View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Congestion Management in Singapore
Assoc Prof Anthony TH CHINDepartment of Economics
National University of Singaporeanthonychin@nus.edu.sg
Introduction
Introduction and What is Traffic Congestion?
Economic Instruments: Pricing, Quota and Tradable Permits
Equity Issues
Singapore’s Holistic Approach and Conclusion
11/12/2013
2
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Introducion: What is congestion?
Congestion can be measured by:1. Speed flow curves Expressway – 45 to 65 km/hOther roads – 20 to 30 km/h2. Delays in travel time
11/12/2013
3
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 4
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 5
18.5 km/h
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 6
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 7
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 8
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 9
Introduction
Introduction
Future
GPS-based ERP system (ERP II)
Distance-based congestion charging
11/12/2013
10
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
11
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 12
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
13
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 14
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 15
30% decrease in traffic within RZ
By 1988, 31% decrease compared to pre-charging levels
After ALS is replaced ERP, traffic down by 10-15%
30% decrease in congestion
14% faster in journey times
71,000 more passengers for buses
14% decrease in number of vehicles entering restricted zones
Introduction
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 16
As GDP per capita increases, more drivers can better afford the charge. Instead of increasing charges gradually, governments may introduce a large spike in congestion charge to induce a shock factor in drivers
Introduction
Introduction: Speed flow
Rates reviewed every 3 monthsEnsure optimal use of road space
Expressway:
Other roads:
45 kph 65 kph
20 kph 30 kph
11/12/2013
17
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Morning peak hour congestion
11/12/2013
18
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Evening Peak Hour Congestion
11/12/2013
19
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Direct impact of ERP
Reduction in generalized cost of congestion:
1.Travelling time
2.Depreciation
3.Fuel
4.Maintenance
5.Repairs of vehicles
11/12/2013
20
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Direct impact of ERP
Reduction in business production cost:
1.Prevents loss of productivity due to extended delivery time
2.Decrease vehicle operating expenses
3.Decrease logistics and scheduling time
4.Avoid additional inventory cost
5.Reduced cost of ‘Rescue drivers’ for missed deliveries
11/12/2013
21
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Indirect impact of ERP
Reduction in externalities:
1.Reduce lower-level accident cost (due to frustration)
2.Reduce cost of pollution
3.Increase amenity of road infrastructure (Stress)
11/12/2013
22
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Impact on economy
The prevention of cost of congestion to the economy results in:Increase competitiveness due to higher productivityPrevents the loss of advantages of agglomeration of buyers and sellers in the city area (Raffles place, City hall, Orchard etc.)
11/12/2013
23
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Effectiveness of ERP
Demand Price Elasticity:
E = % change in demand / % change in price
As demand price elasticity increases, effect on reducing congestion becomes larger and welfare loss becomes smaller
11/12/2013
24
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Flatter demand curve
11/12/2013
25
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Less welfare loss
Flatter demand curve
MSC
11/12/2013
26
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Year Average Speed During Peak Hour (km/hour)
Expressways CBD / Arterial Roads 2002 64.8 24.62003 64.4 24.82004 62.9 25.82005 62.8 26.72006 62.7 27.62007 61.2 26.82008 63.6 26.62009 62.2 27.62010 62.3 282011 62.5 28.52012 63.1 28.6
Singapore Traffic Flow
11/12/2013
27
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 28
18.5 km/h
Annual Motor Vehicle Population under Vehicle Quota System(VQS)
Year Total2002 706,9562003 711,0432004 727,3952005 754,9922006 799,3732007 851,3362008 894,6822009 925,5182010 945,8292011 956,7042012 969,910
2002 – 2012•Total vehicle population has increased by 37%
•Average speed on Expressways is 60-65 kph
•Average speed on CBD roads is 20-30 kph
11/12/2013
29
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Key Questions
1. Are the Charges fair?2. Do I gain from the
extra Charges?3. How are the revenues
re-invested?
11/12/201330UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 1
Horizontal Equity
Vertical Equity
11/12/201331UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 2
Congestion Pricing is vertically inequitable
Horizontally Equitable•A toll charge of $5 along CBD area charges everyone the same amount
Vertically Inequitable• Represents a larger portion of income for a low-income driver than high-income driver
11/12/201332UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 3
Class Impact Equity Considerations
Non-Drivers (Public transport and passengers)
Not affected by charges Non-drivers include people who are disadvantaged, revenues should be used to maximize their benefits
Low Income Drivers
Priced out of system,change for the worse
Govt to use revenues to benefit this group
Middle-Income Drivers
Net benefits reduced, but overall positive gain
Deserve to benefit from revenue only if external costs are compensated
High-income drivers
Time gain is worth of the charges paid
No justification to use road pricing revenue to benefit them
11/12/201333UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 4
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 34
Implication: Empirical studies show that bigger proportion of motorists is made up of 1st 2 groups. Thus, majority will suffer from congestion pricing.
Equity Issues 5
Natural Hedging Strategy
Surplus of Pounds sold for Euros
Purchase US/Euro forward contracts
Business Travelers Localization Effect Privacy
Faster delivery,Extra surcharges
Centralization due to increased
cost of travel
Negative Impact on motorists
11/12/201335UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 6
ISSUES TO BE SOLVED
Increasing population
Remains divisive and controversial
What is the suitable price to charge?
•Only 4 major cities have implemented congestion pricing
•Real short term benefits, but questionable long term gains
• Addition and expansion of bus lanes, metro and increased parking costs in cities
•Car-pooling, car sharing
•Modal shifts in transportation
11/12/201336UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Equity Issues 7
Data has shown ERP impact on reducing congestion is effective despite the persistent increase in vehicles every year
The increase in ERP charges coupled with the increase in number of gantries is a necessary measure to reduce road users to a socially optimal level
11/12/2013
37
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Conclusion 1
Conclusion 2
Road Pricing has proven to be theoretically effective, even with the relaxation in the assumption of perfect information of traffic condition.
In the short run, empirical evidences suggest:
The price elasticity of demand for road space is relatively high.
Road Pricing Schemes, when implemented, would significantly reduce traffic flow.
In the long run impacts of road pricing is mixed:
However, evidences from ongoing programmes support that Road Pricing is effective in maintaining a steady congestion reduction in the long run
11/12/2013
38
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Increase awareness of ERP cost by organizing campaigns and creating games to increase price sensitivity of users
Create phone applications to help users plan transport routes and save cost on ERP changes
11/12/2013
39
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Conclusion 3
Impact of road pricing requires an network approach and analysis.
Congestion management involves a holistic approach:
Systematic, dynamic and effective land use planning;
Availability and investment in alternative travel modes such as public transport, car sharing, non-motorized transport, car- pooling;
Car park policy and livability of the city core;
Change in attitudes towards motorcars through behavioral change.
Conclusion 4
11/12/2013
40
UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
Conclusion 5
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
41
DRAFT LAND USE MASTER PLAN 2013
Transport network to be expanded. Emphasis on green and sustainable transportation modes, such as public transport, cycling and walking;
Greater connectivity for all commuters over the next 10 to 15 years. Agencies to be guided by a more connected Singapore, greater accessibility to public transport and a reduced reliance on private cars as a mode of commute;
The rail network will double to about 360km by 2030. 80% of all homes are within a 10-minute walk of an MRT station;
Bus services enhanced with increased fleets, and more integrated transport hubs;
Infrastructure will be put in place to encourage cycling as an alternative mode of transport for both commuting and leisure. Pedestrian connectivity within a 400m radius of MRT stations will be further improved through a network of covered link-ways that connect to activity-generating hubs in the vicinity;
HDB towns will have more options for walking and cycling, and ultimately lead to sustainable living environment.
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 42
Conclusion 6
Singapore national cycling plan
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development
43
Today 230 km of park connectors and cycling paths.Aim 700 km of integrated and comprehensive paths.
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 44
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 45
City Cycling mode share
Km per 100,000
Copenhagen 35% 80Portland 6% 73Amsterdam 27% 71Sydney 0.7% 15Toronto 1.7% 12Singapore 1.0% 12London 2.0% -
Punggol to Tampines 12.2 km
Travel time (mins)
Travel cost ($)
Car 14 9.8
Bus/LRT 59 3.06
Bicycle 35 0
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 46
11/12/2013UNESCAP Policy Options for Sustainable Transport Development 47
Recommended