Managing Traffic Incidents - University of Queensland

The UK Multi-Modal Transport Studies
nomic impacts and their distribution and may
cover such aspects as:
– The rationale for transport improvement;
– Transport costs and benefits;
– Total economic impacts; and
– Pattern of gains and losses, in both economic
activity and jobs.
Overall, it appears that current appraisal of
transport and economic effects is not fully developed
or applied (in the UK at least) and the
key issue is to develop best practice in the use
of transport/economic appraisal.
Environment:
– Noise
– Local air quality
– Climate change
– Landscape
– Townscape
– Biodiversity
– Heritage
– Water resources
– Other health impacts
– Quality of journey
Safety:
– Accidents
– Security
Economy:
– Economic efficiency of
the transport system
– Reliability
– Wider economic impacts
Accessibility:
– Access to the transport
system
– Option values
– Severance
Integration:
– Transport interchange
– Land-use policy
– Other Government policy
Appraisal and Concluding Remarks
The approach to appraisal developed to meet the
requirements of multi-modal studies, is a costbenefit
analysis tool nested in a multi-criteria
analysis tool.
The box below provides a summary of the
appraisal criteria.
Other specific appraisal criteria include:
– Distribution and equity
– Affordability and financial sustainability
– Practicality and public acceptability.
Information is provided
in the Guidance
(GOMMMS)
to assist in quantifying
these criteria
in a consistent way.
In appraising alternative
transport
strategies there
may be a need to
take into account
external issues (i.e.
national and international
transport
and fiscal policy as
well as general economic
conditions).
This could be
achieved by undertaking
sensitivity
tests of a particular
strategy against
external influences.
It is possible that
transport policy
strategies may not
be the best way to
tackle particular
issues. Aspects, such as health or education
policy, may also be significant factors (eg
hospital and school locations).
When examining costs and benefits a single
benefit- cost ratio or net present value may
conceal significant underlying issues, for example,
the distributional effects of benefits
and costs, and also when benefits and costs
are likely to occur. A strategy that delivers
benefits earlier than a strategy that delivers
benefits only in the long term may be preferable.
All these issues should be taken into account.
The UK Government has also indicated that
it will investigate the use of a cost effectiveness
approach to transport evaluation. Cost
effectiveness differs quite significantly from
cost-benefit analysis because it measures the
ratio of the number of objectives achieved by
a strategy relative to the cost incurred in delivering
them. This contrasts with cost-benefit
analysis which measures "welfare benefits"
irrespective of whether they have been established
as a goal of the strategy. This indicates
a need to address the true objectives of transport
intervention.
References
1. Guidance on Developing Urban Transport
Strategies, IHT, 1996
2. Guidance on the Methodology for Multi
Modal Studies, Volume 1, DETR, 1999
3. Cohen T Multi-Modal Corridor Studies:
Conclusions of Research On the Study
Programme and Implications For appraisal,
paper presented at the European
Transport Conference, Cambridge, 2000
4. Research into Multi Modal Studies, Steer
Davies Gleave for Transport 2000, 2000
5. Guidance on the Methodology for Multi
Modal Studies, Volume 2, DETR, 1999
6. Department of the Environment Transport
and the Regions website, accessed on 16
January 2001 www.roads.detr.gov.uk/
roadnetwork/sactra/report99/summ.htm
7. Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk
Road Assessment, 1999: Transport and
the Economy !
Stephen Luke can be reached on:
sluke@ppk.com.au
14 DECEMBER 2001