Herry-Presentation on Environment-Conference Budapest – CEI-Results – 04-09-03.ppt Slide 1 Int. Conference on Environment Budapest, 2-3 Sept 04 International

Herry-Presentation on Environment-Conference Budapest – CEI-Results – 04-09-03.ppt Slide 1

Int. Conference on Environment Int. Conference on Environment Budapest, 2-3 Sept 04Budapest, 2-3 Sept 04

International International ConferenceConference

Max Herry, HERRY Consult, Max Herry, HERRY Consult, ViennaVienna

Budapest, 3 September 2004Budapest, 3 September 2004

Environmental harmful subsidiesEnvironmental harmful subsidiesand ways to eliminate them:and ways to eliminate them:

External Cost of TransportExternal Cost of Transportin CEI Countriesin CEI Countries



INFRAS / HERRY 2003INFRAS / HERRY 2003““External Costs of Transport in Central and External Costs of Transport in Central and Eastern Europe”Eastern Europe”, Commissioned by OECD , Commissioned by OECD Environment Directorate and the Austrian Environment Directorate and the Austrian Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, 2003and Water Management, 2003

INFRAS / IWW 2000INFRAS / IWW 2000““External Costs of Transport: Accident, External Costs of Transport: Accident, Environmental and Congestion Costs in Environmental and Congestion Costs in Western Europe”Western Europe”, Commissioned by UIC 2000, Commissioned by UIC 2000

HERRY 2003HERRY 2003

1

3

2

MAIN SOURCESMAIN SOURCES



CONTENT:CONTENT: AimAim

MethodologyMethodology

ResultsResults

ConclusionsConclusions

Western EuropeWestern Europe

Policy ConclusionsPolicy Conclusions

1

3

2

4

5

6





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



• Total and average environmental costs (Accidents, Noise, Air Pollution, Climate Change)

• CEI Countries: Albania, Belarus, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, FYRO Macedonia, Hungary, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Ukraine

• Differentiation: Road, Rail, Aviation, Waterborne

• Base year 1995, Outlook 2010 trend and EST

• Methodology based on UIC study

Aim of the StudyAim of the Study



• For each cost category, an appropriate key variable was taken

• This variable was combined with unit values valid for Europe as a whole

• The unit values were transferred by GDP per capita indices per country

• National currency were transferred to EURO by PPP adjustment (exchange rate 1995)

Value Transfer MechanismValue Transfer Mechanism





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



• Key variables: Accidents in road traffic (ECMT) Accidents in rail traffic (UIC) Accidents in air transport (ICAO) Life expectancy (WHO)

• Unit values: Average value of human life 1.5 million EURO adjusted by GDP per capita

• Results: Total accidents cost per mode

Methodology for Accidents - Methodology for Accidents -

GeneralGeneral



• Key variables: Population density (differentiation in urban and regional population density) Traffic volume (vehicle km) Traffic density (vehicle km per road /rail km) Key country for the value transfer: Germany, Greece (road), Western Europe (rail), Switzerland, Austria (aviation)

• Unit values: Average willingness to pay per dB(A) based on UIC study: 30 EURO per dB(A) average per household, adjusted by GDP per capita

• Results: Total noise cost per mode

Methodology for Noise - GeneralMethodology for Noise - General



• Key variables (from OECD study): Emission density (NOX, PM10 emissions per capita) Emission density (NOX, PM10 emissions per ha) Population density (differentiation in urban/rural)

• Unit values: Health costs (per capita approach), Building damages and crop losses (per ha approach) from UIC study (similar value transfer)

• Results: Total air pollution cost per mode

Methodology for Air Pollution - Methodology for Air Pollution -

GeneralGeneral



• Key variables: CO2 emissions per mode Electrified tracks (rail) and CEI electricity mix, based on OECD/CEI study emission factors

• Unit values: Average shadow value per tonne of CO2 national marginal avoidance costs based on Worldbank studies (range from 6 to 12 EURO per tonne, average value of 8 EURO) to reach Kyoto targets

• Results: Total climate change cost per mode

Methodology for Climate Change - Methodology for Climate Change -

GeneralGeneral



• Key variables: Road length (network data, assumption on widths) Length of single+double tracks (assumptions on widths) Number of airports (assumptions on average airport area)

• Unit values: Unit values from Western Europe (repair costs per km2 infrastructure), PPP adjusted

• Results: Total nature and landscape cost per mode

Methodology for Nature and Methodology for Nature and

LandscapeLandscape





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



Total external costs amounted to approx. 40 billion

Euro in 1995, being almost 14% of total GDP in CEI

countries.

Two cost categories are predominant:

• about half of the total of 40 billion Euro are due to

external accident costs;• more than 40% are costs caused by air pollution.• Noise costs are approx. 3%

Results: 1995 Results: 1995 – – II



0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

18.000

Car Bus MC LDV &HDV

Rail pass. Railfreight Aviationpass.

Aviationfreight

Waterborne

[Mio. €/ Year]

Accidents Noise Air pollution Climate change Nature & landscapeINFRAS / HERRY

Results: 1995 Results: 1995 – – IIII



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Accidents Noise Air pollution Climate change Nature &landscape

Road pass. Road freight Rail pass. & freight Aviation pass. Water borneValues < 3% are not visualised in the chart INFRAS / HERRY

Results: 1995 Results: 1995 – – IIIIII



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Road Rail Aviation

[€/1000 pkm]

Accidents Noise Air pollution Climate change Nature & landscape

INFRAS / HERRY

Results: 1995 Results: 1995 – – IVIV



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Road Rail Aviation Water borne

[€/1000 tkm]

Accidents Noise Air pollution Climate change Nature & landscape

INFRAS / HERRY

Results: 1995 Results: 1995 – – VV



0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Albania

Belarus

Bos.-Herceg.

Bulgaria

Croatia

Czech Rep.

FYRO Maced.

Hungary

Moldova

Poland

Romania

Slovak Rep.

Slovenia

Ukraine

[Mio. €/Year]Road pass. Road freight Rail pass. Rail freight

Aviation pass. Aviation freight Water borneINFRAS / HERRY

Results: Results: 1995 VI1995 VI



13

30

12

18

29

45

18

49

5

33

20

22

66

11

26

49

48

65

39

33

55

48

63

17

45

48

46

110

20

44

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Albania

Belarus

Bos.-Herceg.

Bulgaria

Croatia

Czech Rep.

FYRO Maced.

Hungary

Moldova

Poland

Romania

Slovak Rep.

Slovenia

Ukraine

CEI 1995

[Euro / 1000 pkm] or[Euro / 1000 tkm]Road pass. Road freightINFRAS / HERRY

Results: Results: 1995 VII1995 VII



21

11

0

13

11

27

72

44

4

13

16

10

27

6

12

19

10

0

10

7

18

20

30

2

9

13

6

12

5

8

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Albania

Belarus

Bos.-Herceg.

Bulgaria

Croatia

Czech Rep.

FYRO Maced.

Hungary

Moldova

Poland

Romania

Slovak Rep.

Slovenia

Ukraine

CEI 1995

[€/1000 pkm] or[€/1000 tkm]Rail pass. Rail freightINFRAS / HERRY

Results: Results: 1995 VIII1995 VIII



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – II

Outlook 2010: Assumptions

Economic growth: • from 1995 to 2000: 1.5% per annum,• from 2001 to 2010: 3.5% per annum.

Traffic growth Trend EST3• Road Pass. + 83% + 32%• Road Freight + 156% + 13%• Rail + 8-9% + 70%• Aviation + 80% + 80%

Other factors:• Change of unit values according to GDP/capita• Reduction of emission factors



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – IIII

0

10'000

20'000

30'000

40'000

50'000

60'000

70'000

1995 2010 EST3-2010

Mio €/Year

Accidents Noise Air Pollution Climate Change Nature & Landscape©INFRAS

Total costs: Trend: +58% EST3: + 7%



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – IIIIII

0

5'000

10'000

15'000

20'000

25'000

30'000

35'000

1995 2010 EST3-2010 1995 2010 EST3-2010

Passenger RoadMio €/Year


Passenger Rail

Outlook 2010: Total Costs Passenger transport



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – IVIV

0

5'000

10'000

15'000

20'000

25'000

1995 2010 EST3-2010 1995 2010 EST3-2010

Freight RoadMio €/Year


Freight Rail

Outlook 2010: Total costs Freight transport



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – VV

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1995 2010 EST3-2010 1995 2010 EST3-2010


Passenger Road

Freight Road

€/1000 pkm resp. €/1000 tkm

Outlook 2010: Average Costs Road



Results: Outlook Results: Outlook – – VIVI

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1995 2010 EST3-2010 1995 2010 EST3-2010


Passenger Rail

Freight Rail

€/1000 pkm resp. €/1000 tkm

Outlook 2010: Average Costs Rail





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



• Road transport costs are predominant, esp. Accidents and Air pollution.

• Rail costs are higher than in Western Europe, due to fossil electricity production and diesel traction (air pollution costs).

• High range between countries, due to GDP differences and due to different traffic and exposure levels.

• External costs will increase in the future. Big difference between trend and EST.

• Data quality is rather poor: High range of uncertainty.


General interpretation





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



• Higher share of GDP than in Western Europe:14 % compared to 8%

• Average costs are lower in CEI-countries, due to lower GDP per capita

• Difference in safety performance: Accidents costs higher in CEI countries

• Road freight transport is more predominant in CEI countries

• Road – Rail ratio is comparable

• Growth rates are higher in CEI-countries


Comparison with Western Europe





ResultsResults




1

3

2

4

5

6



• No overall picture of transport, but important basis for safety and environmental performance.

• Figures can be used for cost benefit analysis

• Safety programmes and polluter pays principle for insurance systems.

• Fast introduction of EURO norms and improvement of eco-efficiency

• Revitalisation of the railways:- Investment priorities for rail - Electrification and improvement of diesel performance

Policy Conclusions - GeneralPolicy Conclusions - General II



• Average costs as a basis for externality pricing

• 3.3 Eurocents per Passenger and Kilometre for passenger cars

• 4.4 Eurocents per tonne and kilometre for trucks and light duty vehicles.

• However: No direct evidence for the level of today’s prices

Estimation of infrastructure cost coverage

Estimation of congestion costs

Policy Conclusions - GeneralPolicy Conclusions - General IIII



Latest DevelopmentLatest Development



Transnational Project and Workshop Series of Austria, France, Malta, the Transnational Project and Workshop Series of Austria, France, Malta, the Netherlands, Sweden and SwitzerlandNetherlands, Sweden and Switzerland

Transport-Related Health Effects with a Particular Transport-Related Health Effects with a Particular Focus on Children Focus on Children

Towards an Integrated Assessment of their Costs and Benefits.Towards an Integrated Assessment of their Costs and Benefits.State of the Art Knowledge, Methodological Aspects and Policy DirectionsState of the Art Knowledge, Methodological Aspects and Policy Directions

KEY FINDINGS AND KEY MESSAGESKEY FINDINGS AND KEY MESSAGES

Budapest, 23 June 2004Budapest, 23 June 2004

4th WHO Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health 4th WHO Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health “The Future for Our Children”“The Future for Our Children”

Slide 36

Contribution to the UNECE - WHO Transport, Health and Environment Contribution to the UNECE - WHO Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme (THE PEP)Pan-European Programme (THE PEP)



Slide 37

- Air Pollution - France

- Noise - the Netherlands

- Physical Activity (walking & cycling) - Switzerland

- Psychological and Social Effects - Austria

- Road Traffic Injuries - WHO / Malta

- Climate Change - WHO

- Economic Valuation - Sweden

A) Technical findings

B) Key messages

Outline of PresentationOutline of Presentation



Slide 38

(1) Evidence on negative impacts in children

Neonatal and post neonatal mortality (1-12 m)

Asthma attacks

Respiratory symptoms in healthy children

Hospitalisation for respiratory disease and for asthma

Childhood cancer

Preterm birth

Key Study Findings: Air Pollution (I)Key Study Findings: Air Pollution (I)



Slide 39

(2) Children are more susceptible than adults, among others because of their immature metabolism and their physiology.

(3) Black Smoke and PM 2.5 seem as better indicator of exposure to traffic emissions than PM10.

(4) Further assessments of exposure-response function for child-specific health outcomes needed.

(5) Intervention studies show health benefit in decreasing air

pollutant emission either by speed reduction, traffic restriction, fuel and motor quality improvement: e.g. Decrease of 5 µg/m3 PM10 in 19 European cities => would prevent 5,547 deaths

Key Study Findings: Air Pollution (II)Key Study Findings: Air Pollution (II)



Slide 40

(1) 30 % of EU population exposed to noise levels above WHO-guideline-values

(2) At these levels: substantial number of people annoyed and sleep disturbed

(3) Transport noise expected to increase, extra measures needed

01020304050607080

< 55 55 - 65 65 - 75 >75

Ldn (dB(A))

Perc

en

tag

e e

xp

osed

Key Study Findings: Noise (I)Key Study Findings: Noise (I)



Slide 41

(4) Evidence on health impacts in children

Annoyance

Learning: increase aircraft noise has negative impacts on memory and reading (up to 6 months of impairments in reading age)

“Hidden effects” during sleep may increase cardiovascular risk

Intervention helps: minus 5-7 dB(A) outdoor background noise – evidence for health benefits

Key Study Findings: Noise (II)Key Study Findings: Noise (II)



Slide 42

(1) Impacts of Physical (In)Activity

Physical activity of children is decreasing partly due to substitution of walking&cycling by car trips.

Overweight for children has increased.

CH: 37 % physical inactives => Direct treatment costs amount 1.1 billion EUR per year.

Clear evidence on health benefits due to physical activity.

Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (I)Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (I)



Slide 43

Health Benefits

A B C

Physical activity level

low high

A = inactiveB = activeC = trained

(2) Positive Impacts of Physical Activity

Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (II)Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (II)

Life expectancy Cardiovascular diseaseDiabetes IIObesityColon cancerBreast cancer (Prostate cancer) (Pancreatic cancer)OsteoporosisSymptomatic gallstone diseaseDepression Well beingStress toleranceIndependence in old age



Slide 44

At least half an hour a day of moderate intensity physical activity is recommended to women and men at any age.

People who already attain this level can further increase their well-being, health and efficiency by adding some training for cardio-resporatory fitness, strength and flexibility.

For people who already train regularly, further sports activities bring about additional benefits for health. Yet, the the additional effect diminishes gradually.

Cardio-respiratory

fitness training

3/week 20-60 min

Half an hour of moderate intensity physical activity daily

Strength/flexibility training

2/week

Further

sports activities

Health-Enhancing Physical ActivityRecommendations of theSwiss Federal Office of Sports,the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health and the NetworkHEPA Switzerland

Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (III)Key Study Findings: Physical Activity (III)



Slide 45

(1) Facts 127,000 deaths and 2.4 million injured people per year in WHO

European Region – leading cause of death for those aged 5-29 y.

children aged 0-14: ~ 6,500 deaths/year young people aged 15 -29: ~ 37,000 deaths/year

Estimated costs (EU 15): ~ 180 billion €/year

More than 65% crashes occur in urban areas One out of three deaths involves a pedestrian or a cyclist

(2) Implications Improve speed control, especially in urban areas

Focus on children, young people, cyclists and pedestrians

Take into account human body vulnerability to kinetic energy and possibility for mistakes by road users

Key Study Findings: Road Traffic Injuries (I)Key Study Findings: Road Traffic Injuries (I)



Standardized mortality rates from RTIs per 100,000 population Standardized mortality rates from RTIs per 100,000 population in the WHO European Region. 2002 last available yearin the WHO European Region. 2002 last available year

Source: WHO Health for All databse, Jan 2004

There is a large “safety gap” between different parts of Europe: countries reporting the lowest and

highest mortality differ by up to 11 times



Slide 47

Lower score in depression

Lower score in aggression/hostility

Less psychosomatic symptoms

Lower score in anxiety

(1) Psychological effects and health effects by walking to school instead of being driven:

Key Study Findings: Psychological and Social Effects (I)Key Study Findings: Psychological and Social Effects (I)



Slide 48

(2) Fear of road traffic injuries acts as a barrier which prevents children from walking/cycling

(3) Social impact: High traffic density in human settlements is hindering the development of independence and social contacts of children.

(4) Mental and social conditions can modify the impacts of environmental stressors on health.

Key Study Findings: Psychological and Social Effects (II)Key Study Findings: Psychological and Social Effects (II)



Slide 49

Source: WHO-Europe, 2004; World Health Report 2002.

Transport related greenhouse gas emissions contribute to at least one third of the overall emissions;

Although GHG are produced locally the effects are global by affecting the climate system;

WHO estimated that 150.000 deaths were caused by climate change in 2000;

It is estimated that these effects will be doubling if no measures are taken;

In Europe, it was observed that:– Heat-wave caused more than 25,000 death

in 2003;– 6-14% of increase of no. of cases of

salmonella with 1°C increase of temperature;

– Changes of the seasonality of allergic disorders;

– Changes of ranges of vector borne diseases

Impact on Health:

Key Study Findings: Climate ChangeKey Study Findings: Climate Change



Slide 50

Key Study Findings: HIA and Economic Valuation (I)Key Study Findings: HIA and Economic Valuation (I)

Lessons learned

(1) Integrated Health impact assessments and cost-benefit analyses can provide relevant information for policy makers on the effects of interventions. Depending on policy questions and level, different methodologies available.

(2) Economic analyses and tools like CBAs do not take into account all transport-related health impacts, nor do they include children specific costs.

(3) Monetarization of health impacts needs further development.



Slide 51

(4) Need to assess and monetize the transport related environmental health effects in particular on children and incorporate them into economic valuations and tools e.g. cost

benefit analysis of infrastructure and internalization strategies.

(5) CBA of cycling infrastructure in Norway: health benefits of physical activity, benefits of investing in cycle networks significantly outweigh the costs !

(6) The Willingness To Pay (WTP) is a suitable methodology. OECD workshop results: WTP of parents for their children possibly twice as high as for themselves. If no children related WTP values are available then at least take the adult values.

(7) Areas of further investigation: monetarization e.g. valuation of

psychological and social effects and physical activity.

Key Study Findings: HIA and Economic Valuation (II)Key Study Findings: HIA and Economic Valuation (II)



Slide 52

Key Messages (I)Key Messages (I)

(1) Children are vulnerable and their needs should be taken first.

Children are vulnerable from a physiological, psychological and economic point of view.

Experience of a “healthy” environment as a child will influence future choices towards a healthy environment as an adult.

Investments to improve health and environmental conditions for children benefit the entire society and avoid future costs.

Children’s rights to express views freely should be given due weight in accordance with age and maturity (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) specifically Article 12).



Slide 53

Key Messages (II)Key Messages (II)

(2) There is an increasing dependence on private car use leading to severe restrictions of choice for children’s mobility and physical activity.

(3) Current transport patterns and future trends pose a significant threat to children’s health and development: road traffic injuries, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and restricted opportunities for safe walking, cycling and other outdoor activities.

(4) Healthy mobility makes a difference: A minimum of 30 minutes per day of physical activity - e.g. by

human powered mobility like walking and cycling – significantly reduces important disease risks such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, Type II diabetes.



Slide 54

Key Messages (III)Key Messages (III)

(5) Policy makers should focus on implementing measures in transport, which are highly beneficial to children, as they would also bring benefit to everyone.

Integrate “child-friendly mobility” vision into transport policies:

prioritise speed reduction and control, more safe space for walking and cycling, easy access to public transport, promotion of school mobility management.

Awareness raising: education and communication strategies on child friendly mobility, in particular highlighting the benefits of human powered mobility.



Slide 55

Key Messages (IV)Key Messages (IV)

(cont.)

Infrastructure: child-friendly and safe infrastructure, using children´s needs to reform design-standards and planning guidelines for infrastructure, transport codes, and zoning regulations.

Technical measures: particle filters or other appropriate environmental technologies in cars, safety devices such as child car safety seats, seat belt use, helmet use.

Research: programmes should focus more on children specific concerns.



Slide 56

Key Messages (V)Key Messages (V)

(6) Children’s health can also be promoted by general policy using economic instruments and normative interventions.

Mobility management in communities including, car traffic restrictions and prioritization of walking, cycling and public transport.

Enforce speed limits and speed control, enforce maximum permissible blood alcohol levels for drivers of less than 0.05 g/dl.

Reduce traffic emissions e.g. improving vehicle technologies and further tighten emission and safety standards for vehicles.

Use economic instruments and incentives for introducing energy-saving technologies e.g. alternative fuels, zero emission vehicles

Fair and efficient road pricing, parking fee schemes.



Slide 57

Key Messages (VI)Key Messages (VI)

(7) Promote and improve assessment and economic valuation of the transport related health impacts on children.

Take into account negative health effects of transport such as

exhaust emissions injuries and noise, as well as the positive health effects of walking and cycling.

Develop and conduct assessments of transport-related health

effects: e.g. Children Impact Assessments (CIA)

Integrate transport-related health impacts on children and their costs and benefits into policy instruments e.g. cost- benefit-analysis of infrastructure, and internalisation of the external costs of transport.



Slide 58

Key Messages (VII)Key Messages (VII)

(8) Redesign human settlements and infrastructure and integrate children’s needs in planning to provide more space for physical, mental and social development of children.

(9) Incorporating children’s needs requires a shared responsibility between families, the education, health, environment, transport and urban planning sectors, the private sector, industry and civil society.

Intensify pan-European co-operations such as the WHO- CEHAPE, WHO/UNECE THE PEP, the EU-Environment & Health Strategy



Slide 59

Key Messages (VIII)Key Messages (VIII)

(10) There is a world to win: Start to act now!!

Share best practices and assessments, establish new partnerships and co-operation among sectors.

Develop and implement child-friendly mobility plans and monitor their achievements.

Design a “package” of integrative measures with a timeframe for implementation. These could start with pilot projects.

Start assessments of transport related health effects which include costs and benefits with a particular focus on children.



Thank you

for your attention!



Slide 61

Thank You!

Documents

Herry-Presentation on Environment-Conference Budapest – CEI-Results – 04-09-03.ppt Slide 1 Int. Conference on Environment Budapest, 2-3 Sept 04 International