Sharing a ride

Today - for my last post - I want to look at how mobility might be influenced by collaborative consumption and the new sharing economy. Undoubtedly, there is growing popularity for competing services offered by individuals to individuals.

I personally often car pool to different locations with friends to reap the economic, lifestyle and environmental benefits. And I know of my time living abroad, a car pooling or sharing service would have been invaluable. Like most foreigners, I am very mobile while living overseas, but not in a position to buy a car and carry the expenses (like parking or insurance).

Car sharing is extremely popular in Germany. In Berlin alone, home to about a fifth of Germany’s 15,400 shared cars, vehicle density decreased slightly last year, where the number of cars per 1,000 residents fell to 491 from 493, according to the Federal Motor Vehicle Office. There are two types of choices available to users, with many of the large car companies getting involved also. One service connects passengers to drivers, through an app, to share a ride to a mutual destination. They leave from different points depending on the location of the driver. The other is for users to log in, locate the closest available vehicle, wave a membership card, and drive off. These have designated spots throughout the city and users usually drive themselves. Insurance, fuel and parking are all taken car of.

Carsharing is definitely a useful mobility service from an ecological point of view as well as from an economical one. Only by a combination of all modes will we be able to provide mobility for everyone in the future. The key challenge will be for company's to maximise their lean growth while still demonstrating responsible corporate citizenship.

The value of time

Appraisals and evaluations were a new and interesting topic for me to explore this week and I will be reflecting on this subject today. Specifically, I want to highlight the problematic task with placing a value of time travel and the possibility of doing so for active transportation. Placing a value on our time is a fascinating concept. As postulated in the literature, in using a set of values of time, the economic benefits of a transport project can be quantified in order to compare them to the costs, thus forming the basis of cost-benefit analysis.

The most fascinating take away for me in looking at this is that the value of time varies considerably from person to person and depends upon the purpose of the journey - for instance, is the person attending a job interview or are they simply heading out to get a coffee? Are they meeting someone, or are they going alone? Do they need to cross a dangerous intersection? Valuing time accurately is fraught with complexities and using a single value doesn't always capture the many variables and circumstances at play.

This also brings up the issues of valuing active transport. Unique to active transport modes is that you can't work while you undertake these activities - so our value of time may increase. It's also important to note that unlike motorised trips which are usually undertaken to consume an activity at a destination, many active transport trips are discretionary and occurring for their own sake. For instance, I primarily walk when I take my dogs out at night. It also appears that numerous co benefits of these modes exist due to climate change mitigation and health, however due to the complexity in translating these to monetary values, they are often poorly undertaken or omitted from investment appraisals. I believe it is critical that we are able to adequately represent the likely impacts and benefits, especially the societal costs on a inactive nation (ie. greater in-hospital patient care). 

Towards Zero...

I was particularly drawn to the similarities between this week's topic covering Vision Zero and the adverts I've been seeing for TAC’s Towards Zero campaign, asking Victorians to aim for zero deaths on our roads each year. The angle of the Towards Zero campaign is to put a face to road trauma - it is not just a number, but rather someone's brother, sister, father. This appears to be an expression of the ethical imperative within the vision, 'it can never be ethically acceptable that people are killed or seriously injured when moving within the road transport system.' 

Towards Zero is a departure from past campaigns such as 'if you drink and drive, you're a bloody idiot' or raw imagery of fatal crashes. This new approach is a change from an emphasis on current problems to being guided by what the optimum state of the road transport system should be -  the basis of Vision Zero. Now more than ever, it seems cars are negatively impacting the lives of individuals - through congestion, air pollution and car crashes. In some respects, we have created a mentality that prioritises the automobile over human life. I wondered if the goal of zero deaths is achievable as outlined in the SMART acronym. That aside, I think for me it gives a new perspective, especially on the need for better system design. The transport system is so intricately interwoven in our lives that human health and life needs to be a key integrating factor in policies. If we want increased accessibility, but we can only reach that by an increased inherent safety.

Looking at predecessor campaigns such as that of Sweden and NYC, it was interesting to recognise a number of shocks that prompted and provoked policy change, particularly in NYC where the city experienced three deaths in a matter of days - and particularly that of young Cooper Stock. I see shocks happening in other systems all the time - asylum seekers, shootings, domestic violence, healthcare - but we see little policy change occurring. I think this highlights the real role political will and agenda play.

Lastly on this topic, something else which struck me from the NYC case study was the shared responsibility of the transport system between civilians and policymakers and new challenges for planners and designers arising with the advent of technology - ie. drivers looking at their GPS and pedestrians distracted looking down at their phones. While driving can be regulated and governed by laws, walking is an everyday part of life. Walking laws doesn't seem fair. Perhaps the answer is in smart design, alerts and education.

A snapshot of one Japanese town

For this week's post I'd like to explore transport concepts in relation to my year spent abroad in Japan. I was working on an international relations program and was placed in a small city of 90,000, located approximately one hour south west of Osaka. I spent the entire year commuting by bicycle, bus and train.This was a big departure from anything I had experienced before. I grew up in a hilly, dispersed country town in Australia before moving to a city suburb not well serviced by public transport. Prior to Japan, private transport is all I'd ever known.

Japan’s cycling culture is vastly different to Australia and I feel it’s worth sharing some of the conditions (which I've now learnt through this subject's material!) that has led to higher bicycle and train commuter numbers.

1. A real emphasis has been placed on the interaction and planning of transport and the built environment.The most striking aspect about my Japanese city, and indeed many Japanese cities, is that most neighbourhoods are largely self contained. I could reach a convenience store and post office within one minute of my apartment, a large supermarket with two minutes, a shopping centre within four minutes, a train station within 5 minutes, a gym within eight minutes and my workplace within 10 minutes. There were no 'main streets' and schools and supermarkets were placed in each part of town (my town had six of each). Japan doesn't have a great deal of land space and has high population numbers, so perhaps this design was more out of necessity than deliberate. Without the need to travel excessive distances for anything, a bicycle was the easiest and most convenient option.

2. Cycling laws were fairly lax and unenforced which helped in encouraging cyclist participation. My experience riding was fairly free. I could cycle without a helmet wherever and however I liked - roads, the sidewalk, or combination of the two. For the most part, the Japanese are polite, use their bells and slow with respect to pedestrians. In terms of infrastructure, while bicycle lanes are non existent, streets are narrow and slow, so it's often quicker to manoeuvre by bike. There is still a high rate of bicycle accidents - I witnessed a number of low-speed collisions between cyclists and motorists.

3. The train system is fast, efficient and crisscrosses to all major cities. For me, a trip to a neighbouring city took 15 minutes on a train, while a car commute could take anywhere up to an hour due to congested roads.

4. Lastly, owning a car can be inconvenient and expensive. Obtaining a licence is a lengthy process which requires you attend a driving school on a weekly basis and before purchasing a car, a buyer is required to provide proof they have secured an appropriate parking spot. In major cities, renting a parking spot is sometimes more expensive than renting an apartment.

While there is still high car usage in many parts of Japan and cycling on roads can be dangerous, this was just a snap shot of one town. Can this work everywhere? I loved the freedom, fitness and inexpensiveness of cycling but here in Australia I've reverted back to my car to access far away locations, while dissuaded by current policies.

Thinking about urban transport and land use

(Transport Canada)

I approach transport planning and policy from a communications and environmental background. It’s been challenging entering this subject with little knowledge or experience in the area. I expect my learning curve to be quite steep, and with transport becoming a more pressing issue as Australian cities rapidly expand, it will be increasingly relevant as I pursue future work. I think above all, however, is that like everyone else, I am a commuter - of both long distance car drives and shorter (but non lycra-clad) bike rides.

The concept of equity in transport is certainly an enduring one. Throughout time, transport planning decisions have had significant and diverse equity impacts. While I depend on my car every day and thoroughly enjoy the freedom it gives me to travel, this is certainly not the case for everyone. It was insightful to think about how car dependency or forced car ownership impacts many people's lives, particularly those who don't readily have access to private transport which limits employment opportunities and access to important services.With such vast impacts, there is certainly a greater need for transport equity analysis to anticipate and address these problems.

The nexus between land use and transport planning has been an important factor outlined in this week’s discussions and material. This is a particular challenge I see for Melbourne’s east who experience high levels of car ownership, with almost 70 percent of workers leaving the region for work each day. Dispersion and lower density residential development and commercial activity has created poor access and proximity to jobs and leisure activities, with no mode choice. Suburbs have been designed and facilities provided on the basis of households having access to a motor vehicle, reinforcing the dependency on cars (forced car ownership scenario) as the dominant means of transport. Congestion into the city is significant and these mega commutes can be anywhere between 45 minutes up to 3.5 hours. This job imbalance bares a major financial burden, particularly for vulnerable groups who live in one area, but need to conduct activities in another.

The solution of integrated transport planning (density, mix, connectivity and location of activities) by eliminating distance travelled between residential areas, services and workplaces certainly needs to be a focus of future policy decisions. The example of urban planning adopted in Curitiba was a wonderful and workable example of urban development based on a preference for public transport and accessibility designed through structural axes and an integration of mode types. Connecting districts with bus terminals and express lanes, integrating streets and bike paths, and reserving land for residences near work hubs ensures efficiency, availability and accessibility to all members of the city.