[sustran] New Mobility comments, recommendations to Clinton Climate/Large Cities teams.

[Todd Alexander Litman]

Dear Colleagues,

I am too busy at this time to participate 
frequently in this project but would like to share some ideas.

Our report, "Win-Win Emission Reduction 
Strategies (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ) 
identifies various transportation policy reforms 
that provide multiple economic, social and 
environmental benefits. These strategies increase 
transportation options, correct existing market 
distortions that encourage economically excessive 
vehicle travel and create more accessible 
communities. They increase the financial rewards 
to consumers when they reduce their driving, 
giving people new opportunities to save money.

Described differently, although few motorists 
want to give up driving altogether, compared with 
current travel patterns, many would prefer to 
drive somewhat less and rely more on alternative 
modes, provided they are convenient, comfortable, 
safe, affordable and prestigious. Market reforms 
that improve mobility options and reward 
consumers for reducing their driving can make people better off overall.

This is a positive message. It means that we can 
reduce emissions in ways that help achieve other 
transport planning objectives such as reducing 
congestion, consumer costs and traffic accidents, 
and improving mobility options for non-drivers. 
The challenge we face is that conventional 
decision-making is reductionist, each issue is 
assigned to an individual agency or profession 
with narrowly-defined responsibilities. This 
tends to undervalue these Win-Win strategies - 
they tend to provide more modest but multiple 
benefits and so are seldom the highest ranking 
solution to any problem. Yet, when all impacts 
are considered, these solutions are often the 
most cost-effective way of improving transportation.

For Win-Win solutions to be implemented as much 
as justified it will be necessary to convince 
transportation professionals that they should 
place a high value on environmental objectives, 
and environmental advocates that they should 
place a high value on conventional transport 
planning objectives such as reducing traffic 
congestion and accidents, and improving mobility for non-drivers.

Most of these strategies can be applied in most 
parts of the world. For example, currently no 
country requires Pay-As-You-Drive pricing 
(http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm79.htm ), which 
converts vehicle registration and insurance into 
distance-based fees, and most regions could do a 
lot to make vehicle parking more rational and 
efficient, so people pay directly for just the 
amount of vehicle parking they actually need 
(http://www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf ). These two 
measures alone could achieve more than half of 
the Kyoto emission reduction targets for 
automobile transportation in most developed 
countries, while also helping to reduce 
congestion, accidents and sprawl, and saving consumers money overall.


Best wishes,
-Todd Litman

At 04:20 AM 2/13/2007, Eric Britton wrote:
>“We have to reduce about 80% of our greenhouse 
>gas emissions over the next 10 to 15 years."  - 
>William Jefferson Clinton, 1 August 2006
>
>1.         New Mobility support project in brief:
>Our open support project for the Clinton/Large 
>Cities team has moved ahead over the last month, 
>and here in two pages is the current state of play:
>
>    * The website at http://co2.newmobility.org 
> is approx. 90% complete. Already a pretty 
> useful read, but does need more input 
> (including yours if you have a mind to share your thoughts with us on this).
>    * Neither of the two teams involved 
> (Clinton, Large Cities) have in fact asked us 
> to do anything in support of their challenging 
> projects -- but we decided that with such a 
> tight time horizon and such a truly great state 
> of emergency, it would be irresponsible if we 
> were not to share with them our carefully 
> developed experience, insights and information 
> on transformation strategies in the sector, 
> with the thought that this is going to be of 
> use to them. (Those of you who know The Commons 
> and the New Mobility Agenda will not be 
> surprised at such an initiative on our part.)
>    * Increasingly it becomes apparent that if 
> we are to take the Clinton Climate Challenge at 
> its full value -- remember 80% CO2 reductions 
> over next 10-15 years – and not just put it 
> aside and concentrate on other less exigent 
> stuff because Clinton’s targets are not just 
> convenient (think weasel words like 
> “practical”, “realistic”) – this means we need 
> to cut back on CO2 emissions on the order of 
> 5-8 percent in the city as a whole over each 
> year of the coming decade, starting in 2007. 
> Clearly this means more than lots of good 
> project ideas, but rather drags us hollering 
> and spitting into a whole new dimension of policy and practice.
>    * I don’t know anything about the other 
> sectors that the two teams are investigating, 
> but I do know, with great certainty, that the 
> CO2 objectives can be easily met in the 
> transport sector. If you turn to the site you 
> will see our arguments in this respect.
>    * Indeed one of the reasons that I have 
> jumped on this project with both feet is that 
> with President  Clinton’s high profile backing, 
> we may now at long last have the hammer that 
> will allow all of those of us who are concerned 
> with the issues and process of sustainable 
> transport and more specifically the New 
> Mobility Agenda finally to get these issues and 
> trade-offs into the very high level of 
> International visibility that is necessary if 
> the new models and new patterns of behavior can 
> finally start to be brought on line. The mere 
> fact that the Clinton approach is based on 
> politics, vision, leadership and communications 
> rather than technical considerations or the 
> usual cautious bureaucracy provides us with a 
> once in a lifetime opportunity to start to make 
> these changes of which the leading edge of 
> policy and practice in the field has been aware for years finally take place.
>
>II.         Our Zero CO2 Brainstorming Conferences
>
>    * We want to encourage the use of technology 
> to reduce unnecessary travel, which in a 
> project like this where problems and resources 
> are by definition to hugely spread out, it 
> strikes us that there is no option but to put 
> these technologies to work. Every day. After 
> all, it is an emergency, isn’t it? (Or do I have that wrong?)
>
>    * You can find out more about these if you 
> go to 
> <http://newmobility.org/agenda.htm>http://newmobility.org/agenda.htm 
> (For the record, we have been working with a 
> whole range of technologies on this over the 
> last decade, with our first Zero Emissions 
> Strategy Conference taking place in August 1997 
> – see http://www.ecoplan.org/zero-ems/index.htm.)
>
>    * We have played around with the latest 
> Skypecast package over the last few days and 
> just this morning had a little meeting in which 
> the following agenda items were discussed by 
> the group. It was the first such event that was 
> properly focused and useful. You will see the 
> agenda items discussed in the following little 
> annex. (In the future we will record these 
> exchanges and if time allows to edit them down 
> to their essentials, but for now this note will have to do.)
>    * And while the discussions were lively and 
> fruitful, even this short list has far from 
> being exhausted. In fact, I would like it to 
> take taken, improved and discussed in many 
> other places – including BTW in this forum 
> which after all has been created exactly for such purposes.
>
>III.        International Advisory Council
>
>    * At the time we set up the framework for 
> the Kyoto World Cities cooperative program in 
> late 2004 (see 
> <http://kyotocities.org/>http://kyotocities.org) 
>   we contact some 150 of our colleagues working 
> to advance understanding and practice of these 
> issues and invited them to show their support 
> for the International Advisory Council, the 
> present composition of which you can see at 
> http://ecoplan.org/briefs/general/panel.htm.
>    * These are outstanding personalities and 
> leaders in the field, and of course in each 
> case we sought their permission to include 
> their names as supporters in the tough fight 
> for sustainable development and social justice 
> in the transport field. Two quick things about this listing if you will.
>    * First, since the momentum is finally 
> picking up considerably in our shared field, it 
> is now time to expand this group greatly. These 
> shared values, links, and eventual working 
> relationships are going to be important as the 
> push is on, so now is the time to expand the 
> group (which I have neglected to do badly over 
> the last year). And while we are as always 
> interested to have established figures in the 
> field leading the way, we also have a strong 
> preference to bring as many young people with 
> proven commitment, as well as women (far too 
> few to date) and of course to continue to 
> ensure the very broad geographic distribution. 
> So you counsel on this will be most welcome.
>    * Also if for some reason you no longer 
> share the goals and values of the New Mobility 
> projects, well it would be good if you would 
> let me know so that I can sure that our listing 
> continues to be one hundred percent solid. This is no time for ambiguity.
>    * As to your nominations, it would be good 
> to have their basic contact information along 
> with a line or two on their work and approach. Thanks
>
>*           *           *
>
>So that’s where things pretty much stand at this 
>point, so let me close with the following query for you:
>
>    * It is either an emergency or it is not. If 
> it’s just a "kind of emergency", what the hell 
> –we can propose just about anything we want. 
> But if it is – and we know that President 
> Clinton thinks it is, and now you know that I 
> do too, and I know as well that many of you 
> here share this view --  then this probably 
> changes just about everything. And are you ready for that?
>
>With all good wishes
>
>Eric Britton


Sincerely,
Todd Alexander Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
litman at vtpi.org
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
“Efficiency - Equity - Clarity”

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070213/5428a6a3/attachment.html