Transportist: July 2022

News or Opinion: You Decide

  • Why the return to the office isn’t working — This is a fundamental problem, especially between organisations. When in the office I am Zooming with people across the hall because the third person isn’t showing up. Students in Sydney are attending the Zoom version of Hybrid/Flexible (Hyflex) classes rather than attending in person as they are supposed to. This is a problem for teaching in that many good in-person class activities don’t work if critical mass is not attained. The stable Nash equilibrium without a mandate/subsidy for going to the office or school is that nearly everyone works or studies from home. This is reinforced by our general acceptance of covid and flu as a normal part of life, (rather than trying for elimination), but with “the out” that no one mustphysically attend anything, so it becomes the universal excuse for WFH (available both to people with and without illness, as no one can prove anything).

Twitter avatar for @I_Am_NickBloomNick Bloom @I_Am_NickBloom Returning all WFH employees to the office 5-days-a week looks almost impossible – Firms pushing 5 day returns see <50% compliance – Firms pushing 4 days or less see >80% compliance Firms should aim for something moderate and succeed, rather than aim for a 5-day return and fail

Image

June 8th 2022 61 Retweets 146 Likes

Prezos

In Australian English, perfectly functional, but needlessly long words are often shortened or replaced. A mail carrier is a postie, an electrician is a sparky, trash collectors are garbos, the relatives are relos, and so on. I am not clear on the rule about why a particular shortened word takes the “-ie” (or -”y”) or “-o” ending. A presentation is a prezo. (Arguably it might be a prezzie, but that is a piece of software. The zed might be an s.) The following are some upcoming prezos. heroJuly 2 I will be at an online Public forumTraffic signals and how small improvements can make walking a whole lot faster and better.ABOUT: Prof David Levinson, founding president of WalkSydney and Professor of Transport Engineering at the University of Sydney gives a fascinating speech about traffic signals. In Sydney, traffic signals give priority to motor vehicles over pedestrians. This inequality undermines many of the stated goals of transport, health, and environmental policy.

  • DATE: Saturday 2 July 2022 11:00 AM – 11:45 AM (UTC+10)
  • LOCATION: Online event access details will be provided by the event organiser to registered participants.

July 5 and 6 I will be giving virtual guest lectures at Southwest Jiaotong University in Chengdu.

July 7 I will be presenting in person at the UDIA NSW Young Leaders Committee.

July 22 I will be presenting in person at the AITPM National Conference in the session: Planning for future-focused cities using a variety of data and modelling techniques

Sept 14 I will be presenting in person at: Reducing Australia’s Transport Emissions, Sydney 14th September 2022Exploring evidence based solutions to reduce Australia’s fastest growing source of emissions

Maybe I will see you there.

Research

  • Wang, Haotian, Emily Moylan, and David M. Levinson. 2022. “Prediction of the Deviation between Alternative Routes and Actual Trajectories for Bicyclists.” Findings, June. https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.35701.

ABSTRACT: This study estimates a panel regression model to predict bicyclist route choice. Using GPS trajectories of 600 trips from 49 participants in spring 2006 in Minneapolis, we calculate deviation, the average distance between alternative routes and actual trajectories, as the dependent variable. Trip attributes, including trip length, Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT), the number of traffic lights per kilometer, and the percentage of bike trails and separated bike lane, are included as independent variables. F-tests indicate that both fixed entity and time effect panel regression models offer better fits that the intercept only model. According to our results, routes with shorter length and higher share of bike trails tend to have less deviation in their trajectories. Traffic lights per km, VKT, and share of bike lane are not significant at 95% confidence level in this data set.

  • Loyola Borja, Miguel, Nelson, J., Clifton, G., and Levinson, D. (2022) The relation of visual perception of speed limits and the implementation of cycle lanes – a cross-country comparison. Accident Analysis and Prevention. Volume 174, September 2022, 106722. [doi]

ABSTRACT: Speed plays a key role in road safety research. Recent studies have indicated an association between speed limits and driving behaviour. However, less attention has been paid to the role of context in the perception of speed limits, and the way cycle lanes influence this perception. This study examines how respondents in different countries of residence perceive speed limits, and how cycle lanes influence their perception of speed limits. An online survey provided quantitative data for a cross-country comparison from 1591 respondents in Australia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. The findings show that country of residence influences the way speed limits are perceived, and cycle lanes are interpreted distinctly. In locations where cycle lanes are common, they act as indicators of either lower or higher speed limits, while in countries with less familiarity with cycle lanes respondents associate cycle lanes only with lower speed limits. Suggesting a safer and broader understanding of cycle lanes where they are familiar (the Netherlands) and a narrower understanding where cycle lanes are not common (Australia and the United Kingdom), this study provides evidence for policymakers explaining resistance to implementing cycle lanes and implies that implementing lower speed limits and cycle lanes are a road safety measure. Suggestions are identified for future research.

Research by Others

Follow-Up

GW Writes:

I continue to enjoy reading your newsletter, which has some great insights. I liked your recent article on tradeoffs (“Towards Zero”). However, I thought you might be interested to know that in this particular case your terminology use — equating CBA with “business case” (highlighted below) — is different from the UK and US uses of the business case concept.The UK’s transport appraisal guidance on business case analysis positions it as something separate from CBA — as a qualitative process to cover broader, strategic considerations beyond what is covered in CBA (covering things like equity, distribution and place-based impacts).  And recent work in the US by APTA and AASHTO committees has extended the UK view of business case to quantitative analysis, by defining a concept of “business case ROI” that monetizes the broader strategic business case factors using implied willingness to pay. I think you might be interested to read about the latter (as I worked on it). Here are two links to it. 
New High-Performance Rail ROI Report – American Public Transportation AssociationAASHTO, APTA Issue High Speed Rail Investment Guide – AASHTO Journal

More on Sydney Trains.

Prediction of the Deviation between Alternative Routes and Actual Trajectories for Bicyclists

Recently published:

  • Wang, Haotian, Emily Moylan, and David M. Levinson (2022) “Prediction of the Deviation between Alternative Routes and Actual Trajectories for Bicyclists.” Findings, June. [doi].

This study estimates a panel regression model to predict bicyclist route choice. Using GPS trajectories of 600 trips from 49 participants in spring 2006 in Minneapolis, we calculate deviation, the average distance between alternative routes and actual trajectories, as the dependent variable. Trip attributes, including trip length, Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT), the number of traffic lights per kilometer, and the percentage of bike trails and separated bike lane, are included as independent variables. F-tests indicate that both fixed entity and time effect panel regression models offer better fits than the intercept-only model. According to our results, routes with shorter length and higher share of bike trails tend to have less deviation in their trajectories. Traffic lights per km, VKT, and share of bike lane are not significant at the 95% confidence level in this data set.

Figure 1. Example of Commute and Non-Commute Trips

The relation of visual perception of speed limits and the implementation of cycle lanes – a cross-country comparison

Recently published:

  • Loyola Borja, Miguel, Nelson, J., Clifton, G., and Levinson, D. (2022) The relation of visual perception of speed limits and the implementation of cycle lanes – a cross-country comparison. Accident Analysis and Prevention. Volume 174, September 2022, 106722. [doi]

ABSTRACT: Speed plays a key role in road safety research. Recent studies have indicated an association between speed limits and driving behaviour. However, less attention has been paid to the role of context in the perception of speed limits, and the way cycle lanes influence this perception. This study examines how respondents in different countries of residence perceive speed limits, and how cycle lanes influence their perception of speed limits. An online survey provided quantitative data for a cross-country comparison from 1591 respondents in Australia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. The findings show that country of residence influences the way speed limits are perceived, and cycle lanes are interpreted distinctly. In locations where cycle lanes are common, they act as indicators of either lower or higher speed limits, while in countries with less familiarity with cycle lanes respondents associate cycle lanes only with lower speed limits. Suggesting a safer and broader understanding of cycle lanes where they are familiar (the Netherlands) and a narrower understanding where cycle lanes are not common (Australia and the United Kingdom), this study provides evidence for policymakers explaining resistance to implementing cycle lanes and implies that implementing lower speed limits and cycle lanes are a road safety measure. Suggestions are identified for future research.

Fig. 1. Images before and after implementing cycle lanes, looking at the opposite side of the street (SOURCE: adapted from Google maps).

Transportist: June 2022

Congratulations to Australia for a peaceful transfer of power and the lack of demagogues proclaiming “election fraud”. 

Towards Zero

Life is full of trade-offs.

When we conduct a business case (benefit/cost analysis), “ideally” we reduce decision making to a comparison of the monetised benefits and monetised costs. We say, e.g., the value of travel time savings is 40% of the average wage rate. If there are any safety impacts, we might note that a  value of a statistical life is $11,800,000 (for Americans, it is much less in other countries, despite the US’s penchant for devaluing life). If we are doing a better than average job, and considering environmental externalities, we price pollutants, and may even have a carbon tax. We say all this as if life or environmental damage can be substituted by money. When designing a transport system, we may choose to invest in one safety feature and not another, and instead spend the funds on something that reduces travel time. 

Of course, we don’t say your life can be substituted by money, your life is priceless (to you), but other people’s statistical lives are not, and as humans, we don’t act as if they are. But following through to its “logical” conclusion, if we assume the average price holds even as the number of people decreases, the lives of some 8,000,000,000 people on planet earth could be traded for (society would be willing to accept) $9.44e+16 in exchange, but who would be there to receive it? So while the average statistical value of (other people’s) life perhaps holds at the margin, it cannot hold for the whole.

We have similar values for pollutants, but clearly a sufficient amount of some pollutants (CO, NOx, SOx, Pb, PM10, PM2.5, O3, CO2) would kill us all. So while the trade-off price might be valid at the margin, it must increase to infinity as the amount of pollution increases. 

In the end, human life is a perfect complement to human transport. More humans begets more travel. If there were no life, there would be no human transport, and vice versa. These are consumed together. And if this is clearly true in the end for everyone, it is probably true at the margins as well. So perhaps we should not be monetising life and the damages caused by pollution, but instead looking at reducing crash risk and pollution in an absolute sense. But even if we took a Pareto Optimisation approach (no one is worse off, or in this case, no externality is exacerbated), there would still be trade-offs, we could still make more safety improvements or more travel time reductions.

Treating externalities in a non-monetary way requires multi-criteria decision-making. But typically that only abstracts the problem away from money, there is implicitly still a trade-off. 

Over the short-run, this trade-off might be necessary, when so much of the system design is fixed; but does it remain over the long run? A system that pollutes is wasting resources. A system that kills people is wasting resources. That can’t be efficient overall, we are just shifting the burden from a subsystem of all life to another subsystem. 

We often treat life and health and the environment as sacred values. We embue lost lives, and polluted environments with emotion and meaning. In contrast, we don’t treat lost time as sacred. If one were to posit “Zero Delay” in the same breath as Zero Deaths, one would be viewed as a crank. Instead, to those stuck in traffic we say you wasted time, ha-ha, we are not saddened by the thought of others in congestion. 

Nevertheless, unlike road deaths and air pollution, delay continues to remain a salient political issue, which we see in the sloganeering of “congestion busting”, and implicit in all traffic engineering decisions aiming for a better Level of Service. I would also argue that delay is largely unnecessary1

I posit that it is less expensive in the long run to design a transport system that doesn’t pollute, and doesn’t kill, injure, and maim people, and doesn’t result in needless delays, than one that does. A long-run, over-arching benefit-cost analysis would recognise and reward better long-run designs that resulted in zero externalities, following on the ideas of “Net Zero” and “Toward Zero Deaths” from transport, rather than expecting trade-offs of time for safety or time for emissions.

New Journal: Urban Informatics

Urban Informatics (UI) is an international, open-access, peer-reviewed journal publishing high-quality, original research on urban informatics, including urban system, theories, methods, and technologies for urban big data acquisition, infrastructure and analytics, as well as new solutions to urban problems and applications. 

Though published by Springer/Nature, the Article Processing Charges are waived for the first two years.

I am on the Editorial Advisory Board.

Research

  • Zhao, X., Cui, M., & Levinson, D. (2022). Exploring temporal variability in travel patterns on public transit using big smart card data. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Sciencehttps://doi.org/10.1177/23998083221089662 [doi]

News

Dysfunctions

AI

Pricing

Infrastructure

Electrification

Security

Futures Past

Image

1

Recognising that journey delay (time wasted in-vehicle driving at speeds below “freeflow”) would have to be replaced by schedule delay (time spent at the trip origin waiting to travel later, or departing early than desired to avoid journey delay, and thus spending time at the destination you would prefer not to). We assume journey delay is worse than schedule delay because you have more flexibility at your origin and destination to pursue other activities than when sitting in traffic or on a train. This despite time being a fraction of life, and certainly we would rather typically be doing something else.