Giving future generations a voice: constructing a sustainability viewpoint in transport appraisal

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Giving future generations a voice: constructing a sustainability viewpoint in transport appraisal"

Asher Benson
6 years ago
Views:

of High-Speed Rail 2 HS2 phase 1 in the UK May 15 2017

1 Giving future generations a voice: constructing a sustainability viewpoint in transport appraisal The case of High-Speed Rail 2 HS2 phase 1 in the UK May Banekonference Yannick Cornet, postdoctoral researcher yancor@dtu.dk

2 Who I am Yannick Cornet, Phd, PMP, Eng yancor@dtu.dk Phd Sustainable Transport Appraisal (STA) Concepts Tools Governance Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

3 For more Transportation Research Record Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

4 What is Sustainable Transport Appraisal (STA)? 1 st generation: CBA Well-established method for monetization of (some) impacts 2 nd generation: MCA Broadening of assessment criteria Wide range of techniques 3 rd generation: MAMCA Complex problem = no right answer Systematise and make visible various stakeholder interests Positivist Assumptions Key to our approach: make future generations viewpoint explicit Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

5 HS2 Case Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

6 Project options Existing West Coast Main Line High Speed Rail along M1 motorway HS2 Phase 1 as proposed Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

7 Complex and far-reaching impacts.. highly contested project Top issues: 1. More tunnels 2. Community impacts 3. Sound and vibration Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

8 Method UK HS2 high-speed rail case + 2 alternatives Adapt multi-actor MCA (MAMCA) procedure Develop a robust list of 28 assessment criteria Structured interviews based on online questionnaire (33 transport professionals) Assign respondents to stakeholder groups and identify sustainability experts Dual-approach to construct sustainability viewpoints (expert- and principle-based) Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

9 Expert-based sustainability viewpoint (SV1) Key is to identify Sustainability experts Respondent had to meet two of the following three criteria: 1. Conduct environmental analysis of HS2/transport infrastructure to a great extent 2. Conduct analysis of HS2/transport infrastructure primarily at society-level (wider economic impacts, social/environmental issues) rather than project-level (system design, user benefits, project costs, etc.) 3. Have formal education in environmental studies (university degree or university-level coursework) Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

sustainability Applies ROD weights based on strong

10 Principle-based sustainability viewpoint (SV2) Organise criteria in hierarchy of three dimensions of sustainability Applies ROD weights based on strong sustainability principles (SV2a) Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

11 Principle-based approach published here Free download here m/eprint/m52vj2frr2cafifd afa6/full Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

12 In blue: official HS2 goals MCA Impact assessment Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

13 Weights compared: dual-approach sustainability viewpoints Sustainability Viewpoint 1 Expert-based Sustainability Viewpoint 2a Principles-based Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

14 Weights compared: Sustainability vs Gov t Sustainability Viewpoint 1 Expert-based Government Transport professionals Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

15 Weights compared: Sustainability vs Transport experts Sustainability Viewpoint 1 Expert-based Other transport professionals Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

16 Appraisal Results: Sustainability Viewpoints Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

17 Appraisal Results: Stakeholders compared Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

18 Key take-aways Important to cover impacts broadly to avoid omission bias Concepts Tools Governance What matters varies by stakeholder groups, and might not necessarily be sustainable MAMCA provides clarity about competing views Robustness of Sustainability Viewpoints achieved by triangulation (expert-based + principle-based) For the expert-based approach: Structured interviews enabled learning Training and experience matter need for more transport planners with strong sustainability background Further research: can Sustainability Viewpoints influence decision-making? Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

19 Thank you for your attention Yannick Cornet Michael Bruhn Barfod Merrill Jones Baradale Dr. Robin Hickman Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

Brundtland: strong sustainability principles required in rich country context Living standards that go beyond the basic minimum are sustainable only if consumption standards everywhere have regard

Perceived needs are socially and culturally determined, and sustainable development requires the promotion of values that encourage consumption standards that are within the bounds of the

20 Brundtland: strong sustainability principles required in rich country context Living standards that go beyond the basic minimum are sustainable only if consumption standards everywhere have regard for long-term sustainability. Yet many of us live beyond the world's ecological means, for instance in our patterns of energy use. Perceived needs are socially and culturally determined, and sustainable development requires the promotion of values that encourage consumption standards that are within the bounds of the ecological possible and to which all can reasonably aspire (Chap.2 para.5) World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) Our Common Future. United Nations. Chap2 1 Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

loss, climate Rockström, J. et al. 2009. Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society. Steffen, W.

21 Strong sustainability Priority given to sustaining ecological integrity?? Nested model of sustainability Planetary boundaries Sustainability viewpoint: proposal to give higher weights to critical impacts biodiversity loss, climate Rockström, J. et al Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society. Steffen, W. et al Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development on a Changing Planet. Science. Griggs, D., et al Policy: Sustainable Development Goals for People and Planet. Nature. Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

22 Expert-based weights Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

23 Dual-Approach Method Top-down, Principles-based sustainability viewpoint (SV2s) Bottom-up, Expert-based sustainability viewpoint (SV1) Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

28 Impacts Effects that are exceptionally important for management and decision-making, directly illustrating consequences of human action 1.

24 28 Impacts Effects that are exceptionally important for management and decision-making, directly illustrating consequences of human action 1. Selection of 28 standard transport appraisal criteria (WebTAG) 2. Iterative and interactive process with respondents Respondents are asked to select minimum 6 criteria, then assess and weigh them Yannick Cornet, Phd Banekonference May

25 How green are the rail freight flows through Denmark? George Panagakos Postdoc

26 Presentation topics 1. The green corridor concept 2. Corridor benchmarking methodology 3. The GreCOR application 2 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

27 1. The green corridor concept 3 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

28 Definition EU Commission: Green Corridors are a European concept denoting long-distance freight transport corridors where advanced technology and co-modality are used to achieve energy efficiency and reduce environmental impact Freight Transport Logistics Action Plan (2007) 4 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

29 Main characteristics EU Commission: 1. Concentration of freight traffic 2. Co-modality and advanced technology 3. Adequate transhipment facilities 4. Green propulsion 5. Demonstrate innovative transport units 6. Fair and non-discriminatory access 5 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

Effective consideration of interoperability problems

30 Why do we need green corridors? Shift of cargoes away from roads Improved competitiveness of rail and waterborne transport Optimisation in terms of energy use and emissions Effective consideration of interoperability problems Enhanced cooperation Reduced requirements for expansion of network capacity 6 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

31 Examples of green corridor initiatives East-West Transport Corridor ( ) 7 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

32 Examples of green corridor initiatives STRING corridor ( ) 8 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

33 2. Corridor benchmarking methodology 9 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

34 The SuperGreen corridors 10 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

35 The SuperGreen KPIs Relative transport cost (to the user) Transport time (or speed) Reliability (on-time delivery) Frequency of service CO 2 -eq emissions SOx emissions /ton-km hours (or km/h) % of shipments number per year g/ton-km g/ton-km BUT 11 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

36 The SuperGreen methodology 1. Disaggregate the corridor into transport chains 2. Select a sample of typical transport chains according to the Transport Market Study 3. Estimate KPI values for each and every chain of the sample 4. Aggregate these values into corridor level KPIs by using weights and methods specified in the Transport Market Study Use the same sample to monitor performance in subsequent years (equivalent to the basket of goods/services used for calculating and reporting CPI) 12 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

37 3. The GreCOR application 13 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

38 The revised methodology Use transport model results (Danish National Traffic Model) to construct the sample of typical transport chains Exploit GreCOR data as much as possible for estimating the KPI values Address potential gaps in information through well focused interviews with stakeholders Use transport model results to calculate the weights needed to aggregate KPIs from chain- to corridor-level 14 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

LTM data structure Base year = 2010 351 zones 23 commodities 3 modes 14 vehicle types 25 types of transport

39 LTM data structure Base year = zones 23 commodities 3 modes 14 vehicle types 25 types of transport chains entries (~ 507 mio tonnes) Entry = transport chain (<=3 legs) 15 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

40 The GreCOR catchment area 16 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

41 Boundaries of the analysis Annual volume >= 1 tonne [2,9 million entries -> 1,2 million entries] At least one border crossing [1,2 million entries -> entries] Georgaphic location of chain i. Totally irrelevant to GreCOR, e.g. Helsinki-Kaliningrad by ship; ii. Originating and ending outside the catchment area of GreCOR but touching the corridor, e.g. Aalborg-Vienna by truck; iii. Originating or ending within the GreCOR catchment area, e.g. Kolding-Verona by train; and iv. Originating and ending within the GreCOR catchment area, e.g. Gothenburg-Ghent by Ro-Ro ship. [ entries -> entries] 17 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

42 Sample construction Criteria for selection: Relative importance Degree of homogeneity Sensitivity to external influences Stability Adequate definition 18 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

43 Sample construction (continued) Sample design for Commodity group 22 (fertilizers) Chain type Model results Sample Description Annual No of Average Tonne*km No of Adjusted Adjusted tonnes chains distance chains tonnes tonne*km 1 leg; road "no crossing" 2, ,019,240 1 leg; road "land border" 18, ,275, ,259 10,889,129 1 leg; road "ferry" 3, ,980, ,601 2,047,783 1 leg; road "transit DK" , ,561 1 leg; road "direct ferry" ,088 3 legs; road / road "no crossing" / road ,870 3 legs; road / road "land border" / road 7, ,867, ,904 6,321,915 3 legs; road / road "ferry" / road 4, ,874, ,971 3,600,961 3 legs; road / road "transit DK" / road 1, ,434,959 3 legs; road / road "direct ferry" / road 1, ,696 3 legs; road / rail / road 4, ,556, ,642 4,556,469 3 legs; road / conventional ship / road 9, ,555, ,588 6,555,747 Total Commodity group 22 53,964 1, ,972, ,964 33,972, RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

44 Sample construction (continued) Criteria for selection: Vehicle type Highest volume Land border road chains of Commodity group 22 (fertilizers) 20 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

45 Sample construction (continued) The GreCOR sample chains for fertilizers Chain Annual Production Vehicle First Vehicle Second Vehicle Consumption type tonnes zone Leg 1 terminal Leg 2 terminal Leg 3 zone 2 1,716 Fredericia (DK) Articulated Borken (DE) Borken (DE) Articulated Køge (DK) Ghent (BE) 12-18t Terneuzen (NL) Articulated Odense (DK) 12-18t Nyborg (DK) Nyborg (DK) t Odense (DK) Articulated Amsterdam (NL) t Utrecht (NL) Hannover (DE) 12-18t Hannover-Linden (DE) Articulated Kolding (DK) Light truck Kolding city (DK) Padborg (DK) 12-18t Aabenraa Havn (DK) Articulated Dörpen (DE) 12-18t Ov. Groningen (NL) Utrecht (NL) 12-18t Amsterdam (NL) Articulated Esbjerg (DK) 12-18t Sorø (DK) Schleswig-Flensburg (DE) 12-18t Flensburg (DE) Articulated Odense (DK) Light truck Odense NØ (DK) Nyborg (DK) t Nyborg Havn (DK) Articulated Hamburg (DE) t Rotenburg (Wumme) (DE) Rendsburg- Eckernforde (DE) 12-18t Kiel (DE) Articulated Køge (DK) 12-18t Køge (DK) 171 1,460 Akershus (NO) Articulated Oslo (NO) Conv. train Coevorden (NL) Articulated Veluwe (NL) 181 2,399 Akershus (NO) Articulated Oslo (NO) Conv. ship Amsterdam (NL) Articulated Utrecht (NL) 21 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

46 KPI indices (LTM default values) 22 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

47 Conclusions The methodology can effectively assess the performance of a freight transport corridor. Possible improvements: (i) (ii) exclude from the sample atypical chains; merge commodity groups that use the same type of vehicles and have similar characteristics in terms of the KPIs examined; and (iii) exclude chains that do not affect the corridor indices. Use raw data obtained from specialised studies to estimate the chain-level KPIs. 23 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

48 Qualification The method permits monitoring the performance of a single corridor over time It is not suitable for comparisons between corridors 24 RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

For more information http://supergreenproject.eu/ Panagakos, G. and Psaraftis, H.N., 2017.

, 2016. Green corridors in freight logistics. PhD thesis.

49 For more information Panagakos, G. and Psaraftis, H.N., Model-based corridor performance analysis An application to a European case. EJTIR 17(2), pp Panagakos, G., Green corridors in freight logistics. PhD thesis. Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby Green Transportation Logistics: The Quest for Win-Win Solutions, H.N.Psaraftis (ed.), Springer, RAILcph 2017, Copenhagen 15/5/2017

Model-based corridor performance analysis An application to a European case. George Panagakos 1. Harilaos N. Psaraftis 2

EJTIR Issue 17(2), 2017 pp. 225-247 ISSN: 1567-7141 tlo.tbm.tudelft.nl/ejtir Model-based corridor performance analysis An application to a European case George Panagakos 1 Department of Management Engineering,