Sustainable Transportation and TDM
Planning That Balances Economic, Social and Ecological Objectives
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Victoria Transport
Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated 4 January 2009
This chapter discusses the concepts of sustainability, sustainable development and sustainable transportation, and how TDM can help achieve sustainability goals. Sustainability is a planning perspective that accounts for economic, social and environmental goals, including impacts that are indirect, difficult to measure, and distant in time and space. Sustainable transportation requires more comprehensive planning than what is commonly practiced. Sustainable planning can provide an opportunity to identify strategies that can help achieve multiple goals. TDM tends to support sustainability objectives, and sustainability planning tends to support TDM implementation.
|
The earth provides enough to satisfy every person’s need but not
every person’s greed…When we take more than we need we are simply taking from
each other, borrowing from the future, or destroying the environment and
other species. Mahatma Ghandi,
Principle
of Enoughness |
There is growing interest in the concepts of sustainability, sustainable development, and sustainable transport. Sustainability reflects one of the most fundamental human desires supported by virtually all philosophies and religions: to create a better future world. It provides guidance for long-term, strategic decision-making. Sustainability emphasizes the integrated nature of human activities and therefore the importance of comprehensive Planning that coordinates between sectors, jurisdictions and groups. This is an important change because existing institutions are often poorly suited to address complex, long-term problems.
There is no universally accepted definition of sustainability, sustainable development or sustainable transport (Beatley, 1995). Some definitions are listed below.
Sustainable development “meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
“The goal of sustainable transportation is to ensure that environment,
social and economic considerations are factored into decisions affecting
transportation activity.”
A sustainable transportation system is “one in which fuel consumption, vehicle emissions, safety, congestion, and social and economic access are of such levels that they can be sustained into the indefinite future without causing great or irreparable harm to future generations of people throughout the world.”
“…sustainability is not about threat analysis; sustainability is about
systems analysis. Specifically, it is about how environmental, economic, and
social systems interact to their mutual advantage or disadvantage at various
space-based scales of operation.”
The Environmental Directorate of the OECD defines environmentally sustainable transportation as, “transportation that does not endanger public health or ecosystems and that meets needs for access consistent with (a) use of renewable resources that are below their rates of regeneration, and (b) use of non-renewable resources below the rates of development of renewable substitutes.”
Sustainable planning means that local, short-term decisions are consistent with strategic, regional and global, long-term goals.
A sustainable transportation system is one that:
· Allows the basic access and development needs of individuals, companies and society to be met safely and in a manner consistent with human and ecosystem health, and promotes equity within and between successive generations.
· Is Affordable, operates fairly and efficiently, offers a choice of transport mode, and supports a competitive economy, as well as balanced regional development.
· Limits emissions and waste within the planet’s ability to absorb them, uses renewable resources at or below their rates of generation, and uses non-renewable resources at or below the rates of development of renewable substitutes, while minimizing the impact on the use of land and the generation of noise.
The Transportation Association of Canada proposes that a sustainable transportation system has the following characteristics:
(a) in the natural environment:
· limit emissions and waste (that pollute air, soil and water) within the urban area’s ability to absorb/recycle/cleanse;
· provide power to vehicles from renewable or inexhaustible energy sources. This implies solar power over the long run; and
· recycle natural resources used in vehicles and infrastructure (such as steel, plastic, etc.).
(b) In society:
· provide equity of access for people and their goods, in this generation and in all future generations;
· enhance human health;
· help support the highest quality of life compatible with available wealth;
· facilitate urban development at the human scale;
· limit noise intrusion below levels accepted by communities; and
· be safe for people and their property.
(c) In the economy:
· Be financially affordable in each generation;
· Be designed and operated to maximize economic efficiency and minimize economic costs; and
· help support a strong, vibrant and diverse economy.
Sustainability has been identified as “The capacity for continuance
into the long term future.” Anything that can go on being done on an indefinite
basis is sustainable. Anything that cannot go on being done indefinitely is
unsustainable. The practices of the world's populace are currently
unsustainable.
If we do not reach a point where our activities are sustainable, then
we will eventually consume all available resources and generate a level of
pollution that will mean the earth is no longer capable of sustaining human
life.
Within a sustainable society it is also expected that every individual
will have a right to “a better quality of life,” which would include having
adequate food, education, employment and housing, and for this to occur stable
economic growth will be required. The challenge is to decouple social progress
and economic growth from resource depletion and adverse environmental impacts.
The UK Government has set out the following 4 pillars of
sustainability:
· Social progress for everyone.
Concern about sustainability can be considered a reaction to increased specialization in the way institutions are organized, and the tendency of decision-makers to focus on easily measured goals and impacts, while ignoring those that are indirect or more difficult to measure (Measuring Transportation). Conventional planning often reflects a “reductionist” approach, in which a particular organization or individual is responsible for dealing with a particular problem. This may be appropriate in some situations, but it often results in solutions to one problem that exacerbate other problems, or failure to implement solutions that provide modest but multiple benefits. Sustainable decision-making can therefore be described as Comprehensive Planning that considers a variety of goals and impacts regardless of how difficult they are to measure. Sustainable planning and economics often refer to the triple bottom line, meaning consideration of economic, social and environmental impacts.
Conventional planning typically uses a 5-20 year time-frame, less than one generation. Sustainability incorporates concerns about long-term risks, such as depletion of resources, harmful pollution and climatic change that may harm people decades or even centuries in the future. This reflects concerns over “intergenerational equity” (i.e., being fair to future generations). But if future equity and environmental quality are concerns, it makes little sense to ignore equity and environmental impacts that occur during this generation to people in other regions or cultures. Thus, sustainability ultimately reflects the goals of Equity, ecological integrity and human welfare, regardless of time or location.
Sustainable economics maintains a distinction between growth (increased quantity) and development (increased quality). Growth assumes that the goal is to replicate what currently exists at a larger scale – bigger is better. Development assumes that the goal is improvement, which may involve expansion or contraction to an optimal scale.
Economic growth focuses primarily on market activities, while economic development also considers non-market social and ecological activities (Daly 1996). Sustainable development focuses on social welfare outcomes, such as education and health, rather than relying on material wealth as an indicator of development. Unlike neoclassic economics, sustainable economics does not strive for ever increasing consumption, but rather for sufficiency. As a result, it questions common economic indicators such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which measure the quantity but not the quality of market activities. For example, GDP counts medical costs and environmental cleanup as positive economic activity, but assign no positive value to actions that prevent illness or environmental degradation. Sustainable development indicators attempt to take into account qualitative and non-market values (Cobb, Halstead and Rowe, 1998).
Conventional planning tends to ask, “Does it work?” Sustainability planning tends to ask “Does it fit?” That is, sustainability planning places greater emphasis on how individual decisions fit into the overall context of total long-term goals and objectives.
Conventional economics defines people primarily as consumers, with the implication that the way to improve social welfare (i.e., to make people better off) is too maximize consumption of market goods (as reflected in GDP). Sustainable economics recognizes that people are also community members, residents, and citizens who also value non-market goods and community resource. For example, many people value friendship, security and tradition, and will forego material wealth to achieve them. The relative value of these non-market goods tends to increase as people become wealthier, since their most basic physical needs are already met. For example, an increase of $1,000 in annual income tends to provide far greater benefit to somebody who only earns $10,000 a year than to somebody earning $100,000 a year, since the wealthier person already has their basic material needs met (this is called declining marginal benefit). As a result, as a region becomes more economically developed and wealthier, the relative value of additional market goods tends to decline, while the relative value of non-market goods tends to increase.
Sustainability is sometimes defined narrowly. Some studies of sustainability focus on long-term resource depletion and air pollution problems, on the grounds that they represent the greatest risk and are prone to being neglected by conventional planning (TRB, 1997). But sustainability is increasingly defined more broadly to include the range of issues listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Sustainability Issues
|
Economic |
Social |
Environmental |
|
Affordability Resource efficiency Cost internalization Trade and business activity Employment Productivity Tax burden |
Equity Human health Education Community Quality of life Public Participation |
Pollution prevention Climate protection Biodiversity Precautionary action Avoidance of irreversibility Habitat preservation Aesthetics |
This
table lists various sustainability issues.
Although Table 1 implies that each issue fits into a specific category, in practice they often overlap. For example, pollution prevention is an environmental concern, but it also protects human health (a social concern) and is important for fishing and tourism industries (economic concerns). Sustainable planning reflects the realization that impacts and objectives often interact, so solutions must reflect integrated analysis.
|
Who
Is More Sustainable? Who is more sustainable, somebody who drives a fuel-efficient vehicle
high annual miles, or somebody who drives an inefficient vehicle low annual
miles? If sustainability is defined only in terms
of fuel efficiency and related emissions, it can be achieved by driving a
fuel efficient vehicle, such as a 60 mile-per-gallon (MPG) hybrid car.
However, such a car does not reduce traffic congestion or the barrier effect
(delay and risk to pedestrians and cyclists), road and parking requirements,
accident risk, or sprawl. A motorist who lives in a more accessible location
and relies on alternative modes as much as possible (for example, commuting
by bicycle, carpool or transit most days) and so drives an average efficiency
vehicle low annual miles, consumes a similar amount of fuel, but imposes far
lower costs on society overall. |
Principles reflect fundamental goals and practices. Below are basic principles of sustainability planning.
·
Comprehensive Analysis. Sustainability requires
planning that considers economic, social and environmental impacts, including
those that are indirect, long-term and nonmarket. This requires adequate
information and evaluation tools that allow stakeholders and decision-makers to
understand the effects of their decisions.
·
Integrated and Strategic Planning. Sustainability
planning requires that individual decisions support a community’s long-term
strategic objectives. For example, transportation planning decisions should be
subordinate to strategic economic, social and land use plans.
·
Focusing on Goals, Performance and Outcomes. Sustainability
requires that planning be based on goals and outcomes, such as improved social
welfare, ecological health and access. It does not limit analysis to financial
impacts and market activities.
·
Consideration of Equity. Sustainability
emphasizes that Equity impacts should be considered in
decision-making, including those that are indirect and long-term (imposed on
future generations).
·
Market Principles. Market
Principles include consumer choice, full-cost pricing and economic
neutrality can support sustainable outcomes. This requires Market
Reforms that eliminate incentives to over-use of natural resources and to
degrade the environment.
·
Precautionary Principle. Sustainability
supports the Precautionary Principle, which emphasizes the importance of
incorporating risks in decision-making and favoring policies that minimize such
risks when possible. It values Resilience.
·
Conservation Ethic. Sustainability favors
solutions that increase efficiency and reduce resource consumption, due to
uncertainties about future market conditions and environmental impacts.
·
Transparency, Accountability and Public Involvement. Sustainability
requires a clearly defined, transparent planning process, adequate
opportunities for stakeholder to become informed about issues and be involved
in decision-making, and good communication between professionals and the
general public.
Many organizations have developed recommended best practices for sustainable planning. The U.K. Royal Academy of Engineering provides the following principles of Engineering for Sustainable Development (RAE, 2005). See the report for detailed information on these principles.
1.
Look beyond your own locality and the immediate
future
2.
Innovate and be creative
3.
Seek a balanced solution
4.
Seek engagement from all stakeholders
5.
Make sure you know the needs and wants
6.
Plan and manage effectively
7.
Give sustainability the benefit of any doubt
8.
If polluters must pollute … then they must pay as
well
9.
Adopt a holistic,‘cradle-to-grave ’approach
10. Do things
right,having decided on the right thing to do
11. Beware cost
reductions that masquerade as value engineering
12. Practice what you preach.
Various sets of indicators have been
proposed and applied to evaluate sustainability. They expand on existing
indicators, such as GDP, to account for diverse social goals and objectives
(Redefining Progress). These include specific, measurable indicators that
reflect progress toward community development objectives. Table 2 is an example
of a Genuine Progress Indicator developed for
Table 2 Sustainability Indicators
|
Economic |
Social |
Environmental |
|
Economy, GDP and Trade Economic growth (GDP) Economic diversity Trade Personal Consumption Expenditures, Disposable Income and Savings Disposable income Personal expenditures Taxes Savings rate Money, Debt, Assets and Net Worth Household Debt Income Inequality, Wealth, Poverty and
Living Wages Income distribution Poverty Public and Household Infrastructure Public infrastructure Household infrastructure Employment Weekly wage rate Unemployment rate Underemployment Transportation Transportation expenditures |
Time Use Paid work time Household work Parenting and eldercare Free time Volunteerism Commuting time Human Health and Wellness Life expectancy Premature mortality Infant mortality Obesity Suicide Suicide Substance Abuse: Alcohol, Drugs and
Tobacco Drug use (youth) Auto Crashes and Injuries Auto crashes Family Breakdown Divorce Crime Crime Gambling Problem gambling Democracy Voter participation Intellectual & Knowledge Capital Educational attainment |
Energy Oil and gas reserve life Agriculture Agricultural sustainability Forests Timber sustainability Parks and Wilderness Parks and wilderness Fish and Wildlife Fish and wildlife Wetlands and Peatlands Wetlands Peatlands Water Resource and Quality Water quality Energy Use Intensity and Air Quality Energy use intensity Air quality-related emissions Greenhouse gas emissions Carbon Budget Carbon budget deficit Municipal and Hazardous Waste Hazardous waste Landfill waste Ecological Footprint Ecological footprint |
This table summarizes Genuine Progress Indicators used to evaluate sustainability.
Transportation facilities and activities have significant sustainability impacts, including those listed in Table 3. As a result, strategies that increase transportation system efficiency and reduce negative impacts from transportation are among the most effective ways to make progress toward sustainability objectives.
Table 3 Transportation
Impacts on Sustainability
|
Economic |
Social |
Environmental |
|
Traffic congestion Mobility barriers Crash damages Transportation facility costs Consumer transportation costs Depletion of non-renewable resources |
Inequity of impacts Mobility disadvantaged Human health impacts Community cohesion Community livability Aesthetics |
Air pollution Climate change Habitat loss Water pollution Hydrologic impacts Noise pollution |
This table lists impacts that transportation activities tend to have on sustainability objectives.
Because transportation activities have so many impacts related to sustainability, it is important to identify strategies that help achieve multiple objectives, and avoid those that solve one transportation problem but exacerbate others (Comprehensive Planning). For example, a policy or program that reduces traffic congestion but increases air pollution emissions or crashes cannot be considered a sustainable solution. Similarly, a strategy that reduces energy consumption and air pollution emission, but increases traffic congestion, crashes and consumer costs is not necessarily a sustainable strategy. The most sustainable strategies are those that simultaneously help reduce traffic congestion, pollution, crashes and consumer costs, increase mobility options for non-drivers, and encourages more efficient land use patterns, or at least avoid contradicting these objectives (Win-Win Transportation Solutions).
Conventional planning tends to assume that transport progress is linear, consisting of newer, faster modes that displace older, slower modes as illustrated below. This series model assumes that the older modes are unimportant, and so, for example, there is no harm if increasing automobile traffic causes congestion delay to public transit or creates a barrier to pedestrian travel. From this perspective it would be backward to give public transit or walking Priority over automobile travel.
Walk è Bicycle è Train è Bus è Automobile è Improved Automobiles
Sustainable reflects a parallel model, which assumes that each mode can be useful, and strives to create balanced transport systems that use each mode for what it does best. Transport progress therefore involves improving all useful modes, not just the newest mode, as illustrated below. For example, in many cities the most beneficial transportation strategies may involve Improving Walking and Cycling, Support for Public Transit Use, and Restricting Automobile Traffic in congested urban areas. It does not assume that faster, motorized modes should have priority over slower modes, or that increased travel speed is necessarily more important than qualitative factors such as comfort, safety and equity.
Walk è Improved Walking
Conditions
Bicycle è Improved Cycling
Conditions
Train/Bus è Improved Public
Transit Service
Automobile è Improved Automobile
Travel Conditions
Sustainability and sustainable transportation are difficult to measure directly, so various Performance Indicators are used to evaluate them. Some are relatively narrow, focusing on just a few impacts, such as air pollution emissions, while others attempt to represent a broader range of economic, social and environmental objectives (Gilbert and Tanguay, 2000; Gudmundsson, 2001; Litman, 2003). Below are examples of indicators.
·
Quality of overall Accessibility
(ability to reach desired goods, services and activities). More is better.
·
Land Use Mix - Number of job opportunities
and commercial services within 30-minute travel distance of residents. Higher
is better.
·
Land use accessibility - Average number of
basic services (schools, shops and government offices) within walking distance of
residences. Higher is better.
·
Children’s accessibility - Portion of
children who can walk or bicycle to Schools, shops and
parks from their homes. Higher is better.
·
Electronic accessibility - Portion of
population with Internet service (Telework). Higher is
better.
·
Commute speed - Average commute travel time.
Lower is better, particularly for disadvantaged populations.
·
Transport diversity - Variety and quality of
transport Options available in a community. Higher is
better.
·
Mode split - Portion of travel made by
walking, cycling, rideshare, public transit and telework. Higher is better.
·
Transit service – Public transit service
quality, including coverage (portion of households and jobs within 5-minute
walking distance of 15-minute transit service), service frequency, comfort
(portion of trips in which passenger can sit and portion of transit stops with
shelters), affordability (fares as a portion of minimum wage income),
information availability, and safety (injuries per billion passenger-miles) (Transit Evaluation).
·
Motor Transport Options - Quantity and
quality of airline, rail, public transit, ferry, rideshare and taxi services.
Higher is better.
·
Congestion delay - Per capita traffic Congestion delay. Lower is better.
·
Consumer Transport costs - Portion of
household expenditures devoted to transport (Transport
Costs). Lower is better.
·
Affordability - Portion of
household expenditures devoted to transport, including vehicle expenses, fares,
residential parking costs, and taxes devoted to transport; particularly by
people who are economically, socially and physically disadvantaged. Lower is
better, particularly for disadvantaged populations.
·
Facility costs - Per capita expenditures on
roads, traffic services and parking facilities (Transport
Costs). Lower is better.
·
Freight and commercial transport efficiency – Speed, quality
and affordability of Freight and commercial transport.
Higher is better.
·
Delivery services - Quantity and quality of
delivery services (international/intercity courier, and stores that offer
delivery). Higher is better.
·
Market principles - Degree to which transport
systems reflect Market Principles, including prices
that reflect full costs and neutral tax policies. Higher is better.
·
Planning Practices - Degree to which transport
institutions reflect Least-cost planning and investment
practices. Higher is better.
·
User rating - Overall satisfaction
rating of transport system and services by users (Surveys).
Higher is better.
·
Citizen involvement - Public involvement in
transport Planning process. Higher is better.
·
Crash costs - Per capita crash fatalities,
disabilities and monetized Crash Costs. Lower is
better.
·
Planning process - Range of solutions
considered in transport Planning. Higher is better.
·
Health and fitness - Portion of
population that regularly uses active transport modes (walking and cycling).
Higher is better.
·
Community Livability - Degree to which
transport activities increase community livability (local environmental
quality). Higher is better.
·
Cultural Preservation - Degree to which cultural
and historic values are reflected and preserved in transport planning
decisions. Higher is better.
·
Basic Access – Quality of
transport to access socially valuable activities such as medical services,
education, employment and essential shopping, particularly for disadvantaged
populations.
·
Horizontal Equity (fairness) - Degree to which
prices reflect full costs unless a subsidy is specifically justified (Equity). Higher is better.
·
Progressivity - Degree to which transport
policies make lower-income people relatively better off (Equity).
Higher is better.
·
Mobility for non-drivers - Quality of
accessibility and transport services for non-drivers (Equity).
Higher is better.
·
Mobility for people with disabilities) - Quality of
transport facilities and services for people with disabilities, such as
wheelchair users and people with visual impairments (Universal
Design). Higher is better.
·
Nonmotorized transport - Quality of walking and
cycling conditions (Non-motorized Evaluation). Higher
is better.
·
Climate change emissions - Per capita
fossil fuel consumption, and emissions of CO2 and other climate change emissions
(Energy and Emission Reductions). Lower is better.
·
Other air pollution
- Per capita emissions of “conventional” air pollutants (CO, VOC, NOx,
particulates, etc.) (Energy and Emission Reductions).
Lower is better.
·
Noise pollution - Portion of population
exposed to high levels of traffic noise. Lower is better.
·
Water pollution - Per capita vehicle fluid
losses. Lower is better.
·
Land use impacts - Per capita land devoted to
transportation facilities (Land Use Evaluation). Lower
is better.
·
Habitat protection - Preservation of high-quality
wildlife habitat (wetlands, old-growth forests, etc.) from loss due to
transport facilities and development (Land Use Evaluation).
Higher is better.
·
Roadway aesthetic conditions (people tend to be more
inclined to care for environments that they consider beautiful and meaningful).
Sustainability objectives have several implications for transport planning.
Sustainable transportation planning requires a paradigm shift: a fundamental Change in the way people think about and solve problems (Litman, 1999). It requires more comprehensive analysis of impacts, consideration of indirect and cumulative impacts (Louis Berger & Associates, 1998), consideration of demand management solutions, and public involvement in transportation decision-making. It involves Prioritizing Transportation to give higher value trips and lower cost modes priority over lower value, higher cost trips.
Automobile dependency is defined as high levels of automobile use, automobile oriented land use, and a lack of travel alternatives (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Automobile dependency imposes a number of economic, social and environmental costs (Litman, 2000), and results in part due to distortions in transportation and land use markets (Market Principles) (TRB, 1997). Sustainable transportation requires reducing these distortions and encouraging the development of a more balanced transportation system (Evaluating Transportation Choice). Transportation Market Reforms that correct market distortions which cause excessive automobile use and automobile oriented land use patterns can increase Economic Development while also achieving social and environmental objectives.
Equity is a fundamental goal of sustainable development. Sustainable development reflects a desire to consider the impacts that our current decisions could have on future generations, called intergenerational equity. Sustainable transportation therefore requires that broad equity analysis be incorporating explicitly in transportation planning (Evaluating TDM Equity).
Sustainability requires that transportation facilities (roads, parking lots, transit systems, airports, etc.) be designed and operated to encourage use of sustainable modes, to support long-term land use objectives (such as preserving greenspace), to maximize resource efficiency and minimize waste in construction and use, and to operate efficiently over the long term.
Transportation patterns can be affected significantly by land use patterns (Land Use Impacts on Transportation). In particular, low density development, hierarchical street patterns, generous road and parking capacity, and automobile oriented site design tends to increase automobile dependency, leading to high levels of per capita motor vehicle mileage and a reduction in the quality of travel alternatives (transit, walking and cycling). Many experts conclude that sustainable transportation requires more Accessible land use (Newman and Kenworthy, 1999).
Sustainable transportation planning tends to be particularly important in lower-income, Developing Regions, since they have more limited resources, tend to rely more on alternative travel modes, and are currently making critical planning decisions which will determine the type of transportation system they will have in the future. Sustainability planning tends to favor more multi-modal transportation planning and Smart Growth, in order to avoid excessive Automobile Dependency, particularly in economically developing regions.
Many strategies have been proposed to create more sustainable transportation. Most involve either technical innovation or Transportation Demand Management. Sometimes these are presented as mutually exclusive (i.e., one approach or the other), but most objective research indicates that a combination of strategies is needed to achieve sustainability goals. For example, fuel efficient and alternative fueled vehicles can help achieve resource conservation and pollution reduction objectives, but demand management is needed to address other objectives, such as facility cost savings and improved travel choices for non-drivers.
Most analysis suggest that Transportation Demand Management is essential for achieving more sustainable transportation, although the term “Transportation Demand Management” is not always used (World Bank, 1996). Some TDM strategies, called “No regrets” or Win-Win Transportation Solutions, help achieve a combination of economic, environmental and social objectives, and so are justified regardless of uncertainty over the value placed on impacts such as climate change and inequity.
Economic efficiency and resource conservation are important principles sustainability. This suggests that TDM strategies that reflect Market Principles, encourage more resource-efficient travel choices, or result in more efficient land use tend to support sustainability. TDM can also help achieve Livability objectives such as increased local environmental quality and community cohesion.
|
Market
Principles |
Efficient
Land Use |
Efficient
Transportation |
|
Walking and Cycling Improvements |
Incorporating sustainability principles, objectives and evaluation criteria into transportation decision-making can support increased implementation of TDM, and greater coordination between transportation and land use planning.
|
Three fellows were sitting at a bar, and their conversation turns to
collectables. One man describes his coin collection. “I have more than 2,000
coins from every country in the world, including several that are quite rare.
My collection is valued at over $25,000. I keep it in a high-security
cabinet.” The second man brags about his book collection. “I have more than 400
antique books, including several signed first editions. My collection is
valued at over $50,000. I keep them in a climate-controlled room in my
house.” The third man say, “I have the world’s largest seashell collection,
including countless unique specimens. My collection is considered priceless.
I keep it on beaches all over the world.” |
For more information on issues related to sustainable development see Evaluating TDM, TDM Planning, Comprehensive TDM Evaluation, Measuring Transportation, Evaluating TDM Equity, Transportation Affordability, TDM and Economic Development, Transportation Costs, Asset Management, TDM in Developing Regions, Market Principles, Evaluating Pricing Strategies and Evaluating Transportation Choice.
The American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has
acknowledged the need to change current transport planning practices to
incorporate sustainability objectives, as discussed in the report Transportation:
Invest in Our Future. It states, “America’s transportation system has served
us well, but now faces the challenges of congestion, energy supply,
environmental impacts, climate change, and sprawl that threaten to undermine
the economic, social, and environmental future of the nation. With 140 million
more people expected over the next 50 years, past practices and current trends
are not sustainable. To meet the transportation needs of the present and pass
on a better world to our children and grandchildren, it is necessary to expand
the transportation network’s capacity while simultaneously reducing the
environmental footprint of the system,”
The report urged transportation decision makers to adopt the so-called “triple
bottom line” approach to sustainability by evaluating performance on the basis
of economic, social, and environmental impacts and allocating equal
consideration to these driving forces. The specific elements of the triple
bottom line approach and the steps required to achieve them can be summarized
as follows:
In 2005 Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels
established a Green Ribbon Commission that included a wide variety of
stakeholders and experts to recommend climate protection actions for the
· Increase the Supply of Frequent, Reliable and Convenient Public Transportation
· Significantly Expand Bicycling and Pedestrian Infrastructure
· Lead a Regional Partnership to Develop and Implement a Road Pricing System
· Implement a New Commercial Parking Tax
· Expand Efforts to Create Compact, Green, Urban Neighborhoods
Along with their recommendations the Commission offered these observations:
· Success will require a deliberate, sustained, community-wide effort. And, since cars and other transportation sources are the largest source of climate pollution in our area, we will need strong regional collaboration as well.
·
The actions and investments
needed to rein in
· In addition, reducing our reliance on fossil fuels increases our energy independence, keeps more money circulating in the local economy and supports local and regional economic development.
· The road to a more climate-friendly community is paved with economic opportunities, including cost-savings from energy efficiency measures for our families and businesses—especially in light of rising and volatile energy prices—and new business prospects for our companies and entrepreneurs.
· Implementing these recommendations requires a significant investment of time and money by the community. But we believe the price tag is dwarfed by the cost to our community of not taking additional action.
·
Finally, meeting the
A special issue of the Journal of Urban Technology (Perl, 2007) examines the paradigm
shifts needed in urban transportation and land use planning to prepare for
riding energy costs and to achieve sustainability objectives. The analysis indicates
that sustainability objectives can be achieved through a combination of
transportation and land use policy changes that reduce per capita
transportation energy consumption, and create cities that better meet human
needs, but that this requires fundamental changes in policy analysis and
planning practices.
Leading experts recommend the following
general principles to create more integrated and efficient local
decision-making in the European Union:
1. Establish and
enforce strategic (integration and with a long term perspective) visions,
planning ability, capacity to use a wider and more innovative range of tools.
2. Promote
management skills to develop participatory and proactive processes, involving
all relevant stakeholders, and to implement local strategic planning,
influencing and promoting the adoption of self – regulated behaviour from all
the partners.
3. Consider and
reflect upon national/local specificity and differences, being aware of new urban
dynamics and of recent and relevant trends (such as increasing liberalisation
of the environmental markets, globalisation of pressures, the need for urban
renewal, etc.).
A study evaluated
the sustainability of transportation trends in
Access; the Sustainable Transport Forum (www.the-commons.org/access/eehome.htm) is an information network dedicated to exploring and promoting sustainable transportation.
William G. Barker (2005), “Can A Sustainable Transportation System Be
Developed for
Rahman Paul Barter and Tamim Raad
(2000), Taking
Steps: A Community Action Guide to People-Centred, Equitable and Sustainable
Urban Transport, Sustainable Transport Action
Network for
Timothy Beatley (1995), “The Many Meanings of Sustainability,” Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 9, No. 4, May, 1995, pp. 339-342.
Brundtland
Commission (1987), Our Common Future,
Graham Bullock (2006), Stakeholders and the Development of National Environmental Indicators: Case Studies from the Sustainable Roundtables, EPA, and the Heinz Center, Kennedy School of Government Environment and Natural Resources Program Working Paper; at http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/bcsia%20enr%20discussion%20paper%20submission_bullock.pdf.
Canadian National Round Table on the Environment and Economy (www.nrtee-trnee.ca) is working to develop national policies that support more sustainable development and transport.
Centre for Alternative and Sustainable Transport (CAST) (www.staffs.ac.uk/schools/sciences/geography/cast/casthome.html) performs research on non-motorised, sustainable transport.
Centre for Sustainable Community Development: Case Studies (www.fcm.ca/scep/index.htm), Federation of Canadian Municipalities (www.fcm.ca).
Centre for Sustainable Transportation (CST) (www.cstctd.org) is a Canadian research institute dedicated to encouraging more sustainable transportation policy.
Center for a Sustainable Economy (www.sustainableeconomy.org) provides resources concerning tax shifting and environmental tax reform, including proposals to change fuel and vehicle prices.
Centre
for Science and Environment (www.cseindia.org) is a leading
environmental NGO located in
Center for Sustainability (www.c4s.info) works to identify and generate appropriate, multifaceted solutions for sustainable development.
Center for Transportation Excellence (http://environment.transportation.org) is an AASHTO program to support more environmentally responsible transport planning, including sustainability.
Climate Solutions (www.climatesolutions.org) provides information and resources concerning global climate change issues and emission reduction strategies.
Clifford Cobb, Ted Halstead and Jonathan Rowe (1999), The Genuine Progress Indicator, Redefining Progress (www.rprogress.org).
CMHC (2006), Your Next Move: Choosing a Neighbourhood with
Sustainable Features,
CST (1997), Definition and Vision of Sustainable Transportation, Canadian Centre for Sustainable Transportation (www.cstctd.org).
CST (2001), Sustainable Transportation Performance Indicators Project, Centre for Sustainable Transportation (www.cstctd.org).
CST, Sustainable Transportation Monitor, Centre for Sustainable Transportation (www.cstctd.org), produced irregularly.
Herman Daly (1996), Beyond
Growth; Economics of Sustainable Development, Beacon Press (
Jos Dings
(2003), Europe’s Environment: Transport, European Environment Agency (http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_assessment_report_2003_10/en/tab_content_RLR).
Brian Dudson (1998), “When Cars are Clean and Clever: A Forward-looking View of Sustainable and Intelligent Automobile Technologies,” Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 52, No. 3, 1998, pp. 103-120.
Earthscan (www.earthscan.co.uk) publishes a variety of books on transport policy, environment and sustainable development.
ECMT (2004), Assessment and Decision Making for Sustainable Transport, European Conference of Ministers of Transportation, Organization of Economic Coordination and Development (www.oecd.org).
Environment
Friends of the Earth (www.foe.co.uk) is an environmental organization that is often involved in transportation issues.
GDRC (2000), Notes on ‘Quality of Life,’ Global Development Research Centre (www.gdrc.org/uem/qol-define.html).
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (www.globalreporting.org) is an international organization to develop, promote, and disseminate standard framework for sustainability reporting.
Global Development Network (www.gdnet.org/about_gdn) is a global
network of research and policy institutes working together to address the
problems of national and regional development
Ellen Greenberg
(2008), “Sustainable Streets: An Emerging Practice,” ITE Journal, Vol. 78, No. 5 (www.ite.org), pp. 29-39.
Paul Michael Grimley (2006), Indicators of Sustainable Development in Civil Aviation, Dissertation, Loughborough University (http://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace/handle/2134/2755).
GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Technische Zusammenarbeit) (www.gtz.de) is a German
government sponsored organization that provides international services to
improve the living conditions of people in developing and transition countries.
European Commission, Towards More Integrated Implementation Of Environmental Legislation In Urban Areas, Working Group on Integrated Implementation of Environmental Legislation (WG/IIEL), European Commission (DG Environment), (http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/urban/pdf/0302finalreport.pdf), March 2002.
GTZ (2003), Sustainable Transportation:
A Sourcebook for Policy-Makers in Developing Countries, (www.sutp.org), by the
Sustainable Urban Transport Project –
Henrik Gudmundsson (2001), Indicators and Performance Measures for
Transportation, Environment and Sustainability in North America, National Environmental Research Institute (www.dmu.dk/1_viden/2_Publikationer/3_arbrapporter/default.asp).
Henrik Gudmundsson (2003), “Making Concepts Matter: Sustainable Mobility And Indicator Systems In Transport Policy” International Social Science Journal (www.blackwell-synergy.com/rd.asp?code=issj&goto=journal), Vol. 55, No. 2, Issue 176, June 2003, pp. 199-217.
Ralph Hall
(2006), Understanding
and Applying the Concept of Sustainable Development to Transportation Planning
and Decision-Making in the
Halsnæs, et al. (2001), Transport and the Global Environment: Accounting for GHG Reductions in Policy Analysis, UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment (UCCEE) (www.uccee.org).
Institute for Transportation And Development Policy (www.itdp.org) is an organization that supports sustainable transportation policies throughout the world, including in developing countries.
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (www.iclei.org) provides tools to help communities become healthier and more environmentally responsible.
International Society for Ecological Economics (http://kabir.umd.edu/ISEE/ISEEhome.html) is a professional organization.
Internetwork for Sustainability (www.insnet.org) is a nonprofit informal network to support sustainable development.
Richard Lee, Paul Wack and Eugene Jud (2003), Towards Sustainable Mobility Indicators In California, Mineta
Transportation Institute (http://transweb.sjsu.edu/publications/02-05.pdf).
Todd Litman (1999), “Reinventing Transportation; Exploring the Paradigm Shift Needed to Reconcile Sustainability and Transportation Objectives,” Transportation Research Record 1670, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), pp. 8-12; at www.vtpi.org/reinvent.pdf.
Todd Litman (2000), The Costs of Automobile Dependency and Benefits of Transport Diversity, VTPI (www.vtpi.org).
Todd Litman (2003), “Measuring Transportation: Traffic, Mobility and Accessibility,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vol. 73, No. 10, October, pp. 28-32; at www.vtpi.org/measure.pdf.
Todd Litman (2004), “Mobility
Management” module (www.vtpi.org/gtz_module.pdf)
of the Sustainable
Transport Sourcebook, published by the Sustainable
Urban Transport Project in Asia (www.sutp.org)
and GTZ (www.gtz.de);
at www.vtpi.org/gtz_module.pdf.
Todd Litman (2005), Well Measured: Developing Indicators for Comprehensive and Sustainable Transport Planning, VTPI (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/wellmeas.pdf.
Todd Litman (2006), Mobility As A Positional Good: Implications for Transport Policy and Planning, VTPI (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/prestige.pdf.
Todd Litman (2007), “Developing Indicators For Comprehensive And Sustainable Transport Planning,” Transportation Research Record 2017, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), 2007, pp. 10-15.
Todd Litman and David Burwell (2006), “Issues in Sustainable Transportation,” International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 331-347; at www.vtpi.org/sus_iss.pdf.
Louis Berger & Associates (1998), Guidance for Estimating the Indirect Effects of Proposed Transportation Projects, Report 403, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org).
Greg Marsden, Charlotte Kelly and Carolyn Snell (2006), Selecting Indicators For Strategic Performance Management, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting (www.trb.org); at www.mdt.mt.gov/research/docs/trb_cd/Files/06-0378.pdf.
A.D. May (1999), Making the Links: Car Use and Traffic Management Measures in the Policy Package, University of Leeds, UK, OECD, ECMT, Workshop on Managing Car Use for Sustainable Urban Travel (www.oecd.org/cem/UrbTrav/Workshops/Carscities/May.pdf).
Hugh McClintock (2001), Comprehensive Sustainable
Transportation Planning Bibliography,
Michael M'Gonigle and Justine Starke (2006), Planet
U: Sustaining the World, Reinventing The University,
New Society
Publishing (www.newsociety.com).
A. Mitra (2003), Painting the Town Green - The Use of Urban Sustainability Indicators in the United States of America, RICS Foundation (www.ricsbooks.com).
MTE, Moving On the Economy Online Best Practices Database (http://w4.metrotor.on.ca/inter/mte/mte.nsf/$defaultview?OpenView&Count=5) is an ever-expanding searchable inventory of economic success stories in sustainable transportation.
MTE, Mobility in the Developing World and Sustainable Transportation Live (www.movingtheeconomy.ca), by Moving the Economy and the Canadian International Development Agency, is a website that provides information on how developing country cities are applying sustainable transportation principles to help reduce traffic congestion, facility costs, pollution and other transport problems.
Nolberto Munier (2006), Handbook on Urban Sustainability, Springer (www.springer.com).
Natural Step (www.naturalstep.org) uses a science-based, systems framework to help organizations and communities work toward sustainability. The Natural Step organizations provide a variety of resources to help implement sustainability.
Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy (1999), Sustainability and Cities; Overcoming Automobile Dependency, Island Press (www.islandpress.org).
NRTEE (2001), Environment and Sustainable Development Indicators Initiative, National Round Table on the Environment and Economy (www.nrtee-trnee.ca/eng/programs/current_programs/sdindicators).
OECD (2001), OECD Environmental Indicators 2001: Towards Sustainable Development, OECD (www.oecd.org).
OECD (2001), Policies to Enhance Sustainable Development, Meeting Of The OECD Council At Ministerial Level (www.oecd.org/subject/sustdev/0001311E.pdf).
OECD, Project on Environmentally Sustainable Transport, OECD (www.oecd.org/env/trans).
OECD (2002), Policy
Instruments for Achieving Sustainable Transport, Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (www.oecd.org).
OECD (2003),
Urban Travel and
Sustainable Development: Implementing Sustainable Urban Travel Policies, OECD and ECMT (www.oecd.org/cem/urbtrav/index.htm);
also see Mary Crass, Sustainable Urban Travel Policies: The Work Of The European
Conference Of Ministers Of Transport, World Health
Organization, Regional Office for Europe (www.who.dk/eprise/main/who/progs/hcp/UrbanHealthTopics/20020118_1).
Pembina Institute (www.pembina.org) produces reports on Genuine Progress Indicators and Sustainability Trends.
Pembina Institute (2001), Alberta GPI Blueprint Report, Pembina Institute (www.pembina.org).
Performance Measurement Exchange (http://knowledge.fhwa.dot.gov/cops/pm.nsf/home), is a website supported by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration and the Transportation Research Board to promote better transportation decision-making.
Anthony Perl, Special Issue Editor
(2007) “Cities, Energy, and the Post-Oil Paradigm – Special Issue” Journal
of Urban Technology (www.tandf.co.uk), Vol. 14, No. 2, August 2007, pp. 3-13.
PRé Consultants (www.pre.nl) provides information for evaluating sustainability through lifecycle resource costing.
PROSPECTS (2001), Cities’ Decision-Making Requirements, Procedures for Recommending Sustainable Planning for European Cities and Transport Systems (www-ivv.tuwien.ac.at/projects/prospects/Deliverables/pr_del_1.pdf).
PROSPECTS (2003),
Transport Strategy: A Decisionmakers Guidebook, Konsult, Institute for
Transport Studies, University of Leeds (www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk); at www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk/public/level1/sec00/index.htm; originally published as, Developing Sustainable Urban Land Use and Transport
Strategies: A Methodological Guidebook; at www.infra.kth.se/courses/1H1402/Litteratur/pr_del14mg.pdf.
RAE (2005), Engineering for Sustainable Development: Guiding Principles, U.K. Royal Academy of Engineering, (www.raeng.org.uk).
RAND Europe (2004), Operationalising Sustainable Transport and Mobility: The
System Diagram and Indicators, European Commission (www.summa-eu.org).
Redefining Progress (www.rprogress.org) is a research institute studying practical ways to evaluate progress toward sustainability.
Barbara Richardson (1999), “Towards A Policy On A Sustainable Transportation System, Transportation Research Record 1670, TRB (www.trb.org), pp. 27-34.
RP, Environmental Footprint, Redefining Progress (www.rprogress.org/programs/sustainability/ef)
Rural Transport Knowledge Base (www.transport-links.org/rtkb/English\Intro.htm) is a set of reference and training material of the latest thinking and practice in the field of rural transport.
Marc Schlossberg and Adam Zimmerman (2003), “Developing Statewide Indices of Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability: a look at Oregon and the Oregon Benchmarks,” Local Environment, Volume 8, no. 6, p. 641-660, December 2003, at university of Oregon (www.uoregon.edu/~schlossb/PPPM).
Jan A. Schwaab and Sascha Thielmann (2001), Economic Instruments for Sustainable Road Transport: An Overview for Policy Makers in Developing Countries, GTZ (www.gtz.de) and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (www.unescap.org); at www.gtz.de/dokumente/Economic_Instruments_for_Sustainable_Road_Transport.pdf.
STELLA:
Sustainable Transport in Europe And Links And Liaisons With
STI (2008), Sustainable
Transportation Indicators: A Recommended Program To Define A Standard Set of
Indicators For Sustainable Transportation Planning, Sustainable
Transportation Indicators Subcommittee (ADD40 [1]), Transportation Research
Board (www.trb.org); at www.vtpi.org/sustain/sti.pdf.
Strategic Policy Options for Sustainable Development Database (www.iges.or.jp/cgi-bin/rispo/index_spo.cgi), Research on Innovative and Strategic Policy Options (RISPO) by the Institute for Global Environmental Studies provides information, recommended best practices and case studies on a wide range of sustainable policies and strategies.
Sustainable Communities Network (www.sustainable.org) provides tools to help citizens work together to define a community's course and make it more sustainable.
Sustainable Development Online (http://sd-online.ewindows.eu.org)
is an information resource for sustainable development tools and activities
throughout the world.
Sustainable
Development Indicators Website (www.sdi.gov) provides information
on various environmental and sustainable development statistics available in
the
Sustainable Development Networking
Programme (http://sdnp.delhi.nic.in) provides in-depth coverage of
major issues concerning sustainable development.
Sustainable
Sustainable Mobility Project (www.wbcsdmobility.org) by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) aims to chart pathways towards Sustainable Mobility that support societal, environmental and economic objectives.
Sustainability Start (www.insnet.org/sustainabilitystart) is a website that describes a variety of successful sustainability initiatives, including a special section on transportation programs (www.insnet.org/sustainabilitystart/subcat18.rxml).
Sustainable Surface Transportation Website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/transport/index_en.html), European Commission.
Sustainable Urban Transport Project Website (www.sutp.org), aims to help cities achieve their sustainable transport goals through the dissemination of information about international experience and targeted work with particular cities.
TAC (1999), Achieving Livable Cities, Transportation Association of Canada (www.tac-atc.ca).
TELLUS - Bringing CIVITAS Onto the Road (www.tellus-cities.net), European Union. Describes projects to demonstrate that integrated urban transport policies can help reduce urban traffic problems.
TERI,
The Energy and Resources Institute (www.teriin.org) is an independent,
not-for-profit institute engaged in research, training, information
dissemination, and other activities focused on all forms of natural and human
resources, with a special interest in sustainable energy and the environment.
Transport
2000 (www.transport2000.demon.co.uk) is a leading independent
organization concerned with sustainable transport.
Transport Knowledge Partnership (www.gtkp.org) is a website sponsored by leading international development organizations to provide information on transport planning and management strategies suitable for application in developing countries.
Transport
TRB (1997), Committee for a Study on Transportation and a Sustainable Environment, Toward A Sustainable Future; Addressing the Long-Term Effects of Motor Vehicle Transportation on Climate and Ecology, National Academy Press (www.trb.org).
TRB (2005), Integrating Sustainability into the Transportation Planning Process: July 11–13, 2004 Conference Report, Conference Proceedings 37; Transportation Research Board,
(www.trb.org/publications/conf/CP37.pdf).
TRL, Strategic Environmental Assessment Newsletter, Transportation Research Laboratory (www.trl.co.uk/env_sea_newsletter.htm) provides information on international efforts to develop more integrated transportation planning, including consideration of equity issues.
TUV (2000), CANTIQUE: Concerted Action
on Non Technical Measures and Their Impact on Air Quality and Emissions, Research For Sustainable Mobility, European Commission (http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/extra/final_reports/strategic/cantique.pdf).
UNECE/WHO
(2003), Sustainable
and Healthy Urban Transport and Planning, documents
from workshop held in
UITP (2000),
Millennium Cities
Database for Sustainable Transport, International
Association of Public Transport (
UN (2001), Energy & Transport, Report of the Secretary General, Economic and Social Council, Commission on Sustainable Development, Ninth Session, United Nations (www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd10/ecn172001-pc20.pdf).
UN Habitat Archives (www.chs.ubc.ca/archives), at the Centre for Human Settlements (CHS), is an online repository of best practices for building healthy and sustainable cities.
UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment (UCCEE) (www.uccee.org) is a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), specialised in energy and environmental issues. It performs research on international sustainability issues.
United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (HABITAT) (www.unhabitat.org) provides information on sustainable urban development and transportation.
UNESCO-SCOPE
(2006), Indicators of Sustainability: Reliable Tools For Decision Making,
UNESCO-SCOPE, Policy Brief No 1 (www.icsu-scope.org/spotlight/060421_PolicyBriefs_No1.pdf).
USEPA (1999), Transportation Indicators, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (www.usepa.gov/oppetptr/rap.htm).
Eduardo Alcântara Vasconcellos (2001), Urban Transport, Environment And Equity - The Case For Developing Countries, Earthscan (www.earthscan.co.uk).
Vehicle Emission Reductions Website (www.adb.org/vehicle-emissions) by the Asia Development Bank provides a forum for developing countries to share experiences and strategies in reducing vehicle emissions.
John
Whitelegg (2008), Integrating
Sustainability into Transport, Eco-logica (www.eco-logica.co.uk); at www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/Integrating_Sustainability_Transport.pdf.
World Bank (1996), Sustainable Transport; Priorities for Policy Reform, World Bank (www.worldbank.org).
WBCSM (2004), Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability, The Sustainable Mobility Project, World Business Council for Sustainable Mobility (www.wbcsd.org).
World Health Organization Healthy Cities Project (www.who.dk/london99) provides information on international efforts to create healthy cities.
WHO (2004) World Health Organization Case studies on Sustainable Development (www.who.dk/eprise/main/WHO/Progs/HCP/Documentation/20010917_2).
This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport
Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation Demand
Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and
suggestions for improvement.
Victoria Transport Policy
Institute
www.vtpi.org info@vtpi.org
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
#67