Newest Resources (May 2013)

Congestion Costing Critique: Critical Evaluation of the 'Urban Mobility Report'
The 'Urban Mobility Report' (UMR) is a widely-cited study that estimates traffic congestion costs. This report critically examines the UMR’s assumptions and methods. The UMR’s costing methods do not reflect best current practices recommended by economists. It significantly exaggerates congestion costs and roadway expansion benefits. The UMR does not reflect basic research principles: it fails to explain assumptions, document sources, incorporate independent peer review, or respond to criticisms.

Valuing and Improving: Transportation-Related Data Programs
This report summarizes the findings of 2013 Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting sessions on valuing and improving transportation-related data programs (programs that collect basic data used for transport policy, planning and research). It discusses the business case for expanding and improving data programs.

The New Transportation Planning Paradigm
Demographic and economic trends, and new community concerns, are changing the way practitioners define transportation problems and evaluate potential solutions. A new paradigm expands the range of modes, objectives, impacts and options considered in transport planning. This article, forthcoming in the ITE Journal, discusses this paradigm shift and its implications on our profession.

Smart Congestion Relief: Comprehensive Analysis Of Traffic Congestion Costs and Congestion Reduction Benefits
This report examines methods commonly used to evaluate traffic congestion problems and congestion reduction options. Current evaluation methods tend to exaggerate congestion costs and roadway expansion benefits, and underestimate the overall long-term benefits of pricing reforms, public transit improvements, and land use policy reforms. More comprehensive evaluation can help identify more optimal congestion reduction solutions.

Critical Analysis of Conventional Transport Economic Evaluation
This report examines conventional transport economic evaluation. It integrates two different but overlapping perspectives: planners who want more comprehensive and multi-modal analysis, and economists interested in evaluating economic efficiency and economic development impacts. This analysis indicates that conventional evaluation fails to reflect basic planning and economic principles. More comprehensive and multi-modal evaluation can provide better guidance for transport planning and economic development.