IV INTERNATIONAL MEDIA FORUM ON THE PROTECTION OF NATURE PROTECTION OF NATURE, PROTECTION OF HEALTH Tools for a sustainable mobility to clash the traffic and pollution in the urban area: a critical review Carlo Carminucci Director Research Area of Isfort Villa Mondragone, October 2006
This presentation is divided into two sections 1. A short description of the characteristics of the demand for urban mobility, starting from data supplied by Audimob, Observatory on Italians Mobility Styles and Behaviors 2. A concise review of the policies and measures for a sustainable urban mobility, with a few examples of good practices
First section THE DEMAND FOR URBAN MOBILITY: MAIN OUTLINES
Cars, increasingly more the monopolists in urban transport (percentage share of journeys) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10,0 Total 20 81,9 78,9 12,7 8,4 7,6 10,6 2004 2005 Motorcycles Cars Public transport 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Towns over 250,000 inhabitans 61,3 60,6 28,6 28,4 11,6 10 0 2004 2005 Towns over 100,000 inhabitans 90 80 70 67,5 68,0 60 50 40 30 22,7 22,2 20 9,8 9,8 10 0 2004 2005 Towns less than 100,000 inhabitans 88,0 90 83,4 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 7,8 8,8 6,6 5,4 10 0 2004 2005
Public transport holds out in medium and large towns (percentage share of journeys) 35 Total 20 11,8 11,7 13,6 12,3 12,7 10,6 5 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 35 20 26,7 27,4 22,3 22,5 30,5 24,7 28,5 28,6 28,4 22,4 22,7 22,2 5 9,1 7,2 7,3 8,3 8,8 5,4 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Towns over 100,000 inhabitans Towns over 250,000 inhabitans Towns less than 100,000 inhabitans
The basic segmentations of the demand for urban mobility (% of journeys) 40 34,7 32,2 30,5 29,4 30,2 32,5 35,4 30 29,8 31,1 Motivations 20 10 4,7 5,3 4,2 Frequency 0 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 40 Work Study Family management Spare time 71,8 70,9 72,9 28,2 29,1 27,1 Sistematic journeys Non sistematic journeys 2003 2004 2005 30 29,9 27,6 30,1 26,8 25,4 27,1 24,8 Length 20 10 15,7 11,4 18,4 17,8 16,6 9,8 10,7 7,8 0 Till 1 km From 1 to 2 km From 2 to 5 km From 5 to 10 km Over 10 km
Urban mobility in towns with over 100,000 inhabitants: length of journeys by transport means (% of journeys) Till 1 Km From 1 to 2 Km From 2 to 5 Km From 5 to 10 Km Over 10 Km Total Pedestrian mobility 75,0 31,3 9,1 24,8 Bicycles 4,4 9,5 3,5 1,3 0,4 3,8 Motocycles 2,7 6,2 8,0 9,4 9,9 7,0 Cars 15,4 42,8 59,7 63,3 67,7 48,4 Public transport 2,3 10,0 18,8 20,7 12,4 13,4 Combined transport (public and private means) 0,2 0,2 1,0 5,4 9,6 2,6 Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0
Satisfaction indexes for public transport (% of population and averages scores 1-10) Autobus, Buses, tram 2005 2004 2003 5,9 11,4 6,4 22,7 18,7 24,7 53,1 45,8 59,7 Averages Punteggi scores medi 18,2 5,88 11,8 6,04 21,8 6,29 Underground Metropolitana 2005 2004 2003 6,3 4,1 3,8 13,1 14,2 19,6 38,7 43,4 50,1 40,8 39,7 26,2 6,86 6,51 6,95 Treno Local locale train 2005 2004 2003 2,8 2,6 10,4 13,9 11,2 18,1 47,9 51,0 49,1 35,4 35,2 22,4 6,18 6,81 6.91 Per No niente satisfaction soddisfatto (averages (punteggi 1-3) 1-3) Abbastanza Medium satisfaction soddisfatto (averages (punteggi 6-8) 6-7) Poco Low soddisfatto satisfaction (punteggi (averages 4-5) 4-5) Molto High soddisfatto satisfaction (punteggi (averages 8-10) 9-10) Fonte: Isfort, Osservatorio Audimob sulla mobilità, anni vari
The average speed of public transport is on the decrease Cars Auto Public Mezzi transport pubblici 30 25 20 25 15 20 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 10 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mezzi privati (km/h) Cars 2005 2004 2001 Comuni Towns over con 100,000 100.000 inhabitants e più abitanti 23,5 22,7 22,1 Grandi Towns over città 250,000 inhabitants 22,5 21,8 21,4 Comuni Towns less <100.000 than 100,000 abitanti inhabitants Tutta Total la popolazione 24,5 24,2 24,3 23,9 24,6 24,0 Mezzi pubblici (km/h) Public Transport 2005 2004 2001 14,8 16,6 14,3 14,4 16,7 14,3 17,5 17,8 17,4 15,8 17,2 15,6 Comuni con oltre 100.000 abitanti Grandi città Comuni <100.000 abitanti Totale
Judgment on the measures designed to reduce traffic and pollution The opinion of residents in the medium and large towns (average scores 1-10) 2005 2004 Apply discounts on public transport season tickets 8,03 7,45 Prevent the circulation of heavy vehicles within the cities 7,86 7,68 Increase the preferential lanes and routes for public transport 7,42 6,85 Prohibit car traffic in old town centers and other crowded zones 7,30 7,07 Modify the opening hours of shops 6,67 6,44 Promote car-pooling arrangements 6,47 6,64 Cause non-residents to pay car parks (park pricing) Charge for the access to old town centers and to the roads obstructed by traffic (road pricing) 5,18 4,83 5,27 5,11
Judgment on the provisions to fight pollution (%) 45 The following provisions are deemed to have little or no effectiveness 40,0 30 15 11,6 15,0 16,7 23,0 19,3 26,6 23,4 29,2 26,5 0 Divieto Traffic di ban circolazione for the most per i veicoli polluting più vehicles inquinanti (non-catalytic (auto catalitiche, cars, old diesels, vecchi diesel, old vecchi mopeds) motorini) Controllo periodico dei gas Regular di scarico control delle of auto the exhaust (bollino gases blu) of cars (blue stamp) Blocco del traffico in Traffic alcune ban giornate on given (domeniche days (ecological ecologiche) Sundays) Divieto totale della circolazione nelle Total traffic ban on giornate di emergenza days emergency Circolazione a targhe Circulation alterne by alternate license plates 2004 2005
Second section POLICIES AND MEASURES FOR A SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY: A CONCISE REVIEW
A summary of policies and measures for a sustainable mobility in the urban area Policies 1. Fares and pricing 2. Management of the demand for urban mobility 3. Public transport 4. Not pollutant modes of transport 5. Land use and transport Measures Road pricing Park pricing Traffic calming Limitation of vehicle traffic Car-pooling Car-sharing Information Technology (ITS) Bus priority Tariff integration Infomobility Bicycle and pedestrian mobility Integrated planning between transport and land use
Concrete actions: road pricing Consolidate practices Singapore (1975) Middle towns in Norway: Bergen, Oslo, Trondheim (end of 80) London Stockholm Studies and Projects Middle towns in UK (Bristol, Edinburgh) Paris, Marseille Genoa, Rome, Milan (studies and experiments)
A successful case: London s congestion charge Introduced in 2003, after many years of studies and modeling simulations. The interested zone (only on weekdays) is delimited by the Inner Ring Road (22 sq. km.). Starting from February 2007, the area will be extended to the west of the city (a further 20 sq. km.). After merely a year, considerable results have already been attained: sizable reduction in car traffic (-39%), increase in public transport (+38%), decrease in bus waiting time (-30%), decrease in the number of accidents (-9%), and decrease in traffic emissions (-12%, nitrogen oxides and fine dusts). Unexpected negative effects: nearly 50% lower returns than expected owing to the extremely high reduction in the number of cars entering the city and the high number of cars that are exempted from the charge.
Concrete actions: car-sharing Car sharing replaces the ownership of a car with a system of car rental by a community of users (multi-owned cars for several users). Car sharing is considered an efficient alternative to the ownership of a car for users who cover less than 10,000 km a year. The introduction of the car-sharing services aims at: separating the use of a car from its ownership, and this applies in particular to that that share of motorists who does not drive the car on a regular basis for its journeys; minimizing vehicle traffic by stimulating the use of collective transport; reducing the needs for parking spaces in crowded urban areas, through a drop of the population motorization rates
Concrete actions: car sharing Starting from the 1980s, a growing recourse to car-sharing arrangements has been reported in a few central European countries (Germany, The Netherlands, and Switzerland) and, later on, in the United States and Canada. Considered as a whole, the three European countries rely on over 100 organizations and in excess of 100,000 users. In the United States, 17 car-sharing organizations involve nearly 76,500 members (in 2005) with a vehicle fleet of 1,200 cars. In recent years, a few interesting initiatives have also been developed in Austria, Denmark, France and Italy. The spread of the car-sharing service proceeded at the same rate as the development and spread of the technologies applied to the mobility sector: telecommunication systems to manage reservations and car-sharing services (web portals for communication among members and the operation headquarters), smart cards for access and financial management (invoicing system), satellite control of vehicles (GPS) and so on.
Concrete actions: supporting the use of bicycles The mobility of urban areas in Europe and particularly in Italy combines well with the bicycle mode of travel (short-distances, facility of access and parking, etc.). However, this potential is frustrated by the conflict between bikes and vehicle traffic. The promiscuity of the routes and, above all, the speed disparity between bikes and cars reduce to a considerable extent the safety conditions related to the weaker mode of transport. The situation is compounded by the poor quality of urban environments, often characterized by high levels of atmospheric and acoustic pollution. A few experiences: the Bike Offices, Calla-bike, Piedibus.
A final remark Time and money are scarce! Urban policies for a sustainable mobility should be: 1. diversified and integrated 2. focused on local pattern 3. effective (strategic level) 4. efficient (operative level)
Thanks for your attention! Carlo Carminucci ccarminucci@isfort.it