Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (19)
- Part of a Book (18)
- Report (5)
- Conference Object (2)
- Contribution to Periodical (2)
- Book (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (49) (remove)
Division
As the recent withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement has shown, political volatility directly affects climate change mitigation policies, in particular in sectors, such as transport associated with long-term investments by individuals (vehicles) and by local and national governments (urban form and transport infrastructure and services). There is a large potential for cost-effective solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to improve the sustainability of the transport sector that is yet unexploited. Considering the cost-effectiveness and the potential for co-benefits, it is hard to understand why efficiency gains and CO2 emission reductions in the transport sector are still lagging behind this potential. Particularly interesting is the fact that there is substantial difference among countries with relatively similar economic performances in the development of their transport CO2 emissions over the past thirty years despite the fact that these countries had relatively similar access to efficient technologies and vehicles. This study aims to explore some well-established political science theories on the particular example of climate change mitigation in the transport sector in order to identify some of the factors that could help explain the variations in success of policies and strategies in this sector. The analysis suggests that institutional arrangements that contribute to consensus building in the political process provide a high level of political and policy stability which is vital to long-term changes in energy end-use sectors that rely on long-term investments. However, there is no direct correlation between institutional structures, e.g., corporatism and success in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector. Environmental objectives need to be built into the consensus-based policy structure before actual policy progress can be observed. This usually takes longer in consensus democracies than in politically more agile majoritarian policy environments, but the policy stability that builds on corporatist institutional structures is likely to experience changes over a longer-term, in this case to a shift towards low-carbon transport that endures.
There is a large potential for cost-effective solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to improve the sustainability of the transport sector that is yet unexploited. Considering the cost-effectiveness and the potential for co-benefits, it is hard to understand why energy gains and mitigation action in the transport sector is still lagging behind the potential. Particularly interesting is the fact that there is substantial difference among countries with relatively similar economic performances, such as the OECD countries in the development of their transport CO2 emission over the past thirty years despite the fact that these countries had relatively similar access to efficient technologies and vehicles. This study aims to apply some well established political science theories on the particular example of climate change mitigation in the transport sector in order to identify some of the factors that could help explain the variations in success of policies and strategies in this sector. The analysis suggests that institutional arrangements that contribute to consensus building in the political process provide a high level of political and policy stability which is vital to long-term changes in energy end-use sectors that rely on long-term investments. However, there is no direct correlation between institutional structures, e.g. corporatism and success in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector. Environmental objectives need to be built into the consensus-based policy structure before actual policy progress can be observed. This usually takes longer in consensus democracies than in politically more agile majoritarian policy environments, but the policy stability that builds on corporatist institutional structures is likely to experience changes over a longer-term, in this case to a shift towards low-carbon transport that endures.
Many low-carbon transport strategies can help achieve other economic, social and environmental objectives. These include improving access to mobility, reducing traffic and parking congestion, saving consumers money, supporting economic development, increasing public health and safety, and reducing air and noise pollution. Based on Avoid-Shift-Improve approaches and case studies from Germany, Colombia, India and Singapore, this paper shows that low-carbon transport generates significant and quantifiable benefits that can create a basis for political and societal coalitions.
Estimates suggest that currently available and cost effective measures can reduce transport Greenhouse Gas emissions by 40-50% compared to 2010. Yet, a number of barriers affect the optimal exploitation of this potential. Considering the possible economic, social and environmental benefits of sustainable transport, the shift towards a low-carbon pathway of this sector can be a win-win situation for climate protection and local development goals. This paper aims to make a contribution to understand these opportunities by highlighting the linkages between objectives, presenting case studies, facts and figures. The paper will also explore assessment methodologies and tools that can help practitioners to assess sustainable development benefits (SDB) and providing evidence for policy-makers to make more informed decisions on transport investments and polices.
Considerable efficiency gains can be made costeffectively to set the transport sector on a sustainable development pathway. They can be achieved through already available technologies and practices, which will not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly, but also generate social, environmental and economic co-benefits. However, progress in the take-up of low-carbon mobility measures substantially lags behind the potential. A number of barriers contribute to this lack of uptake. This paper explores those barriers by focusing on vehicle fuel efficiency in particular, but will also touch on the wider policy framework to improve the efficiency of the transport sector and reduce emissions. The paper suggests that a combination of fuel pricing, differentiated vehicle taxation, vehicle standards and the provision of modal choice are necessary to minimise rebound effects and significantly curb transport sector greenhouse gas emissions at low- or even negative cost.
Achieving a truly sustainable energy transition requires progress across multiple dimensions beyond climate change mitigation goals. This article reviews and synthesizes results from disparate strands of literature on the coeffects of mitigation to inform climate policy choices at different governance levels. The literature documents many potential cobenefits of mitigation for nonclimate objectives, such as human health and energy security, but little is known about their overall welfare implications. Integrated model studies highlight that climate policies as part of well-designed policy packages reduce the overall cost of achieving multiple sustainability objectives. The incommensurability and uncertainties around the quantification of coeffects become, however, increasingly pervasive the more the perspective shifts from sectoral and local to economy wide and global, the more objectives are analyzed, and the more the results are expressed in economic rather than nonmonetary terms. Different strings of evidence highlight the role and importance of energy efficiency for realizing synergies across multiple sustainability objectives.
Decision-making in sustainable urban mobility planning : common practice and future directions
(2015)
The European Commission aims to foster sustainable local transport systems through the concept of "Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans" (SUMPs). This paper is intended as a think piece highlighting the challenges for cities in selecting sustainable and cost-effective transport and mobility measures. Not only does the paper convey an understanding of the challenges of determining a transport project's viability, but it also presents five case studies of sustainable urban mobility planning and the role of project appraisal in those policy-making processes.
Investments in urban transport should deliver the maximum economic, social and environmental benefits; in times of constrained budgets, projects' economic viability is often the deciding factor. This paper discusses the current practices and challenges facing cities in assessing urban transport interventions. On this basis, it develops options for decision-makers to appraise small-scale, sustainable urban transport policy measures.
The analysis of current appraisal practice shows that data requirements and complexity are cities’ main obstacles appraising projects and comparing potential alternatives. Additionally, there is often a risk that project appraisal enters the planning process too late to play any meaningful role. Conducting a Cost-benefit
analysis (CBA) ex-ante is often only approved if the implementation of the measure in question is already likely. Often, a CBA is a means to access funds rather than a basis for decision-making. Project appraisal of small-scale and non-infrastructure-based measures is often simply too expensive.
On the basis of these findings, the paper discusses the following alternatives to comprehensive CBAs: 1) learn from others, 2) use a simplified assessment method, 3) rely on norms and values. All of these options aim to cope with the trade-off between effort and certitude. In practice, some policy-makers may already apply one or more of these options, but this has not been documented in a systematic manner. A systematic documentation of such practices could be a major step forward for implementation of sustainable and integrated urban transport projects, as it would shed some light on the reasoning behind decisions, from which conclusions could be drawn on the likely follow-on effects thereof and also possible improvements to the process.
The lack of suitable tools to assess sustainable mobility measures' costs, benefits and overall impacts is a significant factor impeding their implementation. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is often applied to large-scale infrastructure projects, but does not capture all relevant socio-economic impacts. Small-scale but potentially highly cost-effective measures often do not have the critical mass to warrant a thorough cost-benefit analysis. This paper reviews existing assessment methodologies, including their advantages, limitations and application to different urban mobility measures, and current assessment practice in cities based on survey results. Based on these analyses, a holistic approach for project appraisal is proposed, consisting of aspects of a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) and CBA and applicable to a variety of urban mobility measures.