PDF: 1832 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...


PDF: 1832 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...

BITRE | Working paper 74

Morton and Mees (2005) have also argued that because these programs are usually

evaluated through self-reporting surveys rather than direct observation of travel

behaviour, they are particularly vulnerable to participant-related artefacts:

… they are also more vulnerable to ‘good subject’ effects when the experimental

target is a group that self-selects as wanting to change their behaviour (Morton and

Mees 2005, p. 5).

The efficacy of personalised travel information systems, compared to conventional

advertising, therefore remains unclear. Irrespective of the level of effectiveness of

such approaches in altering travel patterns, it is clear that it is a costly strategy; the

systems require a high level of human

The efficacy of personalised travel

planning remains unproven.

input—both the priced interviewer time

and the unpriced interviewee time that

is sacrificed.

This is probably why the approach has

yet to be applied beyond small samples

and pilot programs. Thus, such systems aimed at road space demand reduction are

unproven in their efficacy and cost effectiveness.

2.4 Other strategies

There are a variety of other indirect measures that may impact on congestion,

including those focused on parking (increased parking fees, reduced availability of

spaces and eliminating salary-packaging of parking) and others that target vehicle

ownership (such as rides-share organisations and car clubs).

Ideally, parking spaces would be priced at their opportunity cost: however, this is rarely

the case. Manipulating parking costs to reduce congestion requires some analysis.

For instance, reducing the number of available parking spaces may discourage

workers driving into a city, but will do little to discourage through traffic and is likely

to encourage it as other traffic declines. (See BTRE (2002, pp. 34–42) for a discussion

of parking policy strategies.)

As a rule, these options have specific aims other than the management of congestion.

If they were to be promoted as part of a congestion-management package, each

would require individual assessment.

One perceived drawback of all the prevailing strategies to reduce congestion is the

phenomena of induced travel. It is commonly argued that if such strategies were

successful, then induced travel would undermine the success. This is considered next.

2.5 Induced travel

A major barrier to expanding capacity to reduce congestion is the resulting impact on

travel patterns. There is a widely held view that capacity expansion is ‘self-defeating’,

in that it encourages more travel which eventually results in the road becoming

congested again. This road-user response is commonly referred to as ‘induced traffic’,

the ‘induced travel’ effect or ‘generated traffic’. To the extent that expanding capacity


More magazines by this user
Similar magazines