Policies for sustainable mobility in Italian cities

Transcription

1 WIT Press, ISBN --- Policies for sustainable mobility in Italian cities C. Burlando^, C. Canali ^, E. Musso^\ C. Pelizzoni^ ^ DIEM - Dipartimento di Economia e Metodi Quantitativi, Universita di Genova, Italy. ^Dipartimento di Economia, Universita di Parma, Italy. Abstract The paper inspects strategies pursued by policy makers in order to manage urban mobility, given the trade off among the goals of accessibility, environmental sustainability, "fiscal sustainability", wealth/income redistribution. Urban mobility policies are here grouped with reference to the aim of: reducing overall demand; - shifting from individual transport to transit; shifting from high to low impact modes; reducing externalities of individual and collective vehicles; enhancing intermodality. An empirical survey on all major Italian cities is developed, in order to point out opportunities, consequences and problems in carrying out these policies. Background The ultimate function of urban transport is to increase the accessibility of urban space, thus allowing the urban community to benefit from economies of urbanisation. Such a goal of effectiveness in urban transport supply implies direct costs (paid by travellers) and external costs (paid by the community). Their minimisation in turn requires, respectively, goals of efficiency in producing mobility and environmental protection, both aimed - hand in hand with other public policies - to the growth of income of economic system (urban, in the case in point) and to its even distribution. All these objectives aiming to get an increase in collective welfare (considered as the sum of individual utilities) have been ever pursued by public interventions, even though in different ways and by different intensities according to the historic moment. There are different reasons for public intervention, ranging from the social utility of accessibility, to the existence of

2 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century natural monopolies, to positive and negative externalities. The social and economic reasons at first justifying the presence of public intervention have been substituted at present by environmental and economic reasons. Urban mobility generates negative externalities causing the market failure: thus, public intervention (even though partial and less invading than once) is still required in building infrastructures and for fixing rules for the development of individual and collective mobility. Urban mobility policies concern (i) private traffic, (ii) production of transit services, (Hi) realisation and modification of infrastructures. However, mobility in urban areas does not only concern the transport sector. In fact, interactions between the sector and its own territory generate the need to implement non transport-related policies (such as urban planning) in order to achieve transport-related goals. Transport-related policies can be short or long-term: short-term ones regard private traffic (in order to get a more fluent urban mobility) and interventions in the production of transit services (either direct or just aimed at planning and control of private operators); long-term policies are more complex and concern infrastructures, which are largely funded directly by public contributions. Strategies for a sustainable urban mobility By considering both the short and the long term, policy makers can follow strategies of mobility management (not just transport-related), which can be classified in five groups: ) Reducing and reorganising total demand by reducing the number and/or the length of movements. This implies to co-ordinate urban and transport policies in order to reduce distances between settlements with different urban functions (offices, services, residences), to hive off the places of supply of services and to rationalise the distribution of goods. In order to decrease traffic peaks thus improving the fluidity of movements, policy makers can differentiate the hours of some activities, such as those of beginning and end of school lessons. A reduction in the number of movements^ could be also caused by the diffusion of telematics and telecommunications (such as telework, electronic commerce, home banking, telebooking, etc.) which allow to carry on activities without moving and, thus, without generating demand for mobility. ) Transferring demand from individual mobility to collective transport. In order to increase transit market share (external costs per person are estimated triple for private than for collective transport), there is a need for more competitive transit service. Its quality can be improved through higher speeds and frequencies, capillarity of networks, lower distances between stops, more comfortable vehicle and services. It is also necessary to restrict private traffic by enforcing temporary or permanent traffic bans, pedestrian zones, park- and road-pricing, speed limits for private cars, and through incentives for increasing vehicles' occupancy rate (car pooling, car sharing), and liberalising the market of car rental and taxis, where they are subject to regulations and restrictions of supply (such as in Italy).

3 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century 9 ) Transferring public transport from road to rail and promoting alternative energy sources with lower environmental impact. The most effective strategy for increasing speed, reducing externalities and, at the same time, reducing costs of public transport (through the cut down off staff) is the development transport systems in dedicated lanes (normally on rail) powered by electric traction and automatic guide. The result is an increase in efficiency and a potential increase in effectiveness. Rail transport not only reduces environmental impact and congestion, but also accident rates and health and social costs. Above all, rail transit should be developed in connection of centre with suburbs, where present modal split is dominated by road transport (in Italy, -9%) as a consequence of the lack of alternatives. ) Reducing externalities of vehicles, both for individual and collective transport. It is necessary (/) to impose more rigorous rules about overhaul of vehicles and about fuel, relating to both collective and private vehicles and (/'/) to introduce supporting policies capable of stimulating the use of alternative energy sources for public transport vehicles. ) Intermodality. The integration can be enhanced between private and public transport (park-and-ride, fares incentives for parking, concentration of services in intermodal nodes), as well as by promoting integrated networks and cumulative or unified tickets between different modes of collective transport (railways, underground, buses, funiculars, sea and river transport). For these purposes, a key issue is the improvement of information systems for road users and for transit vehicles. The goals of the survey The survey aims at assess the level of implementation of strategies for sustainable mobility in major Italian cities. These cities polarise a relevant share of population, work, production and consumption of a highly developed economy, where a transition occurs towards a model of post-industrial and tertiary economic system. Namely, the main aims of the survey are: - to verify whether is occurring a systematic implementation of those strategies which are nowadays reported by mainstream economic and technical literature as being the most effective for government of urban mobility in highly developed economies and with objectives of sustainability; - if this is the case, whether this implementation occurs homogeneously in cities of different size and in cities belonging to different geo-economical areas of the country; - whether this implementation employs all different strategies of policies for the sustainable urban mobility, or it pursues just a part of those strategies and objectives.

4 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century The survey. Questionnaire and results The level of implementation of policies for a sustainable urban mobility has been analysed through questionnaires proposed to the city councillor responsible for transport and mobility in all the Italian municipalities with a population over. inhabitants (from the biggest to the smallest: Rome, Milan, Naples, Turin, Palermo, Genoa, Bologna, Florence, Catania, Bari, Venice, Messina and Verone). The thirteen cities have been classified into three groups: "small" (population between, and,), "medium" (between, and,,) and "large" (over..). The Table below classifies the above mentioned cities according to the three class of population and to the geographical areas they belong to. Table - The thirteen Italian cities with more than, inhabitants Areas Population rthwest rtheast Centre South and Islands >,, Milan Rome Naples J,-,,,- J, Genoa Turin Bologna Venice Verone Florence Palermo Bari Catania Messina The survey has focused on private traffic, mass transit, mobility analysis/planning, land use and urban policies/management. Namely, questions proposed in the questionnaire range into eight topics concerning: ) reducing demand for mobility; ) optimising mobility; ) promoting mass transit; ) improving alternative modes of transport; ) reducing externalities of vehicles; ) improving intermodality; ) applying traffic plans; ) improving technological innovation. It is rather self-evident that topics and refer to the first strategy mentioned in, while topics,,, refer, respectively, to the second, third, fourth and fifth strategies of. Topic has been included in the questionnaire in order to verify the level of implementation of plans explicitly provided for by the Italian law, while topic points out the technological issues occurring in different policies, in order to show the level of innovation intensity in urban mobility government. Both topics are somehow transverse to all policies and strategies. Obviously,

5 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century each topic can include, and normally does, policies of different nature, ranging from pricing to restrictions and prohibitions, from infrastructures to regulations, from public incentives to product and process innovations. The eight groups of questions are reported below (some of them appear in more than one group, being related to different policies): Reducing private mobility local traffic restrictions pedestrian zones number-plate restrictions (odds/evens alternation) traffic prohibitions on Sunday and public holidays temporary traffic prohibitions related to pollution restricted entry hour for lorries/vans car pooling car sharing collective taxis reducing distances between different land uses decentralisation goods/services supplies telework 9 Optimising private mobility O/D analysis city mobility manager firms' mobility managers co-ordination reducing distances between different land uses decentralisation goods/services supplies echelons in school/office hours Enhancing (road) transit bus lanes improvement of lines and frequency pre-trip information car pooling car sharing collective taxis Rail transit and alternative vehicles incentives for electric cars cycle track underground people mover tramway trolleybuses busway

6 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century Reduction of externalities road pricingu=> park pricingy=> regulations on polluting emissions (private traffic) regulations on polluting emissions (transit) incentives :"or electric vehicles ^j Intermodality park-and-ride quality of intermodal nodes fare and/or functional integration logistic exchange platforms for goods distribution Planning Urban Traffic Plan (PUT) Urban Mobility Plan (PUM) Urban Transport Master Plan (PGTU) Detailed Urban Traffic Plan (PPTU) Executive Urban Traffic Plan (PETU) Technology pre-trip and in-trip information (private traffic) Advanced Transport Telematics (ATT) incentives for electric vehicles pre-trip information (transit) telework. Result processing For aggregate and average evaluations of the results of the questionnaire, it has been fixed that each positive answer (policy in force) scores, each answer stating that a measure is in project scores., each negative answer scores. Average points for answers concerning each group of policies are reported in Tables and. In Table the averages for the whole set of cities are compared to the results for cities belonging to each dimensional class. In Table the comparison is outlined with the results of cities of the four main geographical areas (rth West, rth East, Centre, South & Islands). Figures and show the same results and allow - for each set of measures - an immediate visual comparison of each group of cities to the other groups and to the national average. It must be noted that the lay out of the eight axes is such that transit issues can be read on positive abscissa, private traffic issues on positive ordinate, environment issues on negative abscissa and technology issues on negative ordinate. Bisectors refer to measure which are to some extent "common" to adjacent issues (e.g.: intermodality for private and public transport).

7 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century Large Medium Small Italy Table - Level of implem Optimis. private mobility.... Enhanc. Intermod (road) transit entation Rail transit and altern. vehicles...9. of policies by size of cities Technol. Planning Reducing external..... Reducing private mobility.... Figure - Level of implementation of policies by size of cities Optimising private mobility Reduction of externalities. Enhancing (road) transit Technology -Large Italy ^Rail transit and altei g_.medium * Small rthwest rtheast Centre bwf/z/m. Italy Table - Level of implementation of policies by geographical area Rail Optimis. Enhanc. transit private Intizrmod (road) and Technol. Planning Reducing mobility transit altern. external. vehicles Reducing private mobility.....9

8 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century Figure - Level of implementation of policies by size of cities Reduction of externaliti Optimising private mobility, Enhancing (road) ti Technology ^Rail transit and alternative vehicles I *_. rth-west _#_. rth-cast...*.. Centre _- - South/Islands )l( Italy Finally, a further analysis has been conducted by comparing policies enhancing mass transit, on one hand, to the balance of policies improving and, respectively, discouraging private traffic, on the other hand. Results are summarised Table and in Figure, where scores are calculated as previously explained. Rome Milan Naples Turin Palermo Genoa Bologna Florence Catania Bari Venice Messina Verone Table - Private mobility vs. transit mass transit privau? traffic enhancement improvement private traffic dissuasion

9 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century Figure - Private mobility vs. transit Naples Rome Milan Palermo Bologna Catania * * * Bari ^Venice ^/lessina -, -, -, -, -,,,,,, Private mobility Conclusions The results of the survey provide some meaningful information, that can be summarised as follows: - most of the policies referred to in the questionnaire are far from being widely employed in major Italian cities; out of the measures considered, on average less than % are in force (in April ) in any Italian city with more than, inhabitants, while another % is planned to come into force in the future; - there are relevant differences related to the size of cities: for "small" cities (between, and, inhabitants) measures in force are on average %, fairly less than for "medium" cities with pop. between, and,, (%), and for large cities of over million inhabitants (%); what is quite normal, since urban mobility problems are bigger in big cities, thus justifying a higher priority in the political agenda; - similar inequalities result between cities of different geographical areas, what is far less obvious: cities of Southern regions show a much lower level of enforcement of measures in mobility government (%) than cities of the rest of the country (%); since Southern regions include cities of the three size groups, more or less proportionally to national averages, and considering the level of public expenditure usually (much) higher than in the rest of the country, this inequality can only be explained through a lower attention and priority to such issues such as urban mobility and the quality of urban environment; cities of different sizes appear to employ quite different ranges of policies (at least as far as the groups of measures of the questionnaire are considered); bigger cities show a comparatively higher use of innovative

10 WIT Press, ISBN --- Urban Transport and the Environment for the st Century policies (not only technologically) such as innovations in transport modes, vehicles, energy, the enhancement of intermodality between private and public transport or between different modes mass transit, the optimisation of traffic flows through reduction of peaks; while smaller cities mainly focus on more traditional policies such as restrictions to private mobility and incentives to mass transit; bigger cities employ a more homogeneous mix of policies than medium and small cities (the ratio between the percentage of enforcement for the less employed group of measures and that of the more employed group of measures is respectively.,. and.); probably due to the fact that bigger cities, and partly medium cities, have a need comparatively higher for employing as many as possible of the available tools for facing mobility problems; thus they adopt simultaneously different strategies, what is less or no necessary for smaller cities, which focus on a few measures, considered effective for specific problems; - the comparison between policies for mass transit, on one side, and the "balance" of measures optimising and restricting private mobility, on the other side (see Figure ) shows that all large cities, two out of the three medium cities and the two bigger among "small" cities have adopted a policy mix aiming both at enhancing public transport and at optimising private traffic; the strategy, often enunciated, of penalising private mobility (road pricing, traffic restrictions, etc.) and jointly bettering the quality of public transport is far from being organically pursued, probably also for political reasons. References [] EU passenger transport rose from 9 to 99 more than GDP, at an average annual rate of.%. About % is concentrated in cities (see TNO, 999), where billions trips per year are estimated (OGM et a/., 99). See: TNO, Definition of European transport systems, European Commission, DG VII, FANTASIE project, Deliverable D; OGM et al, QUATTRO project: synthesis and recommendation, European Commission, DG VII; [] Cascetta E., Teoria e metodi dell'ingegneria del sistemi di trasporto, Torino, Utet, 999. [] Cardia C., Junyent R., (Eds.), The impact of major transport infrastructures on the urban quality. European case studies, Bruxelles: COST, 999. [] Camagni R., (Eds.), Economia e pianificazione della citta sostenibile, Bologna, II Mulino, 99. The whole paper has been jointly discussed and developed by the authors. Nevertheless,,. are by C.Burlando; is by C.Canali;,. are by C.Pelizzoni; is by E.Musso.