  11. 11. THE SCANDINAVIAN APPROACH
  12. 12. FINLAND – JOHANNA KALLIOINEN Source: Johanna Kallioinen, INSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF CYCLING IN TRANSPORT PLANNING ; Velo-city 2003, Paris 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
  13. 13. NORWAY – KJARTAN SÆLENSMINDE <ul><li>Net benefit/cost ratio </li></ul>Health - large share of benefit
  14. 14. Gunnar Lind, Movea Christer Hydén, LTH, Ulf Persson, LTH CBA of bicycle infrastructure source: Sven Hunhammar, Swedish EPA; Cost Benefit Analyses, of infrastructure for cycling, Velo-City Congress, Dublin 2005
  15. 15. THE BRITISH APPROACH
  16. 16. ROD KING – HILDEN vs. WARRINGTON Hilden spends a fraction of Warrington’s cycle spend Yet achieves results nearly 5 times greater
  17. 17. ALEX SULLY PUMA Congress <ul><li>10 new cyclists are worth spending </li></ul><ul><li>€ 1.2 million </li></ul><ul><li>₤ 2 M invested in 2000 – returned in local spend in two years </li></ul><ul><li>In 2006/7 400k bike visits & - ₤ 9 M in local spend </li></ul><ul><li>source: Alex Sully (20 10 ) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010 </li></ul>
  18. 18. ALEX SULLY (PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision <ul><li>source: Alex Sully (20 10 ) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010 </li></ul>Consider first Consider last Traffic volume reduction Traffic speed reduction Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic management Reallocation of carriageway space Cycle tracks away from roads Conversion of f ootways/footpaths to shared use
  19. 19. ALEX SULLY (PUMA Congress) - Hierarchy of Provision <ul><li>source: Alex Sully (20 10 ) Active Mobility in the UK - from Vision into Action; 1st Polish active Mobility Congress, October 2010 </li></ul>Invisible cycling infrastructure Consider first Consider last Traffic volume reduction Traffic speed reduction Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic management Reallocation of carriageway space Cycle tracks away from roads Conversion of f ootways/footpaths to shared use
  20. 20. LYNN SLOMAN – Sevilla Congress <ul><li>Time devoted to the average private car </li></ul><ul><li>Total: 1300 hrs </li></ul><ul><li>to get 16,000 km = </li></ul><ul><li>‘ average speed’ 12kph </li></ul><ul><li>source: Sloman (2006) Car Sick: Solutions for our Car-addicted Culture, after Ivan Illich (1974) Energy and Equity </li></ul>Earning money for purchase, insurance, repairs fuel, paking 5 10 hrs/year Doing tasks: car wash, repair, find parking space, de-icing, walking to car 2 65 hrs/year Sitting in car: moving and stationary 42 5 hrs/year Paying for extra cost of garage 100 hrs/year
  21. 21. THE AUSTRIAN APPROACH
  22. 22. MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011 <ul><li>Costs for the overall economy: bicycle vs.car </li></ul>source: Michael Meschik & Gregor Trunk Institute for Transport Studies, BOKU Vienna – Velo-City Sevilla Indicator [€-ct/km] Internal External Total Bicycle Car Bicycle Car Bicycle Car Health Noise Accidents Running costs Travel time Pollutants CO 2 TOTAL DIFFERENCE bicycle-car
  23. 23. MICHAEL & GREGOR TRUNK – Velo-city Sevilla 2011 <ul><li>Costs for the overall economy: bicycle vs.car </li></ul>source: Michael Meschik & Gregor Trunk Institute for Transport Studies, BOKU Vienna – Velo-City Sevilla Indicator [€-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 CO 2 - - - -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
  24. 24. GENTLE MOBILITY - GRAZ <ul><li>Three car parking restriction levels </li></ul><ul><li>Abandonment of car oriented traffic policy </li></ul><ul><li>No more roads built </li></ul><ul><li>The Mayor who proposed to build a tunnel under the city not re-elected </li></ul><ul><li>Tempo 30/50 introduced all over the city after a 6 months explanation campaign </li></ul>
  25. 25. THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH
  26. 26. FUNDS DEVOTED TO TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN CEE 10+ AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 1/3 Source: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas2007/index_en.htm’
  27. 27. THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 2/3 <ul><li>Allow for more recreational cycling </li></ul><ul><li>Rhythm replaces strength </li></ul><ul><li>Invite foreign experts and tell them what to tell </li></ul><ul><li>( no-one is considered a prophet in his own land ) </li></ul>
  28. 28. THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN APPROACH 3/3 <ul><li>Promote from below, from above and from the centre </li></ul><ul><li>Avoid militant attitudes – convert cycling promotion groups into a n organised, civic movement </li></ul><ul><li>Look for low hanging fruit – eliminate bottlenecks and create attractive medium distance trails/routes </li></ul>Source: http://www.gdansk.pl/ster,1433,18848.html
  29. 29. <ul><li>Do not fight directly with routism – dedicated cycle routes along main traffic arteries and along attractive water fronts are O.K. </li></ul><ul><li>Pay attention to education and promotion </li></ul><ul><li>as much as to infrastructure development </li></ul><ul><li>Address your message to the small and slow: consider families, women and children as a target group </li></ul>
  30. 30. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
  31. 31. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1/2 <ul><li>Cycling is a valuable source of revenue </li></ul><ul><li>Promotion of sustainable urban and regional development is a source of important savings </li></ul><ul><li>Promotion of cycling is more important than </li></ul><ul><li>the development of visible cycling infrastructure </li></ul><ul><li>Develop capacity for partnership co-operation </li></ul>
  32. 32. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2/2 <ul><li>Decision makers pay more attention to chances of success and tend to choose large inf r astructure, car traffic oriented solutions </li></ul><ul><li>Promotion of active mobility is more productive than promotion of public transport use and they reinforce one another </li></ul><ul><li>We are in the mind opening business – the issue of transport efficiency is a part of it only </li></ul>
  33. 33. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION 
  34. 34. THIS PRESENTATION WAS PREPARED BY A TEAM COMPOSED OF : TELEPHONE: E-MAIL: ANDRZEJ B. PIOTROWICZ +48 502 200 559 [email_address] Dr PIOTR KUROPATWIŃSKI +48 501 069 616 [email_address]

×