© 2019 Sustainable Mobility for AllTM Internet: http://www.sum4all.org Standard Disclaimer This publication was produced by the Sustainable Mobility for All (SuM4AllTM) initiative. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Boards of the SuM4All members or the governments they represent. SuM4All does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of SuM4All or its members concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) http://creativecom- mons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, trans- mit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution Please cite the work as follows: Sustainable Mobility for All. 2019. Global Roadmap of Action Toward Sus- tainable Mobility: Universal Urban Access. Washington DC, License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 Translations If you create a translation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This translation was not created by Sustainable Mobility for All. SuM4All shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation. Copyright Statement The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without per- mission may be a violation of applicable law. Sustainable Mobility for All encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to sum4all@worldbank.org. ISBN: 978-1-7341533-2-3 GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION Toward Sustainable Mobility UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS......................................................................................................................................... VIII FOREWORD....................................................................................................................................................... 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................................................................. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................... 3 1.  INTRODUCTION TO URBAN ACCESS....................................................................................... 4 2.  STATE OF PLAY......................................................................................................................... 22 3.  LEGAL AND REGULATORY AGREEMENTS................................................................................ 29 4.  CATALOGUE OF MEASURES..................................................................................................... 31 5.  THE COUNTRY EXPERIENCES .................................................................................................. 43 6.  ROADMAP OF ACTION............................................................................................................. 56 7.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................ 59 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................... 61 ANNEX A. URBAN ACCESS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION........................................................................ 68 ANNEX B. USEFUL GUIDES TO IMPROVE URBAN ACCESS........................................................................ 73 ANNEX C. LIST OF POLICY MEASURES.......................................................................................................... 75 List of Figures Figure 1.1: Traffic, mobility and accessibility .............................................................................................................. 5 Figure 1.2: Cycle of automobile dependency............................................................................................................ 7 Figure 1.3: Avoid-Shift-Improve ................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 1.4: Types of residential density ...................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 1.5: Car travel versus density for 58 world cities ........................................................................................... 13 Figure 1.6: Urban densities versus carbon emissions ............................................................................................... 13 Figure 1.7: Car ownership versus density in selected cities ..................................................................................... 15 Figure 1.8: Optimal Automobile Mode Share ........................................................................................................... 15 v Figure 1.9: Economic productivity versus fuel prices ............................................................................................... 16 Figure 1.10: Sustainable Transport Hierarchy ............................................................................................................ 17 Figure 2.1: Scatterplot of Rapid Transit to Resident Ratio vis-à-vis GDP per capita by country............................ 22 Figure 2.2: Rapid Transit per Resident Ratio by regions............................................................................................ 23 Figure 2.3: London’s WebCAT Mapping ..................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 2.4: Chicago’s Urban Accessibility Explorer.................................................................................................... 25 Figure 4.2: Rapid transit to resident ratio (RTR) map ................................................................................................ 32 Figure 4.1: Vehicle ownership by income and location............................................................................................. 33 Figure 5.1: Ranchi strategic transportation plan......................................................................................................... 43 Figure 5.2: Ranchi mode share data............................................................................................................................. 44 Figure 5.3: Changes in Travel in London, 2001-2017................................................................................................ 45 Figure 5.4: Vancouver, Canada sustainable mode share, 2013-2018 ..................................................................... 46 Figure 5.5: Downtown Seattle mode share, 2000-2017 ........................................................................................... 46 Figure 5.6: Metrobús routes ......................................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 5.7: Delhi Pedestrian Design Guidelines ........................................................................................................ 49 Figure 5.8: Freight transport management measures .............................................................................................. 52 Figure 5.9: Korean technological implementation plans ........................................................................................ 53 List of Tables Table 1.1: Efficient and Equitable Urban Access Benefits......................................................................................... 4 Table 1.2: Transport problem perspectives................................................................................................................. 6 Table 1.3: Changing transport planning paradigm.................................................................................................... 7 Table 1.4: Emerging Transport Planning Issues.......................................................................................................... 8 Table 1.5: Access Improvement Strategies................................................................................................................. 8 Table 1.6: Comparing strategies................................................................................................................................... 10 Table 1.7: Compact Development Benefits and Costs.............................................................................................. 13 Table 1.8: Motor vehicle costs....................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 1.9: Parking management strategies ................................................................................................................ 18 Table 1.10: Appropriate pricing of various transport costs....................................................................................... 19 Table 1.11: Inclusive Transport and Housing.............................................................................................................. 20 Table 1.12: Optimal Urban Design............................................................................................................................... 21 Table 2.1: Transportation for everyone ratings........................................................................................................... 26 Table 2.2: Urban access analysis data needs.............................................................................................................. 27 Table 4.1: Access improvement strategies by geographic and economic factors................................................. 34 Table 4.2: Regulatory and Institutional policy measures and their impacts ........................................................... 36 Table 4.3: Economics and Finance policy measures and their characteristics ...................................................... 37 vi UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Table 4.4: Engineering and technology policy measures and their characteristics .............................................. 39 Table 4.5: Communication policy measures and their characteristics .................................................................... 40 Table 4.6: Urban access mobility measures and synergies with others .................................................................. 41 Table 6.1: Selection considerations.............................................................................................................................. 56 Table B-1: Sustainable Transport Performance Indicators......................................................................................... 69 Table C.1: Policy Measures with Description............................................................................................................... 75 vii LIST OF ACRONYMS ADB Asian Development Bank AFD Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency) AFDB African Development Bank ATAG Air Transport Action Group BMZ German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development BRT Bus Rapid Transit C40 C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group CAF Development Bank of Latin America Caltrans California Department of Transportation CARB California Air Resources Board CAUPD China Academy of Urban Planning Design CIVITAS City-Vitality-Sustainability CSCP China Sustainable Cities Program CSTC China Sustainable Transport Centre DBS Dock Less Bikeshare System DNP Departamento Nacional de Planeación (National Planning Department) ESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific GIZ German Development Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) GMR Global Roadmap of Action GOPR Governor’s Office for Planning and Research GRA Global Roadmap of Action HOV High Occupant Vehicles ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) IDB Inter-American Development Bank IRU International Road Transport Union ITDP Institute for Transportation and Development Policy ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers ITF International Transport Forum ITS Intelligent Transport System KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (German state-owned development bank) LOS Loss of Service viii UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Maas Mobility-As-A-Service NACTO National Association of City Transportation Officials NCLB No Country Left Behind NDCs Nationally Determined Contributions NPA National Petroleum Authority NUA New Urban Agenda PMZ Parking Meter Zone RTR Rapid Transit to Resident Ratio SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SETPs Sistemas Estratégicos de Transporte Público (Strate¬gic Public Transport Systems) SLoCat Sustainable, Low Carbon Transport STI Sustainable Transport Indicator STIMs Integrated Mass Transit Systems SUM4ALL Sustainable Mobility for All SUTP Sustainable Urban Transport Project TDM Transport Demand Management TfL Transport for London TOD Transit Oriented Development TUMI Transformative Urban Mobility Initiative UCLG United Cities and Local Governments UITP Union Internationale des Transports Publics (International Association of Public Transport) UN United Nation UNESCAP The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific UN-HABTAT United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development VTPI Victoria Transport Policy Institute WRI World Resources Institute ix UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY FOREWORD S ustainable Mobility for All (SuM4All) is an um- The consensus on what sustainable mobility meant set brella platform that brings together 55 public us on our next task to establish the imperative for ac- and private organizations and companies with a tion. The Global Mobility Report 2017 benchmarked shared ambition to transform the future of mobility. Its countries’ performances on mobility relative to four unique value lies in bringing key influential actors to policy goals. The findings of that report were alarm- work together. It serves as the principal platform for ing: not a single country in the world—developed or international cooperation on sustainable mobility, a developing—has achieved sustainable mobility. center of excellence, and a repository of policy, knowl- edge and resource on sustainable mobility. Its mission With evidence at hand, SuM4All embarked on a ma- is to play a leading role in the ongoing transformation jor drive in 2018 to develop a comprehensive poli- of the global mobility system, and support countries cy framework to assist decision makers in cities and in their transition towards sustainable mobility. countries as well as practitioners at development banks to identify gaps, necessary steps, and appro- Established in 2017, SuM4All’s first task at hand was priate instruments to attain the Sustainable Develop- to find common ground on what countries wanted to ment Goals, and improve the sustainability of their achieve. We all agreed that transport was a key con- transport sector. tributor to economic development and core to peo- ple’s quality of life. We also agreed that the transport We are pleased to share the outcomes of these efforts that we have is not the transport that we want—con- that embody the collective knowledge of all its mem- gestion in cities, segregation among rural and urban bers and more than 180 experts, and feedback from communities, carbon emissions, air and noise pollu- more than 50 public decision makers and 25 large tion, and traffic accidents that are symptomatic of a private corporations. The report builds on six papers, systemic problem with mobility. We set our ambition including this Universal Urban Access paper, whose high for the mobility of the future: we need an equita- content is made accessible and usable to all in a web- ble, efficient, safe and green mobility. based tool for decision making. Sustainable Mobility for All Steering Committee (On behalf of our 55 Member organizations) July 2019, Washington, D.C. 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS T his Universal Urban Access Paper was prepared My Transport), Karen Vancluysen (POLIS Network), Lina by the working group led by Philip Turner (UITP) Marcela Quiñones, Lisa Conibear (Shell), Lise Breuil and Jacob Mason (ITDP), with inputs from Todd (AFD), Madan B. Regmi (UNESCAP), Marie-Hélène Litman (consultant), Carlosfelipe Pardo (consultant), Vanderpool (IRU), Mark Major (SLoCaT), Michel Arnd Amadou Oumarou (AFDB), Alana Dave (ITF), Ariadne (POLIS Network), Muneeza Mehmood Alam (World Stavroula Abel-Velegraki (UN), Armin Wagner (GIZ), Bank), Nancy Vandycke (World Bank), Nicolas Wagner Arturo Ardila-Gomez (World Bank), Beatrice Chng (ITF), P. Fall (AFDB), Priscille de Coninck (AFD), Reda (ICLEI), Dr.Branislava Saveljic -Balac (Committee on Souirgi (AFD), Ruifan Shi (World Bank), Sabrina Gan- Human Settlements UN HQ), Bronwen Thornton der (C40), Schaefer Martin Christopher (GIZ), Stefanie (Walk21), Bruno Schoen (KfW), Claire Enslin (Where Holzwarth (UN Habitat), Stephen Cotton (ITF), Tatiana Is My Transport), Diego Canales (WRI), Haldane Dodd Peralta Quiros (World Bank), Thilly de Bodt (ICAO), (ATAG), Edgardo Bilsky (UCLG), Georges Bianco Thomas Bombaert, (ICAO), Wei Liu (UN), Wendy Fu Darido (World Bank), Gerhard Menckhoff Bertrand (ICAO), and Yohnny Raich (Where Is My Transport). GOALOU (AFD), Gourdji Henry (ICAO), Harvey Scorcia (CAF), Heather Thompson (ITDP), Ibou Diouf (World Finally, the team would like to acknowledge the finan- Bank), Irena Zubcevic (UN), Jari Kauppila (ITF), Javier cial support of the World Bank and the German Fed- Morales Sarriera (World Bank), Claire Enslin (Where Is eral Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Develop- ment (BMZ) to the production of this paper. 2 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY C entral to universal access in urban areas, is that services, such as mobility-as-a-service (Maas), in- enabling access to opportunities goes beyond telligent transport systems (ITS) and digital park- the idea of providing access to transport alone. ing management. It involves increasing population’s access to opportu- §§ Gives greater importance to accessibility rather nities, with a special emphasis on improving access than mobility by focusing on movement of people for the most vulnerable populations and enhancing and goods rather than vehicles. equity of access. §§ Follows a hierarchy of modes where non-motor- Several indicators aimed at measuring access rely ized, active travel is given greater priority than heavily on the availability and accuracy of data, of- individual motorized traffic, and where integra- ten lacking for cities in the developing world. Vari- tion of transport (i.e., ease of movement between ous global organizations use available knowledge to modes) is enhanced, most visibly in the allocation provide policy advice, technical support and financial of street space. help to governments that are willing to follow their §§ Focuses on saving lives while making transport lead. The challenge lies in applying that knowledge, safer and cleaner rather than better performance redirect those investments, and learn from those best of the transport system as a whole. practices. §§ Assesses travel times instead of average speeds Challenges to universal urban access start with the when measuring performance. mainstream approach in urban planning, which continues to give greater emphasis to low-density, The key findings of this paper are that countries in Eu- sprawled urban areas and individual motorized traffic, rope have the best performance, while countries that while disregarding public transport, cycling and walk- have traditionally favored sprawling and low-density ing. Additionally, policy measures to manage demand cities, such as the USA and Australia, have low perfor- are commonly discarded because of political chal- mances. Most developing countries have low levels of lenges in implementation, despite their known posi- the RTR1 as well, although it is worth noting countries tive effects in overall transport improvements. such as Ecuador or Chile, which have higher levels of rapid transit provision than some countries in the This GRA universal urban access paper is unique in global North. several respects, as it: In terms of financing, the challenge lies in the alloca- §§ Advocates for new approaches which promote, tion of funds into other interests, policies and invest- for instance, exclusive right-of-way for public ments, as well as hidden subsidies. Interestingly, the transport, redesigned street space for walking investments needed to achieve great improvements and cycling, sharing individual transport modes will be much smaller than the medium and long-term and lower maximum speeds. These can be com- benefits that they will generate. plemented by multimodality, sharing and digital ENDNOTES 1 The rapid transit to resident ratio (RTR) indicator is a measure developed by the Institute for Transportation and Devel- opment Policy (ITDP) and provides a very good proxy for quality public transport provision. 3 1.  INTRODUCTION TO URBAN ACCESS BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT mental goals such as economic productivity, social eq- uity, public health and safety, resource conservation, This paper provides guidance for achieving Sus- and environmental protection. A sustainable transport tainable Development Goal 11.2, which states that system is therefore efficient (it minimizes the money, by 2030 there should be “access to safe, affordable, land, time, energy and environmental resources re- accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, quired to access services and activities) and equitable improving road safety, notably by expanding public (it is fair and serves all users, including disadvantaged transport, with special attention to the needs of those people) in additional to safe and green. in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older persons” (UN, 2015). This paper Why describes key concepts related to urban access, iden- tifies ways to incorporate this goal into planning ac- The world is increasingly urbanized–68% of the tivities, and provides practical guidance for improving world’s population is projected to live in urban areas urban access in a particular situation. by 2050 (UN 2018). As a result, urban transport conditions significantly affect people’s quality of life What and opportunities. In modern industrial economies, economic and social opportunity depends on access Accessibility (or just access) refers to people’s ability to to urban jobs and services. Improving urban access obtain or reach desired goods, services and activities. can provide large and diverse benefits, as summarized Sustainability balances economic, social and environ- in Table 1.1. Table 1.1: Efficient and Equitable Urban Access Benefits Improve Access Increased Use of Reduced Automobile More Compact Options Efficient Modes Travel Development Better walking, bicycling, transit More walking, bicycling, Reduced private vehicle More compact and connected and telework ride-sharing, transit, etc. ownership and travel communities • Improved traveler • Mobility benefits to users • Reduced traffic congestion • Public savings and revenues convenience and comfort • Increased fare revenue • Road and parking cost savings • Improved accessibility, • More access to opportunities • Increased fitness and health • User savings and affordability particularly for non-drivers • Social equity (disadvantaged • Increased security • Increased safety • More efficient public services groups benefit) • Open space preservation • Local economic development • Energy conservation • Improved safety and security • More economic productivity • User enjoyment • Reduced noise and air pollution Note: Improving access options, shifting travel modes, and more compact development can provide many benefits Source: Todd Litman (2013), “The New Transportation Planning Paradigm,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vo. 83, No. 6, pp. 20-28 (https://trid.trb.org/ view/1256859). 4 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY How progression from traffic-oriented to mobility-oriented and accessibility-oriented planning. Traffic-oriented This report describes various strategies for improv- planning evaluates transport performance based pri- ing urban transport efficient and equity. They include marily on vehicle traffic conditions, and so assumes improvements to resource-efficient mobility options, that the primary goal is to improve vehicle travel con- mobility substitutes such as telecommunications and ditions. Mobility-oriented planning focuses on the delivery services that reduce the need for physical movement of people and goods, and so recognizes travel, incentives for travelers to use the most efficient the efficiencies that can result from automobile to option for each trip, development policies that create more space-efficient vehicles such as public transit more compact and connected communities, Trans- and rail. Accessibility-oriented planning recognizes port Demand Management (TDM) programs, and that the ultimate goal of transport is to access ser- technologies that facilitate efficient transport. The next vices and activities, and recognizes a wide range of section puts these policies into a broader context. factors that can affect access including mobility, trans- port network connectivity, geographic proximity, af- 1.1.  A new transport planning paradigm fordability and even information (Levinson, Marshall and Axhausen 2017; Rode and Floater 2014; Venter This paper’s analysis reflects a new planning para- 2016). Figure 1.1 illustrates these concepts. The new digm which is changing the way we define transport paradigm expands the range of solutions that can problems and evaluate potential solutions (ADB be applied to transport problems, which tends to in- 2009; Litman 2013). The new paradigm represents a crease efficiency and equity. Figure 1.1: Traffic, mobility and accessibility Source: Philipp Rode, Catarina Heeckt, Nuno da Cruz (2019), National Transport Policy and Cities: Key Policy Interventions to Drive Com- pact and Connected Urban Growth, Coalition for Urban Transitions (www.coalitionforurbantransitions.org); available at https://lsecities.net/ wp-content/uploads/2019/04/CUT2019_transport_final.pdf Note: A Traffic View focuses on vehicle travel conditions and favors roadway and parking improvements. A Mobility View focuses on personal travel and favors public transit in some conditions. An Accessibility View considers all factors that affect people’s ability to reach desired services and activities including mobility, connectivity, geographic proximity, affordability, and user information. 5 Table 1.2: Transport problem perspectives Perspectives Traffic Mobility Accessibility Users –– Do I have a vehicle and license? –– Is there transit service? –– What services are nearby? –– Is it safe to drive? –– Are buses and trains crowded? –– Can I afford to live here? –– Is the road paved? –– How far must I walk? –– What are my commuting costs? –– Is it safe to drive here? –– Will I be safe? –– Can I get around without a car? –– Is the road congested? –– I can I navigate the system? –– How safe is this area? –– Can I find parking? –– Can I afford the fare? –– How much exercise will I get? –– Can I afford fuel and parking? –– Is transit travel stigmatized? –– Can I use delivery services? Businesses –– Are we located on a busy road? –– How far is the transit station? –– How many customers are nearby? –– How visible are we to traffic? –– How many customers use transit? –– How many workers are nearby? –– Are we on a busy road? –– How many workers can reach us by –– Can staff video conference? –– Do we have enough parking? transit? –– How attractive is this area? Planners –– What is the road surface –– What is the demand for transit? –– What do people want to access? quality? –– Can we create Transit Oriented –– How connected is the system? –– How congested is the road? Development (TOD)? –– How dense and mixed is the area? –– What is the accident rate? –– How can we shift travelers from –– How affordable is housing in TODs? –– How can non-drivers travel? driving to transit? –– How safe is travel overall? –– How can we manage traffic? –– How safe is transit travel? –– How can we manage transport? –– How much parking is needed? Note: Transport questions vary depending on perspective. Source: Authors These different perspectives present different ques- Comprehensive analysis is important because plan- tions to users, businesses and planners, as indicated in ning decisions often involve trade-offs between dif- Table 1.2. For example, if a roadway is congested, traf- ferent types of access. For example, increasing urban fic-oriented planning assumes that the problem is in- density tends to increase traffic and parking conges- adequate vehicle capacity and favors roadway expan- tion but increases proximity, and increases public tran- sion; mobility-oriented planning may support public sit efficiency. Wider roads with higher design speeds transit service improvements, and targeted incentives improve vehicle access but create barriers to walking to use those modes; accessibility-oriented planning and bicycling. Increasing parking increases motorists’ considers active and public transport improvements convenience but disperses development which re- and roadway expansion that privileges more efficient duces access by other modes. As a result, traffic-ori- modes, mobility substitutes such as telework (using ented planning can create a self-reinforcing cycle of telecommunication for work and shopping) and deliv- more driving, fewer mobility options and more auto- ery services, more compact and mixed development mobile-dependent development, as illustrated below to reduce travel distances (for example, more neigh- (Figure 1.2.). Accessibility-oriented planning can help borhood schools and more affordable housing in ur- reverse these trends. ban areas, more Transit Oriented Development, plus incentives for travelers to choose the most efficient Table 1.3 compares the old and new paradigms. mode for each trip). 6 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY The new paradigm is more comprehensive and multi- Figure 1.2: Cycle of automobile dependency modal. It expands the range of impacts and solutions considered in transport planning. It considers emerg- ing planning issues, such as parking costs, public fit- ness and health, and local economic development, as indicated in Table 1.4. For example, the new paradigm recognizes universality, the importance of serving all users’ needs, wealthy and poor, young and old, strong and weak, men and women. Comprehensive analysis helps identify policies that achieve diverse goals and support global agreements such as those described in Annex 1 of this paper. The new paradigm also considers a broad range of access improvement strategies, as indicated in Table 1.5. The new paradigm recognizes the unique and import- Source: VTPI, Online TDM encyclopedia, Automobile Dependency, ant roles that active (walking and bicycling) and public Available at https://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm100.htm transport (buses, trains and shared taxis for last mile connectivity) play in an efficient and equitable trans- Note: Many common planning practices contributed to a cycle of au- port system. They are resource-efficient (they have tomobile dependency and sprawl. These tend to reduce the supply of minimal financial, space and energy requirements) affordable housing in compact, mixed, walkable and transit-oriented and inclusive (they accommodate diverse users). It communities. Table 1.3: Changing transport planning paradigm Old Paradigm New Paradigm Definition of Mobility (physical travel) Accessibility (people’s ability to reach services and activities). Transportation Modes considered Mainly automobile Multi-modal: Walking, cycling, public transport, automobile, telework and delivery services. Objectives Congestion reduction; roadway cost Congestion reduction; road and parking savings; consumer savings and savings; operating cost savings; affordability; accessibility for non-drivers; safety and security; energy reduced crash and emission rates conservation and emission reductions; public fitness and health; efficient per vehicle-km. land use (compact city with diversified land use). Impacts considered Travel speeds and delay, operating Various economic, social and environmental impacts, including indirect costs, crash and emission rates. impacts. Favored transport Roadway capacity expansion. Improve transport options (walking, cycling, public transit, etc.). improvements Transportation demand management. Smart Growth development policies. Performance Vehicle traffic speeds, congestion Quality of accessibility for various groups. Multi-modal LOS. Various indicators delay, crash and emission rates. economic, social and environmental impacts. Note: The old paradigm was mobility-oriented, the new paradigm is accessibility-oriented. Source: Todd Litman (2013), “The New Transportation Planning Paradigm,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vo. 83, No. 6, pp. 20-28 (https://trid.trb.org/ view/1256859) 7 Table 1.4: Emerging Transport Planning Issues Old Issues Emerging Issues • Traffic congestion • Parking congestion and costs • Crash rates (e.g., per billion vehicle- or passenger-kms) • Affordability • Vehicle travel costs • Vision zero / road safety • Government costs • Basic access (to school, jobs, stores, healthcare, etc.) • Pollution emission rates (per vehicle-km) • Economic and social opportunities • User comfort and convenience • Public fitness and health • Total per capita transport emissions • Community environmental quality (livability) • Local economic development Note: The new paradigm recognizes emerging planning issues, and therefore the value of a more efficient and diverse transport system. Source: Authors Table 1.5: Access Improvement Strategies Accessibility Factors Improvement Options Mobility Improve traffic speed, capacity and safety by paving roads and improving roadway design. Mobility options Improve walking, bicycling, public transport, rideshare, taxi, automobile and carsharing Prioritization Facility management and pricing favor higher-value trips and more efficient modes. Mobility Substitutes Improve telecommunications and delivery services that substitute for physical travel. Network connectivity Increase the density of paths and roads, and the connections between modes. Proximity Increase density and mix to reduce travel distances and improve walkability. Affordability Improve affordable access options (walking, cycling, public transport ridesharing and telework). Convenience Improve user information and payment systems. Note: There are many possible ways to improve accessibility. Sources: (a) Philipp Rode and Graham Floater (2014), Accessibility in Cities: Transport and Urban Form, NCE Cities – Paper #3, by the London School of Economics’ LSE Cities program (www.lsecities.net), for the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate’s New Climate Economy Cities Pro- gram (www.newclimateeconomy.net); at https://bit.ly/1vaXLJi.; (b) VTPI (2019) Online TDM Encyclopedia, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www. vtpi.org/tdm) also considers TDM incentives and Smart Growth example, transport agencies often devoted the major- policies that create more accessible and multimodal ity of their resources to expanding urban roads and communities. parking facilities to reduce congestion, although this degrades walking and bicycling conditions, under- The old paradigm was reductionist; individual agen- mines public transport, causes sprawl, and induces cies were responsible for solving narrowly-defined additional vehicle travel, and therefore increases traf- problems, and so often implemented solutions that fic problems. More comprehensive analysis tends to exacerbated other problems outside their scope. For support more multimodal planning and transporta- 8 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Figure 1.3: Avoid-Shift-Improve AVOID/REDUCE SHIFT IMPROVE Reduce or avoid travel or Shift to more environmentally Improve the energy efficiency the need to travel friendly modes of transport modes and vehicle technology • Integration of transport and • Transport demand management • Low-friction lubricants land-use planning • Mode shift to none motorized • Optimal tire pressure • Smart logistic concepts transport • Low rolling resistance tire • Mode shift to public transport • Speed limit Eco driving (Rising Awareness) • Shift to alternative fuel Source: Daniel Bongardt, Manfred Breithaupt and Felix Creutzig (2011), Beyond the Fossil City: Towards low Carbon Transport and Green Growth, Sustainable Transport Technical Document #6, Sustainable Urban Transport Program (www.sutp.org); at https://bit.ly/2wttbCQ. Note: Avoid-Shift-Improve maximizes sustainable transport benefits by favoring strategies that reduce total motor vehicle travel and so provide more total benefits than simply improving vehicle design tion demand management solutions that provide ad- Many policy and planning reforms can increase urban ditional benefits, in addition to reducing congestion. transport efficiency and equity by improving efficient Many organizations now apply Avoid-Shift-Improve mobility options, providing incentives to use the most priorities, which first favors strategies that reduce the efficient option for each trip, plus development and need to travel or shift travel to more resource-efficient, roadway design changes. An integrated program of modes because they provide more benefits than im- such strategies can significantly improve transport proving vehicle design, as indicated in Figure 1.3 and system efficiency and equity, providing large and di- Table 1.6. verse benefits, including benefits to motorists and communities. There are many obstacles to achieving universal ur- ban access. Many current planning practices favor au- Many new technologies and services complement tomobile-oriented transport planning and sprawled those measures. For example, integrated naviga- development patterns, to the detriment of walking, tion systems and payment apps, parking manage- bicycling and public transport. For example, any ment systems, car- and bike-sharing, ride-hailing and countries subsidize vehicle fuel consumption; many self-driving vehicles, Maas and ITS support and are jurisdictions limit development densities and require supported by more efficient and diverse transport abundant parking; a major portion of transport funds planning. In addition, these emerging technologies are dedicated to highways and parking facilities and and services can create new problems, such as pri- cannot be invested in other modes or TDM programs; vacy concerns, universality, and rebound effects (for and travel data and performance evaluation often un- example, if ride-hailing and self-driving cars stimulate dercount and overlook non-auto modes. More com- more driving, which exacerbates traffic problems) and prehensive and multimodal planning requires new so require efficient management to ensure that they data, analysis methods and agency responsibilities. support sustainable transport goals (Polis Traffic Effi- 9 Table 1.6: Comparing strategies Planning Objective Reduce Shift Improve Improve and encouragement More compact development, More efficient and alternative fuel Strategies walking, bicycling, and public efficient pricing, and telework vehicles, roadway improvements. transit User convenience and comfort ü ü ü Congestion reduction ü ü Road and parking charges ü ü Consumer savings and affordability ü ü ü Reduced traffic accidents ü ü Improved mobility for non-drivers ü Energy conservation ü ü ü Pollution reduction ü ü ü Physical fitness and health ü ü Supports land use objectives ü ü Note: Compact development provides various internal (to residents) and external (to other people) benefits and costs. Sources: (a) Reid Ewing and Shima Hamidi (2014), Measuring Urban Sprawl and Validating Sprawl Measures, Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah for the National Cancer Institute, the Brookings Institution and Smart Growth America (www.smartgrowthamerica.org); at https://bit.ly/2I6StdG.;(b) Todd Litman (2014), Analysis of Public Policies That Unintentionally Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org), LSE Cities (www.lsecities.net), for the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate (www.newclima- teeconomy.net); at http://bit.ly/1EvGtIN. ciency & Mobility Working Group & Hoadley, 2017). 1.2.  Analysis scope Implementing the new paradigm requires capacity This paper primarily considers local personal access building and global information sharing among pol- but recognizes the importance of efficient commercial icymakers. Some important new ideas, such as Bus transport (called logistics), and longer-distance per- Rapid Transit (BRT) and pedestrianized streets, that sonal travel. Efficient commercial transport support first developed in the Global South and are now being economic productivity, business activity, employment implemented throughout the world, and many new and tax revenue. Individuals sometimes need bulk technologies, such as integrated public transit naviga- transport, for example, for large purchases or mov- tion and payment systems, are being implemented in ing to a new home. Commercial travel tends to have Asia more quickly than in other regions. More global high travel time values, including labor, equipment capacity building can help understand and address and vehicle expenses, and sometimes large costs for key sustainable mobility goals described in this doc- unexpected delays. In addition, heavy freight vehicles ument, including social equity, economic opportunity, tend to impose large external costs including traffic economic development, improved public fitness and congestion, road wear, parking requirements, acci- health, and environmental protection. dent risk, noise and air pollution emissions. For these reasons, improving commercial transport can provide large potential savings and benefits. 10 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Although this report is primarily concerned with in- which increases their productivity and improves cus- tra-region (within region) mobility and accessibility, tomer and employee. Businesses also benefit from many concepts also affect inter-regional (between reduced parking requirements that reduce their costs, region) transport. Improving urban mobility facilitates from multimodal planning that improves access for interregional travel by improving access to bus and their customers and employees, and from vehicle and train stations, ports and airports, and local logistics, fuel savings that leave households with more money and by reducing through traffic congestion delays. to spend on locally produced goods and services. In For example, travel to airports is often less reliable, fact, countries with higher fuel taxes such as Norway more stressful, and takes longer than air travel itself, and Japan, and cities with higher road and parking and long-haul freight deliveries are often delayed by fees such as London and Singapore, tend to be more congestion in the cities they pass through, so improv- economically successful and resilient than automo- ing urban mobility and access improves interregional bile-dependent regions with higher transport costs. travel efficiency. In addition, rail terminals, ports and Sustainable transport advocates must respond to airports often become major activity centers them- inaccurate and exaggerated criticisms and commu- selves, with administration, logistical, maintenance, nicate the many benefits provided by more efficient manufacturing and storage facilities and services. As a and diverse transport system. We can use this to build result, overall logistical efficiency and disadvantaged a broad political coalition. For example, transport groups’ economic opportunity require efficient local agencies, businesses, public health professionals, en- access for passengers, workers and goods distribu- vironmental organizations, and anybody who requires tion. or prefers alternatives to driving has good reasons to support these policy reforms. 1.3.  Understanding and responding to criticisms 1.4.  Principles of efficient and equitable Sustainable transport policy reforms often face criti- urban access cisms, much of which is inaccurate or exaggerated. It To be efficient and equitable, a transport system must is important that proponents understand and respond be diverse to serve diverse demands, and efficient to to such claims. minimize the resources – time, money, land and en- For example, critics argue that these strategies harm ergy – needed to access services and activities. To be travelers by forcing them out of cars, but surveys indi- equitable it must also be fair in its distribution of costs cate that many people actually want to drive less and and benefits, and ensure that everybody, including rely on sustainable modes, provided they are conve- disadvantaged groups, can access basis services and nient, comfortable and affordable. Multimodal plan- activities. To achieve these goals an urban transport system should reflect the following principles (Interna- ning responds to these demands. tional Transport Forum, 2016; Viegas, Martinez, Crist, & Critics also argue that pricing reforms harm poor peo- Masterson, 2016): ple. Although a given tax or fee represents a greater §§ Planning should be comprehensive, integrated portion of household budgets for lower- than high- multimodal, and accessibility-based. er-income motorist, since vehicle ownership and fuel consumption increase with income, vehicle fees and §§ Access options should be diverse to serve diverse fuel taxes are less regressive than most other funding demands, including the needs of disadvantaged source, and they benefit the poor overall if revenues groups. Planning should respond to consumer are invested in affordable modes, or if pricing reduces demands (called consumer sovereignty). For ex- bus delays, crash risk or pollution emissions. Similarly, ample, if demand for a travel mode increases, re- critics argue that pricing reforms and vehicle restric- sponsive planning improves that mode. tions harm businesses and reduce economic produc- §§ Investments should reflect least-cost principles, tivity. Although some fees burden some businesses, allowing selection of the most cost-effective solu- many businesses benefit from reduced congestion tions. 11 §§ Users should have incentives to choose the most ties typically range from about 20 to 200 residents per efficient option for each trip. Higher value trips hectare, with higher rates in central districts. and more efficient modes should have priority in transport investments, facility management and Mix can also refer to diverse housing types that re- pricing. spond to diverse housing needs, including physical §§ Transportation fuel taxes, road and parking fees, abilities (some housing units should accommodate and vehicle fees and taxes should at least reflect wheelchairs and other impairments), incomes, house- short-term marginal costs and recover long-term hold size and type (including large and multi-gen- total costs, unless underpricing is specifically jus- eration families), ages and special needs (such as tified. home workspaces and gardens). Figure 1.4 illustrates §§ Planning should include community engagement various housing types. These are categorized as de- and comprehensive performance evaluation. tached (single-family) or attached (multi-family); and low-rise (2-4 story), mid-rise (4-8 story), and high-rise These principles help identify optimal urban design (more than 8 story). targets described below (Litman 2017; Rode and Floater 2014). Why 1.4.1.  Development Density and Mix Increasing densities and mix reduces travel distanc- es and improves walking, bicycling and transit access What (Currie and De Gruyter 2018). This reduces vehicle travel and increases sustainable travel as illustrated Density refers to the number of people and jobs lo- in Figures 1.5 and 1.6. Increased density also reduces cated in an area. Mix refers to the combination of land uses (residential, commercial, recreational, etc.) in an per capita land consumption, which preserves open area. These can be measured in various ways, such space (farmlands and habitat). Diverse housing types as people, jobs or housing units per acre, hectare, serve diverse demands, affordable urban housing in- square-kilometer or -mile; net (residential land only) creases economic opportunity and inclusivity for dis- or gross (total land area); and for a particular district, advantaged groups. Table 1.7 summarizes compact neighborhood, municipality or region. Urban densi- development benefits and costs. Figure 1.4: Types of residential density Source: Ann Forsyth, et al. (2016), Revitalizing Places: Improving Housing and Neighborhoods from Block to Metropolis, Harvard University Graduate School of Design (http://research.gsd.harvard.edu); at http://bit.ly/2fszLii. Note: Urban housing types including detached (1-3 story), and low-rise (2-4 story), mid-rise (4-8 story), and high-rise (more than 8 story). 12 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Figure 1.5: Car travel versus density for 58 world cities Figure 1.6: Urban densities versus carbon emissions Source: Peter Newman and Jeffrey Kenworthy (2011), ‘Peak Car Source: Philipp Rode, et al. (2017), Integrating National Policies Use’: Understanding the Demise of Automobile Dependence,” to Deliver Compact, Connected Cities: An Overview of Transport Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice, Vol. 17.2, pp. 31- and Housing, New Climate Economy (https://newclimateecono- 42; at www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp17.2.pdf. my.report); at https://bit.ly/2vonQeQ. Note: Higher densities tend to reduce motor vehicle travel. Note : As density increases carbon emissions tend to decline. Table 1.7: Compact Development Benefits and Costs Internal (To Residents) External (To Other People) –– Increased accessibility, which reduces travel time and –– More efficient public transit services money costs, and increases affordability. –– Open space preservation (farm and natural lands). –– Improved mobility options, which gives non-drivers more –– Reduced public infrastructure and service costs. independent mobility and reduces chauffeuring burdens. –– Reduced total congestion. Benefits –– More efficient and affordable housing options. –– Reduced traffic crash rates. –– Increased economic resilience. –– Reduced disability and healthcare costs. –– Increased traffic safety, fitness and health. –– Increased economic productivity and development. –– Reduced fuel consumption and pollution emissions. –– High-rise increases construction costs. –– Better planning requirements for compact cities and diverse –– Infill increases unit land prices (dollars per hectare). land use Costs –– Less private greenspace (lawns and gardens) and privacy. –– Increases in some infrastructure costs such as curbs and –– Increased exposure to some pollutants. sidewalk. –– More local traffic and parking congestion. Note: Compact development provides various internal (to residents) and external (to other people) benefits and costs. Sources: (a) Reid Ewing and Shima Hamidi (2014), Measuring Urban Sprawl and Validating Sprawl Measures, Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah for the National Cancer Institute, the Brookings Institution and Smart Growth America (www.smartgrowthamerica.org); at https://bit.ly/2I6StdG.; (b) Todd Litman (2014), Analysis of Public Policies That Unintentionally Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org), LSE Cities (www.lsecities.net), for the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate (www.newclima- teeconomy.net); at http://bit.ly/1EvGtIN. 13 Targets borhoods (Forsyth, et al. 2016; World Bank 2018). Planning should support appropriate densities, land People most walking trips are less than a kilometer, uses, building types, and vehicle parking supply. De- so most urban housing should be located in compact velopment policies should favor urban infill over ex- walkable neighborhoods within a kilometer of com- pansion, with growth concentrated in central areas monly used services such as schools, shops and parks and near rapid transit stations. Any urban expansion (ITDP 2016). Efficient bus service typical requires 40, should occur along designated corridors with ade- and rapid transit service at least 80, residents or work- quate transit services and utility lines and create com- ers per hectare within a kilometer of stations (World plete and walkable neighborhoods with most homes Bank 2018). In unconstrained cities (those that can located within a kilometer of commonly-used services expand into low-value land) most homes can be low- (Angel 2011; Rode, et al. 2017). or medium-rise (1-8 stories), but geographically con- strained cities generally require some high-rise hous- 1.4.2.  Vehicle Ownership and Use ing. For recreation and happiness sake, 15-25% of urban land should be devoted to public greenspace, What parks and trails (Larson, Jennings and Cloutier 2016). To maximize urban access, most new development This refers to the number of motor vehicles owned, should occur within or adjacent to existing cities, with vehicle kilometers, and mode share (portion of to- major activity centers (large office buildings, college tal trips made by a mode) in an area. Optimal levels campuses, cultural and recreational facilities) located are the amounts travellers would choose if they had in central areas or near rapid transit stations. diverse access options and all costs (roads, parking, congestion, crash risk, and pollution) were internal- How ized (Boarnet 2013). Optimization is important be- cause transport planning often involves trade-offs Smart Growth and Transit Oriented Development between auto travel and other access options; for ex- (TOD) are general terms for development policies ample, vehicle travel reductions reduce traffic impacts that create compact, mixed, and multimodal neigh- Table 1.8: Motor vehicle costs Internal (Vehicle User) External (To Other People) –– Fuel –– Road and parking facility costs not paid directly by users –– Road and parking user fees –– Traffic congestion Variable –– Wear and tear –– Barrier effect (delay motor traffic causes to active transport) (Operation) –– Vehicle occupant crash risk –– Crash risk imposed on other road users –– Fossil fuel production external costs –– Noise and air pollution emissions –– Depreciation –– Sprawled development patterns –– Insurance –– Road and parking facility habitat and hydrologic impacts Fixed –– Registration fees (Ownership) –– Scheduled maintenance –– Residential parking paid by users Note: Motor vehicle travel imposes many costs, including direct user costs and external costs imposed on others. Sources: (a) Todd Litman (2009), Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis, VTPI (www.vtpi.org/tca).; (b) NZTA (2010-2017), Economic Evalua- tion Manual, Volumes 1 and 2, New Zealand Transport Agency (www.nzta.govt.nz); at https://bit.ly/2KC3k17 and https://bit.ly/2P0wpEd.; (c) Ricardo-AEA (2014), Update of the Handbook on External Costs of Transport Final Report, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu); at https://bit. ly/2c4e0b1. 14 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY that improve walking, bicycling and transit conditions, Targets and by reducing parking supply, allow more compact and accessible development. Vehicle ownership and use tend to decline in cities with multimodal $1.75 transport planning and efficient pric- Why ing (Buehler, et al. 2016; CARB 2014; Small 2017). This suggests that optimal vehicle ownership and use are $1.50 Gasoline Prices Per Liter -2004 Motor vehicle ownership and use imposes various significantly lower than what currently occurs in many $1.25 costs, summarized in Table 1.8. Many of these, includ- cities. Even in affluent cities, perRcapita = 0.373 vehicle own- ing congestion, facility costs, barrier effect, crash and tends to decline with density, as illustrated in ership $1.00 pollution damages, tend to increase with density. In Figures 1.7 and 1.8. urban areas, total external costs are generally higher $0.75 than motorists’ out-of-pocket expenses, so for each Many jurisdictions have emission reduction or vehi- dollar a motorist spends on driving their vehicle im- cle travel reduction targets. For example, the State of $0.50 R = 0.0759 poses more than a dollar worth of costs on govern- California has targets to reduce greenhouse gas emis- ments and other people. This is economically ineffi- sions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, and reduce $0.25 cient and unfair; it increases external costs and cross total vehicle travel at least 15% by 2050 compared to $0.00 subsidies from people who drive less than average to expected levels (GOPR 2018). Similarly, Washington $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 people who drive more than average and degrades State House Bill 2815 that passed in 2008 set targets walking and bicycling conditions. Since motor vehicle vehicleAnnual for reducing per capita Average travelGDP by 18% by 2020, travel tends to increase with income, this is regressive. 30% by 2035 and 50% by 2050. Oil Producers Oil Consumers Figure 1.7: Car ownership versus density in selected cities Figure 1.8: Optimal Automobile Mode Share 90 80 High Income Motor Vehicles Per Adult and Percent Middle Income 70 Low Income 60 Auto Mode Share 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rural Suburban Small City Large City City Center Source: World Conference on Transport Research, 2016 Source: Greater Greater Washington, 2018 Note: As city size, density and poverty increase, vehicle owner- ship and use should decline. Optimal levels are less than 0.2 Note: In affluent cities such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia and vehicles per capita and less than 20% auto mode shares in af- London, automobile ownership tends to decline as density increases. fluent city central areas, and less than 0.1 vehicle per capita and This show how land use factors can affect travel activity, and therefore less than 10% auto mode shares in lower-income city centers. transport costs such as vehicle expenses, road and parking infrastruc- Various demand management strategies can be used to favour more ture costs, crash risk and pollution emissions. space-efficient and affordable modes over private automobiles. 15 This indicates that in affluent rural areas, it may be Figure 1.9: Economic productivity versus fuel prices appropriate for most adults to own a motor vehicle and use it for most trips, but as city size, density and poverty increase, they should decline, with less than $1.75 0.2 vehicles per capita and less than 20% auto mode shares in affluent central areas, and less than 0.1 vehi- $1.50 Gasoline Prices Per Liter -2004 cle per capita and less than 10% auto mode shares in $1.25 lower-income city centers, as indicated below. R = 0.373 $1.00 How $0.75 Efforts to reduce motor vehicle ownership and use are generally called Transportation Demand Manage- $0.50 R = 0.0759 ment (TDM) or Vehicle Travel Reduction. These include multimodal planning, efficient transport management $0.25 and pricing, Smart Growth development policies that $0.00 that create more accessible and multimodal commu- $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 nities, and targeted TDM programs (Small 2017; TfL Average Annual GDP 2018; VTPI 2018). Oil Consumers Oil Producers 1.4.3.  Vehicle Fuel Conservation Source: Gerhard Metschies (2005), International Fuel Prices, What German Agency for Technical Cooperation (www.international- fuelprices.com). Vehicle fuel conservation reduces motor vehicle fossil fuel consumption and emissions. 90 Note: Economic productivity tends to increase with fuel prices, indicat- conservation supports economic development, ing that fuel80 High Income particular- Why Motor Vehicles Per Adult and Percent Middle Income ly in petroleum 70 importing regions. Low Income There are many reasons to reduce fossil fuel consump- 60 tion and emissions. Fossil fuel production and con- Auto Mode Share Targets 50 sumption impose significant economic, social and en- vironmental costs. Motor vehicle fuel a major source of Many jurisdictions 40 have targets to reduce fossil fuel local pollution and global pollution; in most cities it is consumption 30 by 20-50% in order to reduce local and the largest single source of climate change emissions. global emissions, 20 and to reduce petroleum import Petroleum production pollutes air and water and dis- costs and risks (GOPR 2018; Nawaz, Shahzada and 10 Alvi 2018). turbs habitat and farmlands. Some countries bear sig- nificant petroleum subsidy costs (Davis 2013). Many 0 regions depend on imported fuel which reduces local How Rural Suburban Small City Large City City Center economic development and makes them vulnerable Vehicle fuel can be conserved by reducing total motor to price shocks and political manipulation (Nawaz, vehicle travel through multimodal transport planning, Shahzada and Alvi 2018; Plante2011). Figure 1.9 il- TDM strategies, Smart Growth development policies, lustrates this: economic productivity tends to increase and efficient transport pricing (particularly fuel taxes), with fuel prices, particularly for petroleum importing and with clean vehicle programs that encourage use countries, while petroleum-producing countries with of fuel-efficient vehicles and renewable fuels. low fuel prices, such as Iran, Venezuela and Nigeria, have poor economic performance, sometimes called the resource curse. 16 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 1.4.4.  Efficient Roadway Management these modes, which increases system efficiency and benefits disadvantaged groups. As a result, transport What prioritization and management increase system effi- ciency and equity, providing many benefits. Roadway management includes various policies and programs to increase system efficiency (see Figure Targets 1.10). This uses regulations, space allocation and pric- ing to favor higher value travel and space-efficient All cities need sufficient road space, including a net- modes, reflecting a sustainable transport hierarchy. work of arterials that can efficiently accommodate bus routes and heavy trucks. These should reflect com- Why plete streets design principles which ensure that ur- ban roads are designed and management to accom- Public roads are a valuable public asset. Public rights- modate diverse uses and users. This generally means of-way typically represent 10-25% of urban land, and sufficient sidewalks and crosswalks, bike- and bus- urban streets provide mobility, accommodate utility lanes where justified, and traffic calming and speed lines, are the primary public realm where people in- control. teract, and are the face of a city. Efficient management and prioritization can increase transport system effi- How ciency and equity and reduce problems such as traffic congestion and accidents. In rapidly developing cities, roadway management may include development of sufficient arterial roads Prioritization tends to benefit commercial travel, in- designed based on complete streets principles to ac- cluding freight and service vehicles, buses and busi- commodate diverse modes including walking, bicy- ness travel, because they have high travel time values cling, public transport, automobiles and heavy trucks and support economic activity. Heavy vehicles (trucks (ITDP 2011; NACTO 2016). Urban streets should be and buses) impose large congestion, road wear, acci- managed to favor more sustainable modes, with wide dent and pollution costs, so efficient freight transport sidewalks and crosswalks, bike- and bus-lanes, low can reduce externalities. Favoring High Occupant design speeds, and traffic calming (ITE 2019). Vehicles (HOVs) increases travelers’ incentive to use Prioritization can include dedicated bus, HOV or truck Figure 1.10: Sustainable Transport Hierarchy lanes, or priced lanes on urban roadways and park- ing facilities. Better logistics and technologies can coordinate deliveries and consolidate loads, optimize CYCLE/WALK routing, reduce delays and improve customs clear- ances. Shifting freight from truck to rail or marine can CONFERENCE CALL/PHONE/ EMAIL/VIDEO CONFERENCE reduce costs. Improved bus and truck design can re- duce road damage, fuel consumption, noise and air CYCLE/WALK & emissions. Public policies can support these efficiency PUBLIC TRANSPORT gains through better planning, infrastructure, pricing PUBLIC TRANSPORT and incentives (Caltrans 2016; CIVITAS 2015; World Visit:www.travelinescotland.com Bank and IRU 2017). PARK & RIDE 1.4.5.  Efficient Parking Management CAR SHARE What Parking supply refers to the number of spaces avail- IN A CAR ALONE able in an area. Parking management refers to various policies and programs that result in more efficient use Source: Authors of parking resources. 17 Why Targets Parking policies significantly affect transport and de- All cities should efficiently manage on- and off-street velopment patterns. Urban parking is expensive; municipal parking. Cities should reduce or eliminate many vehicles are worth less than the parking spac- minimum parking requirements, allowing developers es they occupy (Scharnhorst 2018). Many cities have to determine the number of parking spaces to pro- more parking than is efficient and fair because they vide based on market demand, and support parking underprice municipal parking and require developers management strategies. to provide abundant off-street parking. This increases motor vehicle ownership and use, development costs How and sprawl, and forces people who don’t own vehi- Table 1.9 summarizes various parking management cles to subsidize parking for those that do, which is strategies and their typical parking demand reduc- inefficient, and unfair, and because vehicle ownership tions. and use tend to increase with income, this tends to be regressive (Belmore 2019; The Economist 2017). 1.4.6.  Efficient Transport Pricing The challenge is to have rates that do not hamper eco- nomic activities (e.g. shopping) while at the same time What discouraging travelling, notably during peak time. Efficient transport pricing means that fuel, roads, park- ing, and vehicle fees are priced to recover long-run Table 1.9: Parking management strategies Traffic Strategy Description Typical Reduction Reduction Walking and cycling Improve walking and cycling conditions to expand the range of 5-15% ü improvements destinations serviced by a parking facility. Provide bike parking. Reduced and more accurate Adjust parking standards to more accurately reflect demand in a 10-30% requirements particular situation. Establish parking supply maximums. Efficient pricing Charge motorists directly and efficiently for using parking. 10-30% ü Unbundle (rent parking separately from building space) and cash out (give non-drivers the cash equivalent of parking subsidies offered motorists) free parking. Shared parking Parking spaces serve multiple users and destinations. 10-30% Regulations Regulate parking to favor higher value uses and increase efficiency. 10-30% Increase capacity of existing Increase parking supply by using otherwise wasted space, smaller 5-15% facilities stalls, car stackers and valet parking. Improve Information and Provide convenient and accurate information on parking availability 5-15% ü Marketing and price, using maps, signs, brochures and the Internet. Improve enforcement Insure that regulation enforcement is efficient, considerate and fair. Varies Improve facilities Improve parking facility design and operations. Varies Note: This table summarizes various parking management strategies. It indicates the typical reduction in the amount of parking required at a destination, and whether a strategy also reduces vehicle traffic and associated problems. Sources: a) GIZ (2012), Sustainable Parking Management, Transfer Project (http://transferproject.org); at https://bit.ly/2AdQdzV.; b) Ríos Flores, et al. (2014), “Practical Guidebook: Parking and Travel Demand Management Policies in Latin America,” Inter-American Development Bank, (www. iadb.org); at http://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/3577?locale-attribute=en. 18 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY costs and at a minimum reflect marginal costs. For ternal costs. Efficient pricing is particularly important example, efficient road and parking pricing recovers in urban areas where facility, congestion, crash risk the costs of these facilities, with rates that increase and pollution costs are high. More efficient pricing with congestion and vehicle size. This gives travelers can provide many benefits and help achieve many an incentive to change time, mode, route, and vehicle planning goals. For example, efficient road pricing type to reduce congestion and road wear, and allows reduces traffic congestion, accident risk and pollution higher value trips to outbid lower value trips, which emissions, and efficient parking pricing reduces the increases economic efficiency. This also increases eq- number of parking spaces needed, allowing more uitable, since it reduces subsidies from non-drivers to compact and affordable development. motorists, and since vehicle travel increases with in- come, tends to be progressive. Targets Why All jurisdictions should implement programs to re- duce subsidies and apply efficient transport pricing. A basic economic principle is that efficiency and equi- Transportation prices should at least reflect short-term ty tend to increase if prices (what users pay for a good) marginal costs and recover total long-term costs, so reflect the marginal cost of producing that good. This for example, road user fees should repay total road- prevents society from spending two dollars to pro- way costs, with higher rates under congested condi- duce a good that consumers only value at one and tions. This follows the ‘if you benefit you pay’ principle. reflect the principle that consumers should general- For instance, expressways should be tolled because ly “get what they pay for and pay for what they get.” they benefit users and that those who do not pay can Transport systems often violate this principle, reduc- be denied access to the road. However, in the case of ing efficiency and fairness. Vehicle fuel is often sub- local or neighborhood streets this is not necessarily sidized, roads and parking are often unpriced, and possible. many costs are external (Shoup 2005; SUTP 2018). This underpricing increase vehicle travel beyond what How is economically efficient, which exacerbates traffic problems and tends to be regressive because poor Table 1.10 summarizes the appropriate pricing of var- households gain smaller benefits and bear larger ex- ious transport costs. Table 1.10: Appropriate pricing of various transport costs Cost Pricing Method How to Calculate Fuel production Fuel tax. External costs of producing, importing and consuming fuel, including GHG emissions. General taxes are applied to fuel. Congestion Time and location-based vehicle fees or road Prices are higher under congested conditions. Price to reduce traffic tolls. volume to optimum flow. Roadway costs Road tolls or weight-distance fees. Cost allocation applied to all roadway costs, including local streets and sidewalks, traffic services, rent and taxes on roadway land. Parking Charge users directly for parking using time Fees set to recover parking facility costs and maintain 85% maximum and location-based fees. occupancy during peak periods. Crash risk Time- and location-based fees, or distance- Current insurance premiums prorated by annual mileage, increased to based fees. account for uncompensated accident costs. Pollution Time and location-based fees (if possible) or A vehicle’s emission rate (such as grams per mile) times regional Emissions distance-based fee. pollution unit costs (such as cents per gram). Note: This table describes the appropriate way to price various transport costs. Source: Authors 19 1.4.7.  Inclusivity How What Inclusivity requires developing diverse housing types to accommodate diverse needs, including hous- Inclusivity refers to a community’s ability to accommo- ing for people who are poor, have large families, or date diverse groups, including physically, economical- have special cultural practices. In some cases, it can ly and socially disadvantaged people, rural-to-urban involve providing land and materials that allow disad- migrants, foreign migrants, and refugees, plus artistic, vantaged groups to build their own communities. It religious and cultural activities. This improves urban can also include building spaces particular activities access for population groups that particularly benefit. such as artists’ studios and workshops, small business- A political movement that supports inclusivity is some- es (called economic incubators), and meeting spaces times called the right to the city (Lefebvre 1968). suitable for religious and social activities. Inclusivity may also require special services to support and in- Why tegrate disadvantaged groups, such as language and skills training, plus social and recreational activities. In modern industrial economies, economic opportu- nity largely depends on workers’ access to urban jobs Attractive and economically successful cities tend and services, and therefore affordable urban transport to have high land costs which result in unaffordable and housing options (Ewing, et al. 2016). Inclusivity housing. In response, they use various strategies to helps achieve social equity goals (it helps disadvan- increase housing affordability including development taged people), supports local economic development reforms, subsidies, price controls, and various incen- by increasing labor supply, and can help prevent so- tives to encourage affordable infill (Angel 2011; King, cial and health problems that can result from concen- et al. 2017) – see Table 1.11. Because a cheap house trated poverty and alienation. It also tends to create is not truly affordable if located in an inaccessible area more artistic, creative and attractive cities (Florida, with high transport costs, it is important to locate af- Mellander and King 2015). fordable housing in areas with good urban access (Forsyth, et al. 2016) Targets Inclusivity planning can be challenging. Urban land Inclusivity targets vary depending on specific condi- tends to be expensive, and higher density develop- ment increases construction costs, so market-priced tions and planning goals. All cities should collect in- urban housing is often unaffordable to poor house- formation on disadvantaged groups’ transport and holds, and public spaces are often crowded and vul- housing demands, and respond to those needs with nerable to conflict. The urban poor often live in infor- appropriate facilities, services and programs (Di Ci- mal settlements, where they lack basic property rights ommo 2018). and services; special programs may be needed to in- tegrate them. Planning such programs should include Table 1.11: Inclusive Transport and Housing Transport Housing Improve active mode (walking and bicycling) conditions (including links to Encourage more affordable infill housing development. compact city and diverse land use). Housing subsidies. Universal design (accommodating people with mobility. impairments and Improving informal settlements. other special needs) Programs to support and integrate immigrants. Affordable public transport, including informal services. Source: Authors 20 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY stakeholder consultations to identify and address con- aged under urban-peak conditions. cerns and potential problems. 2. Semi-constrained cities have a limited ability to expand. Their development should include a 1.4.8.  Optimal Urban Design Summary combination of infill and expansion. A significant portion of new housing should consist of attached This section identified various urban design factors, housing (townhouses and low-rise apartments) targets and implementation strategies, summarized in and mid-rise multi-family. Private automobile the following Table. ownership should be discouraged, and their use Cites vary in conditions and needs. For this analysis restricted under urban-peak conditions. cities can be divided into three categories: 3. Constrained cities cannot significantly expand, so most growth should be infill, consisting of mid- 1. Unconstrained cities are surrounded by abun- and high-rise apartments. Strong policies are dant lower-value lands. They should expand needed to maximize livability in dense neighbor- along designated development corridors and hoods including well-designed streets, adequate maintain at least 30 residents per hectare densi- parks and trails, building designs that maximize ties. A significant portion of new housing may con- fresh air and privacy, and restrictions on vehicle sist of small-lot single-family houses, plus some ownership and use, particularly those with internal larger lots to accommodate residents who have combustion engines. space-intensive hobbies such as large-scale gar- dening or owning large pets. Private automobiles Table 1.12 summarizes various growth and design fac- may be common, but their use should be discour- tors for optimal urban access. Table 1.12: Optimal Urban Design Factor Unconstrained Semi-constrained Constrained Growth pattern Expand as needed Limited expansion Minimal expansion Gross density (residents/ha) 20-60 40-80 80 + Net (parcel) density (residents/ ha) 40-120 80-160 160 + Housing types Mostly low-rise Approximately equal portions Mostly mid- and high-rise low-, mid- and high-rise Vehicle ownership (per 1,000 res.) 300-400 200-300 < 200 Private auto mode share 20-50% 10-20% Less than 10% Intersection density per sq. km. 40+ 60+ 80+ Portion of land in road ROW 10-15% 15-20% 15-20% Roadway design All urban streets safely accommodate walking and bicycling. Recreational facilities Most households are located within a ten- minute walk of local parks and recreational facilities, and 15-25% of urban land is devoted to public open space. Examples Most African and American cities Most European and Asian Singapore, Hong Kong, cities Malé Note: This table summarizes urban design features optimized for urban access and other planning goals. Source: Todd Litman (2017), “Determining Optimal Urban Expansion, Population and Vehicle Density, and Housing Types for Rapidly Growing Cities,” Transportation Research Procedia, for the 2015 World Conference on Transport Research; at www.vtpi.org/WCTR_OC.pdf 21 2.  STATE OF PLAY 2.1.  Measuring urban access be considered as a proxy for measuring availability of quality public transport. The Figures below show the As previously discussed, many factors can affect ur- distribution of the RTR for the countries in the world ban access including mobility, connectivity, proximity that have cities with over 500,000 inhabitants, show- and affordability (Venter 2016). New data sources and ing that there are many developed countries that have mapping systems can be used to measure urban ac- sizeable rapid transit networks, however, many other cess. It is often measured based on the time required countries, developed or developing, still lag behind. to reach desired services and activities. Some systems are more comprehensive, accounting for pedestrian, In Figure 2.1, data on the Rapid Transit to Resident bicycle and automobile travel speeds, sometimes Ratio is plotted against GDP per capita and used to considering the effects of traffic congestion, and some compare countries on Universal Urban Access. Coun- account for money as well as time costs (called gener- tries are divided into four groups (A to D) based on alized costs). For equity analysis, this should be mea- distance to best performance. sured for different groups, for example, by income, physical ability and location. The United Nations Sus- tainable Development Goal 11.2 (indicator 11.2.1: Figure 2.1: Scatterplot of Rapid Transit to Resident Ratio proportion of population that has convenient access vis-à-vis GDP per capita by country to public transport, by sex, age and persons with dis- abilities) supports this analysis. Group Group Group Group Group D Group C Group B Group A D C B A SUM4All’s Global Mobility Report 2017 noted that IRL IRL there is 80no internationally agreed methodology BRN for 80 GDP per capita (US$ Thousands, PPP), 2017 GDP per capita (US$ Thousands, PPP), 2017 measuring SDG 11.2 and that few cities and AREcountries KWT KWT ARE CHE measure 11.2.1: (i.e. percentage of the population NOR NOR USA USA within 500m 60 of a public transport stop). The Report 60 ISL NLD AUT SAU DNK AUT NLD identified a set of proxy indicators that are SAU SWE easierDEU DNK to AUS SWE DEU BEL BEL FIN BHR FIN CAN measure (especially in developing countries / cities) BHR FRA GBR JPN ITA JPN GBR FRA NZLISR OMN ITA MLT 40 NZL OMN ISR KOR ESP CZE 40 and frequently reported by public transport under ESP KOR SVNCZE - ESTCYP PRT PRT LTU takings in both developing and developed TUR KAZ countries BHS MYS TTO LTU POL GRC HUN TTO MYS HUN KAZ TUR RUS GRC LVA POL RUS LVA HRV ROU HRVROU / cities. This can be used to gauge GNQ people’s PAN MUSCHL satisfac- URY URY PAN IRN CHL 20 MEX IRN BLR ARG LBY BGR 20 LBY TKM ARGMEX THA BLR BGR tion with the service offer and THA when coupled GAB BRAIRQ DOM DZA TKM AZE SRBBWA MKD COL with SUR CRI SDG BRB CHN GRD CRI IRQ DOM SRB MKD MNGPER CHN BRA COL AZE DZA ZAF ALBMNG PER PRY LKA LBN IDN TUN BTN PRY EGY BIH LBNLCALKA IDN VCT EGY TUN ECU 11.2.1 data it will help provide city a UKR NAM with ECUFJI ARM JOR GEOclearer a DMA JAM JAM JOR PHL SLV BOL ARM MAR GTMUKR GEO MMR MARAGO GUY BOL GTM UZB SLV IND LAO MDA WSMBLZ PHL VNM CPVTON TLS LAO VNM MDA MMR AGO PAK NIC HND IND UZB NIC HND NGA COG CIV PAK picture of howTCD accessible SDN ZMB MLI CMR YEM GIN ETH AFG BFA TGO MOZ TZA MDG BDI COD MRT SEN HTIBENtheir NER MWI NPL is SLE cityKEN UGA RWA GNB GHA through PNG LSO ZWE LBR KGZ TJK COM VUT SLB GMB KHM STP FSM public BGD - BGD CIV KHM CMR KGZ TJK NPL BEN YEM BFA AFG HTI BDI CAF - transport. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0 20 40 60 80 Rapid Transit to Resident Ratio Rural Access Index, 1999–2004 One existing indicator that measures the availability (km per million), 2018 of rapid transit in different cities and countries is the to Resident Rapid TransitGroup D Ratio Group C (RTR). Group B Group Athis indi- While Source: ITDP raw D Group data analyzed Group C by the World Group B Bank Group A cator is not a direct measure of urban access, it can IRL IRL 80 BRN 80 BRN S$ Thousands, PPP), 2017 S$ Thousands, PPP), 2017 ARE KWT KWT ARE CHE 22 CHE NOR USA NOR USA 60 60 ISL ISL NLD SAU DNK NLD AUT SAU AUT DEU DNK SWEDEU AUS AUS SWE BEL BEL FIN FIN BHR BHR CAN GBR FRA FRA GBR JPN ITA JPN UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Group D represents countries that, compared with of the RTR ratio and in the variability (spread) of the their peers, have made the least progress; Group C data among countries within a region. Ranked by me- represents those that have made less progress; Group dian, the regions, from lowest to highest, would be: B represents those that have made more progress; Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, Middle East & North and Group A represents countries that have made Africa, Latin America & Caribbean, East Asia & Pacific most progress. It may be noted that each country and Europe & Central Asia. group includes countries from most or all regions. 2.2.  Accessibility Tools Figure 2.2 shows the distribution of Rapid Transit per in developed Resident (RTR) ratio Rural Access Index and developing Tools are increasingly used Index Rural Access in developed countries, regions countries, and in sixPercentage, of the world for devel- 1999–2004 and soon in some developing countries Developing Countries, Percentage, 1999–2004 (ITF 2017). oping countries 100% only. The line in the box shows the 100% However, currently most access mapping systems median90% of the variable. The width of the box on either 90% overlook key factors. Most only measure travel time, side of the 80% median shows the “spread” of one quartile 80% ignoring financial costs, although for many lower-in- of the observations. The “Whiskers” show where the come travelers, money costs are a major burden and 70% 70% more spread out observations lie (two quartiles). Indi- constrain on travel. Few systems account for travel 60% vidual dots show observations which are outlying ex- 60% comfort, such as transit vehicle crowding, or station treme values 50% beyond the quartiles. For example, the 50% amenities such as seats, and few cities have detailed median40% for developing countries in Europe and Cen- 40% information on walking and bicycling conditions. Be- tral Asia is about 12. The values within one quartile 30% low are examples. 30% range from 20% about 0 to 12 (the Box) and the broader 20% values range from about 0 to 38 (the Whiskers). There Accessibility in Practice 2 10% 10% exists an extreme outlier at 48. 0% 0% This State Smart Transportation Initiative report of- were found Developed countriesDeveloped Countries to have a higher me- fers practical guidance on Europe East Asia & Pacific implementing & Central Asia accessibil- dian RTR ratio than developing countries. There were ity-based planning. Developing Countries Latin America & CaribbeanIt outlines East & North Africa data needs Middle concepts, also clear differences between regions in the median South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa Figure 2.2: Rapid Transit per Resident Ratio by regions Rapid Transit per Resident Ratio Rapid Transit per Resident Ratio Km per million, 2018 Developing Countries, km per million, 2018 100 50 90 45 80 40 70 35 60 30 50 25 40 20 30 15 20 10 10 5 0 0 Developed Countries East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Developing Countries Latin America & Caribbean Middle East & North Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa Source: ITDP raw data analyzed by the World Bank 23 and availability, analysis tools, and other consider- ride services. The results indicate that the inaccessibil- ations in measuring accessibility, and describes exam- ity index analysis provides a practical way to consider ples of such analyses. equity impacts in planning decisions. Conveyal Analysis for Public Transport3 London’s WebCAT Mapping System5 Conveyal Analysis helps you evaluate changes to London Transport’s WebCAT mapping system shows public transport systems using accessibility indicators. the areas that can be reached by transit within a given These indicators quantify the access to opportunities travel time (Figure 2.3). It is used by individuals and experienced by transit riders, such as the proportion governments for strategic planning. The figure below of the regional job market reachable within 45 min- illustrates typical output. utes of total walking and transit time. Public Transit Accessibility Levels6 Inaccessibility Index for Social Equity Analysis 4 Public Transit Accessibility Levels (PTALS) is a stan- Ciommo (2018) developed an inaccessibility index dardized method for measuring a location’s public which indicates the number of desirable activities transport network accessibility, considering average (such as jobs, healthcare and shopping) that a partic- walk speeds, distances to transit stops and transit ser- ular demographic group cannot reach. The results are vice frequencies. This can help community planning used to evaluate the social equity impacts of strategic and investment decisions. Each area is graded from planning decisions in Barcelona, Spain, such as city 0 (very poor access) to 6b (excellent access). Shah center vehicle restrictions, parking policy changes, and Adhvaryu (2016) applied this method using GIS public transit service improvements, and park-and- mapping in Ahmedabad, India. This demonstrates Figure 2.3: London’s WebCAT Mapping Note: London Transport’s WebCAT mapping system shows the areas that can be reached by transit within a given travel time. Source: WebCAT Mapping system. Figure available from “https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/planning-with-web- cat/webcat” 24 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY that such tools can function in developing as well as and methods for measuring transit access to jobs and developed countries. workers. Revision7 Urban Accessibility Explorer9 This regional mapping, analysis and visualization pro- Chicago’s Accessibility Explorer is an easy-to-use gram integrates a range of public and private data mapping system that measures the number of activ- and performance indicators for sustainable commu- ities, including various types of jobs, schools, parks, nity evaluation.  stores and libraries, that regional residents can reach within a given travel time, by a particular mode. The Smart Location Mapping8 results are displayed on maps (see Figure 2.4) which can be adjusted by scale and area. This tool can help This program provides interactive maps and data for policy makers, planners and residents evaluate how measuring location efficiency, including the effects transport and land use decisions affect accessibility. of the built environment on per capita vehicle travel, Figure 2.4: Chicago’s Urban Accessibility Explorer Note: The Urban Accessibility Explorer shows the number of activities (in this case, jobs) that can be reached within a given travel time (40 minutes) by a particular mode (public transit) in the Chicago region. Source: Urban Accessibility. Online tool available from http://urbanaccessibility.com/ 25 Transportation for Everyone Rating System10 decisions, and communities making planning deci- sions. Table 2.1 summarizes the Transportation for Everyone rating system, which evaluates mobility and accessi- A higher rating is particularly important for people bility options, and helps identify gaps and improve- whose ability to drive is constrained, including youths, ment options. It recognizes diverse factors that affect people with disabilities or low incomes, and people accessibility. This can be used by households when who are frequently impaired or distracted, plus driv- choosing where to live, businesses making location ers who want to avoid chauffeuring household mem- Table 2.1: Transportation for everyone ratings Accessibility Factors Rating (1-10) 1. All-weather (paved) roads, and reliable motor vehicle fuel supplies. 2. Compact, mixed urban development, which creates Transit-Oriented Development (if located around transit stations) or Urban Villages (if pedestrian oriented), where most common services (shops, restaurants, schools, parks, transit stops, etc.) can be reached within a 5-10-minute walk or bicycle ride of most homes and worksites. 3. Good walking and cycling conditions, including adequate sidewalks, crosswalks, paths, bike lanes, bike parking, and vehicle traffic speed control. 4. High quality public transit services, with good coverage, frequency, comfort, safety and affordability for both local and interregional (between city) services. 5. Good connectivity, including dense walking and road networks, and intermodal connections such as walking and cycling access, and taxi services at transit stations. 6. Convenient and affordable carsharing and bike sharing, taxi and ride-hailing services. 7. Universal design (the ability of transportation systems to accommodate people with diverse needs and abilities, including those with disabilities and heavy loads). 8. Good telework options, such as on-line shopping, banking and municipal services, and efficient delivery services ((mail, courier and local shops). 9. Convenient user information concerning transportation options. 10. Social marketing that promotes non-automobile modes and enhances their status. Sum Note: Each factor can be rated from 0 (worst) to 10 (best). Source: Todd Litman (2017), “Determining Optimal Urban Expansion, Population and Vehicle Density, and Housing Types for Rapidly Growing Cities,” Transportation Research Procedia, for the 2015 World Conference on Transport Research; at www.vtpi.org/WCTR_OC.pdf Transportation for Everyone Score 70–100 Multimodal – A car is unnecessary for most daily travel. Many households are car-free. 50–69 Mixed – Non-auto travel is possible but sometimes difficult. Most households have at least one car. 0–49 Automobile Dependent – It is difficult to live without a car. Most households have one car per driver. 26 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Table 2.2: Urban access analysis data needs Geographic Demographic Economic Transport Activity Transport Conditions • City size • Age and gender • Transport • Transit trips • Transit quality • Residential density • Wealth expenditures • Active transport • Walking and cycling • Employment density • Population growth • Employment and • Mode shares conditions rate productivity • Traffic congestion • Development mix • Vehicle ownership • Government • Crash casualty rates • Transport network • Motor vehicle use Note: Urban access analysis requires various types of data. Source: Authors bers with such constraints, or who may value having many need augmentations for more comprehensive non-automobile options for current or future use. and multimodal planning. For example, most jurisdic- tions will need additional facility and traffic data for Accessibility analysis requires various types of data, as pedestrian and bicycle level-of-service analysis. summarized in Table 2.2. For optimal analysis this in- formation must be geocoded at a fine-grain scale and New data sources and analysis methods can help disaggregated by demographic factors. Much of this overcome obstacles to urban accessibility analysis in information is already collected through census, trav- developing countries.11 el surveys and infrastructure planning programs, but ENDNOTES 2 www.ssti.us/2017/07/accessiblity-in-practice 3 https://www.conveyal.com/analysis 4 https://bit.ly/2QJoj4Q 5 https://bit.ly/2j3u5Og 6 http://bit.ly/2raLR8b 7 http://revision.lewis.ucla.edu/?mc_cid=6d7654de44&mc_eid=b8e4b2304e 8 www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/smart-location-mapping 9 http://urbanaccessibility.com 10 www.vtpi.org/choice 11 The following documents describe transport survey and modelling in such regions. Judy Baker, et al. (2005), Urban Poverty and Transport: The Case of Mumbai Policy, Research Working Paper 3693, World Bank (www.worldbank.org); at http://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/3693.html. Eric J. Gonzales, et al. (2009), Multimodal Transport Modeling for Nairobi, Kenya: Insights and Recommendations with an Evidence-Based Model, Paper UCB-ITS-VWP-2009-5, UC Berkeley Center for Future Urban Transport (https://escholarship. org/uc/item/6dv195p7). Jacob Koch, Luis Antonio Lindau and Carlos David Nassi (2013), Transportation in the Favelas of Rio de Janeiro, Lincoln Institute (www.lincolninst.edu); at https://bit.ly/2DCeCQZ. 27 Debora Salon and Sumila Gulyani (2010), “Mobility, Poverty and Gender: Travel Choices of Slum Residents in Nairobi, Ken- ya,” Transport Reviews, Vol. 30/5, pp. 641-657 (www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01441640903298998). Sumeeta Srinivasan (2011), “Linking Travel Behavior and Location in Chengdu, China: Geographically Weighted Approach,” Transportation Research Record 2193, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org), pp. 85-95; summary at http://trb.meta- press.com/content/1786181773g62543. Sumeeta Srinivasan and Peter Rogers (2005), “Travel Behavior of Low-Income Residents: Studying Two Contrasting Loca- tions in the City of Chennai, India,” Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 13, pp. 265-274; summary at www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0966692304000535. C. Venter, V. Vokolkova and J. Michalek (2007), “Gender, Residential Location, And Household Travel: Empirical Findings From Low-Income Urban Settlements In Durban, South Africa,” Transport Reviews, Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 653-677; summary at http://144.171.11.39/view.aspx?id=843271. 28 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 3.  LEGAL AND REGULATORY AGREEMENTS 3.1.  Review of Existing Commitments The 2016 Paris Agreement provides a strong com- mitment to action towards sustainable urbanization Many international agreements and commitments through the Nationally Determined Contributions relate to sustainable development, sustainable trans- (NDCs). Although the Paris Agreement focuses on portation and transportation pollution emissions. green mobility, an analysis by UN-Habitat showed that These support efforts to improve urban access and the majority of NDCs (113 of 164) have strong to mod- create more efficient and equitable transport systems. erate urban content, particularly in regions of Africa This section describes examples. and Asia, clearly recognizing the association between urbanization and climate change. The transport sector 3.1.1.  Instruments is most referred to when it comes to urban climate ac- tion, including improved roads, efficient and reliable In 2017, the United Nations Conference on Housing public transport, mass transit systems, and railway and Sustainable Urban Development (UN-Habitat) de- lines.12 veloped the New Urban Agenda (NUA), endorsed by the UN General Assembly through resolution 66/207. The Ashgabat Statement, endorsed by the partici- The NUA provides a vision, principles, and tested pants of the United Nations Global Sustainable Trans- practices for better and more sustainable cities world- port Conference in 2016, addresses several areas wide. Its successful implementation is a critical step within transport in pursuit of the Sustainable Devel- towards the realization to the 2030 Agenda for Sus- opment Goals. On urban accessibility, the Ashgabat tainable Development, including the achievement of Statement emphasizes that public transport services Goal, making cities and human settlements inclusive, and infrastructure contributes to the vitality of cities safe, resilient and sustainable. and are critical to enabling the mobility of people and goods, in particular considering the needs of vulner- The addresses various aspects of urbanization in an able groups (women, children, youth, persons with integrated and coordinated manner, emphasizing the disabilities, people living with HIV/AIDS, older per- participation of global, regional, national, subnation- sons, indigenous peoples, refugees and internally dis- al, and local actors. On transport, it calls for action on placed persons and migrants). accessible passengers and freight mobility in urban areas, more inclusive public spaces, and access for The International Association of Public Transport persons with disabilities. It also encourages devel- (UITP) 2014 Declaration on Climate Leadership com- opment and expansion of new financing instruments mitted to doubling public transport market share for infrastructure. Overall, the NUA is a commitment worldwide by 2025. This Declaration puts public towards (i) ensuring coherence between goals and transport systems at the forefront, emphasizing plan- sectoral policies, including mobility policies; (ii) the in- ning for long-term improvements in public transport tegration of urban and territorial planning; (iii) adopt- systems and the need for a modal shift to low carbon ing, implementing, and enforcing safety policies and public transport within cities. It also calls for cities to measures including pedestrians, bicyclists, and mo- “design public policies that limit urban sprawl and al- torcyclists; and (iv) strengthening the coordination low integrated public transport systems to expand in between transport, urban, and territorial planning de- parallel with urban development”, and to “support the partments. 29 development and use of technological innovations in In addition, non-state initiatives such as the Marrakech the public transport sector that lay the foundations for partnership, Mobilize Your City, TUMI, UITP initiative the sustainable smart city.” to double share of public transport also complement the action of national governments in improving con- Similar principles for urban mobility are laid out in the ditions for transport. Regional Action Programme for sustainable transport connectivity in Asia and the Pacific, phase I (2017- 3.1.2.  Implementation Challenges 2021), by the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP). While urban trans- By means of the NUA, the international community has port is one of the many areas addressed by this docu- covered significant ground in addressing the need for ment, this action program indicates that countries and an integrated approach towards urbanization chal- cities of the region must “initiate and implement inno- lenges. Despite significant progress, universal access vative policies and frameworks to assess, plan, devel- remains the global goal for sustainable mobility with op, improve and maintain sustainable urban transport the smallest number of dedicated international in- systems and services.” It proposes guides, frameworks struments. At the global level, there is a need to build and studies as the specific outputs of this action plan. upon the existing know-how, such as the NUA, to con- tinue to support developing countries and cities in the The role of civil aviation in the provision of interur- pursue of more sustainable cities. ban transport has been addressed by instruments adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organi- With a focus on cities rather than countries, the inter- zation (ICAO). ICAO particularly addressed the least national community must also continue to embrace connected countries, such as landlocked developing local governments. Policy recommendations can be countries and small island developing states, in the more implementable if they address urban mobili- Council Resolution on Aviation Contribution towards ty needs at the local level, after considering specific the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable De- needs and challenges, and prioritizing the actions of- velopment, which was adopted unanimously by ICAO fering greatest impact. Finally, a comprehensive but 39th Assembly in 2016. This resolution focuses on the simple tracking framework would be beneficial for implementation of assistance programmes aimed at use at different levels of government (including cities), enhancing the air transport systems of these coun- allowing to measure progress and understanding the tries.13 Another resolution from ICAO focusing on needs for adjustments in the path towards sustainable least connected countries is the Council Resolution mobility. on No Country Left Behind (NCLB) Initiative in 2016. ENDNOTES 12 UN-Habitat. (2017) Sustainable Urbanization in the Paris Agreement. 13 United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Ministerial Conference on Transport, Decem- ber 2016. Ministerial Declaration on Sustainable Transport Connectivity in Asia and the Pacific. (E/ESCAP/MCT(3)/11. Moscow. Retrieved from www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/pre-ods/MCT3_11E.pdf 30 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 4.  CATALOGUE OF MEASURES This paper divides them into these four toolboxes: that should be considered when selecting and de- signing these strategies. 1. Regulatory and Institutional – includes reforms to governance, laws, regulations, funding and Public transit service quality planning practices that improve urban access. 2. Economics and finance – includes reforms to The quality of transit services significantly affects ur- transport prices to encourage efficiency and eq- ban access. Scheduled buses and shared taxis op- uity. erating in mixed traffic provide basic and affordable mobility for non-drivers. Higher quality transit can at- 3. Engineering and Technology – impacting phys- tract discretionary passengers who would otherwise ical and technological infrastructure and opera- drive, reducing traffic problems and provide a catalyst tions. for Transit Oriented Development (TOD). This directly 4. Communications – These involve an integrated benefits transit users and reducing vehicle traffic pro- set of marketing strategies that encourage travel vides community benefits. activity changes in a situation or group, such as commuters, freight transport or special event at- Rapid transit refers to high quality bus and urban rail tendees. systems that typically include frequent and relatively fast service, rapid boarding and attractive stations. The These strategies and programs can be implemented Institute for Transportation and Development Policy’s at various scales. Some require national or state/pro- Rapid Transit to Resident Ratio (RTR) is a good indica- vincial action. Others are implemented at a regional tor of transit service quality. It compares a country’s ur- or municipal scale, some at a district or neighborhood ban population with their rapid transit supply. Coun- scale, and others at a site such as a campus or build- tries and cities can be divided into the following four ing. Many of these strategies are synergistic, that is, groups based on their RTR rating (Figure 4.2). they are more effective and efficient if implemented together, so they should generally be planned as an §§ Group D have the lowest RTR, meaning that they integrated program that includes a complementa- have severe deficiencies in rapid transit access. ry set of positive and negative incentives. Every city, To improve urban access and reduce traffic prob- district and site are unique, and so requires a unique lems they must establish an urban transport plan- set of access improvement strategies and programs. ning and funding capacity to begin rapid transit The following section describes factors that should be networks, improve basic bus services, develop considered when selecting the combination to apply active transport, and support TOD. in a particular situation. §§ Group C have low RTR ratings. To improve urban access and reduce traffic problems they should 4.1.  Evaluation criteria improve their urban transport planning and fund- ing capacity so they can significantly expand and Every city and urban district are unique and so re- improve their rapid transit systems, improve sta- quires a unique set of sustainable transport policies tion access, and support TOD. They should also and programs. This section discusses various factors 31 Figure 4.2: Rapid transit to resident ratio (RTR) map Source: 2014 RTR Report implement TDM incentives and programs. Many large urban regions have fragmented planning §§ Group B moderate RTR ratings. They should ex- and transit services, and so require governance, plan- pand and improve their rapid transit systems, ning and funding reforms to improve region-wide co- improve station access, and support TOD. They ordination of transport systems and land use develop- should also implement TDM incentives and pro- ment policies. grams. Growth rates §§ Group A have the highest RTR ratings. They should focus on improving rapid transit design, univer- Rapidly growing cities can justify more infrastructure sality and affordability, transit station access, and investments, such as rapid transit network expansions, integrated transport and land use planning. To to accommodate future needs. Strategic transport achieve equity goals, TODs should include hous- planning and policy reforms are particularly important ing that accommodates disadvantaged groups. in rapidly-growing cities to prevent automobile-de- They should also implement TDM incentives and pendent transport systems and sprawled develop- programs to encourage travelers to drive less and ment patterns. rely more on resource-efficient modes. Geographic constraints Urban region size and density Unconstrained cities that are surrounded by abun- Smaller city residents can reach more destinations by dant, lower-value land can expand, allowing more dis- active transport, but larger and more dispersed cities persed development patterns, such as higher rates of require more motorized transport, including higher single-family housing, although for efficiency and eq- speed transit and automobile travel. Larger cities tend uity, their urban-fringe developments should create to have more intense traffic congestion which justifies walkable, compact and mixed-use communities that more efficient road and parking pricing and pay-as- encourage active transport and provide independent you-drive vehicle insurance and registration fees. 32 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY mobility to non-drivers. Cities that are constrained by shorelines, mountains or high-value open space (hab- Figure 4.1: Vehicle ownership by income and location itat, parks or farms) must grow upward rather than out- ward, and so require stronger policies to limit auto- 800 mobile ownership and use and create dense but very Sprawled livable communities. Vehicles Per 1,000 Residents 600 Automobile ownership and use Multimodal Automobile ownership and use tend to increase with 400 income, particularly as households increase from low to moderate incomes, but vehicle use eventually sat- urates, and this point of saturation depends on urban Transit Oriented 200 transport and land use policies (see Figure 4.1). All cities should strive to limit vehicle ownership and use to optimal levels, although their goals and strat- 0 egies will vary depending on conditions. For exam- Poor Moderate High Affluent ple, many lower-income cities should improve and Incomes expand urban roadways to increase vehicle travel efficiency and safety, these roads should incorporate Source: Authors complete streets principles, so they are designed and managed to favor diverse uses and users in order Note: Private motor vehicle ownership and use tend to increase with to favor sustainable modes for efficiency and equity income but eventually saturate. This level depends on transport and sake. Lower-income countries must improve walking land use factors. Many affluent but transit-oriented urban neighbor- and bicycling conditions, and affordable public transit hoods have low levels of vehicle ownership, resulting in more efficient services, for example, by formalizing shared taxi ser- and equitable transport systems for everybody. vices and developing BRT networks. Promoting active transport and improving public clude walking links, for example, to transit stations transport quality and parked cars. Under some conditions, bicycling similar roles and can significantly increase mobility, Many affluent cities already have high rates of vehicle increasing by an order of magnitude the area that ownership and use and so require high quality pub- can be accessed within a given time period. Walking lic transit services, including BRT and rail transit, effi- and bicycling are affordable and healthy, require rel- cient pricing to discourage vehicle travel, particularly atively inexpensive infrastructure, and produce mini- to major activity centers, and TDM programs that en- mal pollution. As a result, an efficient and equitable courage travelers to use the most efficient option for transport system requires good walking and bicycling each trip. Parking management helps reducing park- conditions. Virtually all cities need high quality walk- ing facility costs, reduce parking demand, and reduce ing and bicycling conditions, including poorer cities sprawled development. Many affluent cities can sig- where many people rely on these modes for basic nificantly improve walking and bicycling conditions. access, transit-oriented cities where walking and bi- cycling provide local mobility and access to stations, Active transport (walking and bicycling) and affluent and sprawled cities were active transport is important to achieve health objectives. Walking (including variants such as wheelchair, scoot- er and handcart use) is the most basic form of trans- Various methods can be used to evaluate walking and port. Virtually everybody uses pedestrian facilities bicycling conditions, Level of Service (LOS) and other (sidewalks, crosswalks and paths), and most trips in- rating systems (Dowling, et al. 2008). These measure 33 the extent of sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes, and Institutional capacity paths, and roadway traffic volumes, speeds and ve- hicle mix, and sometimes factors such as topography Implementation often requires institutional reforms and climate (Semler, et al. 2016). and practitioner training to support more comprehen- sive and multimodal planning. For example, transit Inclusivity needs service improvements may require more integrated planning, new funding sources, and planners familiar Cities and districts with more disadvantaged groups, with rapid transit and TOD implementation. The aim such as people with mobility impairments or low in- here will be to ensure that compact and more diverse comes, should implement strategies that improve af- development can happen. fordable and inclusive transport and housing options. Time scale Political feasibility and support Some strategies can be implemented quickly and Urban access strategies should be selected based have immediate impacts. Others require more time to on their political feasibility and support. Some strate- develop and provide benefits. gies may be politically infeasible or may require effort and time to build support. More aggressive programs Table 4.1 below summarizes how density and wealth may become more acceptable over time as transport can affect access improvement priorities. Poor- problems increase and people become more familiar er-denser areas rely more on active transport, poor- with these changes. er-dispersed areas rely more on basic public transit, Table 4.1: Access improvement strategies by geographic and economic factors Wealth Poorer Richer –– Public transport improvements –– Complete streets policies –– Bicycle improvements –– Smart Growth policies –– Street paving –– HOV lanes Lower –– Complete streets policies –– Bus service improvements (dispersed) –– Shared taxis services –– Regional rail –– Traffic safety programs –– Campus transport management –– Plan complete communities –– Clean vehicle incentives Density –– Bus Rapid Transit –– Urban rail transit –– Walking and bicycling improvements –– Integrated Corridor Management –– Integrated Corridor Management –– Complete streets policies Higher –– Street paving and arterial design –– Smart Growth policies –– Affordable infill housing –– Commute trip reduction programs (compact) –– Complete streets policies Universal design –– Efficient road and parking pricing –– Parking pricing and management –– Parking management –– Neighborhood vehicle restrictions –– Neighborhood vehicle restrictions Note: Optimal vehicle control strategies will vary depending on local geographic and economic factors. Source: Authors 34 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY wealthy-compact areas require more vehicle travel to support Transit Oriented Development (TOD). reduction strategies and incentives to use space-effi- Reform development policies and zoning codes cient modes, and wealthy-dispersed areas rely more to support more compact, mixed and connected on clean vehicles. These factors apply at both local development, and establish growth management and regional scales, so a city may have different prior- policies that limit urban expansion. ities in different neighborhoods. 7. Apply reduced and more flexible parking require- Additional factors to consider when selecting urban ments, and other policies that support parking access improvement strategies are outlined in the list management. of policy reforms outlined below. 8. Reform investment practices to reflect least-cost planning principles. 4.2.  Toolboxes 9. Establish new funding options for sustainable modes and TDM programs, including land value This section describes and evaluates various sustain- capture. able urban access policy measures. 10. Formalization and regularize informal mobility 4.2.1.  Regulatory and Institutional Toolbox services such as shared taxis and private buses. 11. Implement Smart Growth policies. Encourage lo- Policy measures include reforms to governance, laws, cation-efficient and transit-oriented development. regulations, funding and planning practices that cre- Produce maps which show the accessibility of dif- ate more compact and connected cities, improve re- ferent locations and encourage households and source-efficient travel options, and give travelers in- businesses to choose accessible and multimodal centives to use the most efficient option for each trip. locations. Examples of these policy measures include: 12. Support sustainable transport capacity building (training and information resources) by transport 1. Reform governance to allow more integrated agencies and professional organizations (plan- planning among different sectors, jurisdictions ners and engineers). and agencies. Support more coordination be- tween transport and land use, passenger and 13. Reform regulations to allow and support innova- freight transport, plus intra- and interregional tive mobility services such as demand-responsive, planning. TNCs (Transportation Networking Company for last mile connectivity to high capacity modes), car- 2. Establish NUMPs (National Urban Mobility Plans) sharing and bike sharing, and linking these with and SUMPs (Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans) public transit. 3. Establish a Vision Zero policy, with a traffic safety 14. Develop regulations and incentives that encour- implementation plan. age more efficient or alternative fuel vehicles, re- 4. Establish sustainable transport goals and perfor- quire emission inspections, or encourage scrap- mance targets related to active transport (amount ping older vehicles. that people walk and bike), shift to public trans- 15. Establish complete streets policies to ensure that port, reduced fuel consumption and pollution all roads accommodate diverse users and uses. emissions, traffic casualty rates, consumer costs and affordability, impervious surface area, and Table 4.2 evaluates these policy measures according other impacts. Change transport planning goals, to their impacts, implementation speed and costs. from maximizing traffic flow to minimizing vehicle These assessments are very general and may vary sig- travel. nificantly depending on conditions and perspective. 5. Establish transport-related data collection, perfor- Some strategies, such as land use development policy mance evaluation and accessibility mapping pro- reforms and cleaner vehicle purchase incentives, may grams. be quick to implement but take years or decades to achieve their full impacts and benefits. Similarly, some 6. Integrate transportation and land use planning 35 Table 4.2: Regulatory and Institutional policy measures and their impacts Policy Measure Impacts and benefits Implementation Implementation speed costs Governance reforms for more integrated planning Varies (a) Medium (b) Medium Establish NUMPs and SUMPs Varies Medium Low Establish sustainable transport goals and performance targets Varies Medium Low Establish transport-related data collection, evaluation and Varies Medium Low mapping programs More integrate transport and land use planning Varies Medium Low Parking reforms and improved management Large Medium Low Apply least-cost planning Varies Medium Low Establish sustainable transport funding Varies Medium Low to high Formalize shared taxis and private buses Medium Quick Low Smart Growth policies Varies Medium Medium Support sustainable transport capacity building Varies Medium Low Allow and support innovative mobility services Medium Medium Low Low if regulations, Encourage efficient or alternative fuel vehicles Medium Medium high if subsidies Establish complete streets policies Medium Medium Low Note: This table provides general assessments of various sustainable transport policy reforms. Actual impacts and costs can vary depending on conditions and perspectives. (a) Planning reforms do not affect travel directly but can result in large impacts and benefits. (b) Can be implemented quickly but may take years or decades to achieve their full impacts and benefits. Source: Authors policy measures may have low implementation costs Motorists generally prefer “free” roads and parking, to governments but impose additional costs and sav- but these facilities are never really free, the choice ings to consumers and businesses. is really between paying directly or indirectly. Paying directly through user fees is more efficient and equi- 4.2.2.  Economics and Finance Toolbox table, since it reduces vehicle travel and therefore ex- ternal costs such as congestion, accident risk and pol- These policy measures change transport prices to lution emissions, and reduces subsidies from people encourage efficiency and equity. They are proven to who drive less than average to those who drive more, be effective at achieving transport planning goals if roads and parking facilities are funded through gen- eral taxes or rents. Described differently, charging di- and some also generate revenue that can be used to rectly for roads and parking facilities gives consumers support sustainable transport programs. For example, a new opportunity to save money by reducing their Commute Trip Reduction programs are two to five use, for example, with efficient pricing a commuter times more effective at reducing automobile commut- who shifts from driving to another mode would save ing is commuter parking is efficiently priced or cashed hundreds of dollars annually in reduced road and out (people who don’t drive receive the cash equiva- parking costs. Since lower-income households tend lent of the parking subsidies offered to motorists). to own fewer vehicles and drive less than those with 36 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY higher incomes, this tends to be progressive with re- building space, so tenants are not forced to pay spect to income. for spaces they do not need). Cash out free park- ing (people who don’t drive receive cash benefits These strategies include: equal to parking subsidies provided to motorists). Charge daily rather than monthly or annual park- 1. Eliminating fuel subsidies. Many countries subsi- ing fees, so motorists have incentives to use alter- dize vehicle fuels or charge less than internation- native modes part-time. al market prices or production costs. Reducing these subsidies increases efficiency and equity 5. Pay-as-you-drive pricing. This means that vehicle (GIZ 2018). insurance and registration fees are based directly on the amount a vehicle is driven, so a $400 an- 2. Cost-based fuel taxes. At least recover all road- nual fee becomes 4¢ per vehicle-kilometer and way costs, and possibly charge for external cost a 1,200 annual fee becomes 12¢ per vehicle-ki- through an escalating carbon tax. Apply general lometer. This gives motorists a significant new in- sales taxes to vehicle fuel. centive to reduce their vehicle travel, but is not a 3. Efficient road pricing. This includes road tolls or new fee at all, just a different way to pay existing vehicle-travel fees, to pay roadway costs, with fees. rates that increase under urban-peak conditions 6. Affordable public transport fares. Structure fees to reduce traffic congestion. so they are affordable, and attractive in order to 4. Efficient parking pricing. This means that fees reduce costs to lower-income transit-dependent recover costs (revenues repay all costs, includ- passengers, and to make transit travel more at- ing the equivalent of rents on land devoted to tractive to discretionary travelers who would oth- parking facilities), with higher rates at times and erwise drive. locations with higher demand to reduce parking 7. Integrated payment systems. Develop convenient, congestion problems. Apply efficient pricing to integrated payment systems for road, parking and municipal parking and encourage private proper- transit fares. ty owners to charge for parking. Require landlords to unbundle parking (rent parking separately from 8. Efficient and clean vehicle incentives. Charge Table 4.3: Economics and Finance policy measures and their characteristics Policy measures Impacts and benefits Implementation speed Implementation costs Eliminating fuel subsidies Very large Quick Provides savings Cost-based fuel taxes Very large Quick Provides revenue Efficient road pricing Very large Medium Provides revenue Efficient parking pricing Very large Quick Provides revenue Pay-as-you-drive pricing Very large Medium Very low Affordable public transport fares Medium Quick Medium-high Integrated payment systems Medium-low Medium Low Efficient and clean vehicle incentives Mixed benefits and costs Mediuma High if subsidies Note: This table provides general assessments of various economic reforms. Actual impacts and costs can vary depending on conditions and per­ spectives. It should be noted that technologies such as GPS in cell phones and cars can make it easier to implement these strategies, for instance allowing an individual to pay a toll via the phone for using any road in the city. (a) Can be implemented quickly but may take years or decades to achieve its full impacts and benefits. Source: Authors 37 higher taxes on the purchase of higher-pollution 7. Active transport improvements. Improve walk- vehicles and fuel and offer discounts and rebates ing and bicycling facilities including sidewalks, on cleaner vehicles and fuels. crosswalks, paths, and bike parking (with recharg- Table 4.3 evaluates these policy measures. ing for electric bikes). Ensure that all pedestrian facilities reflect universal design (they accommo- date people with disabilities, luggage, carts, and 4.2.3.  Engineering and Technology Toolbox other special needs). These involve physical and technological infrastruc- 8. Active and public transport integration. En- ture that improves urban access. They include: hance physical integration between public trans- port cycling and walking with safe, direct access 1. Roadway improvements. Pave currently un- to stops and stations paved urban streets and improve design to in- crease traffic efficiency and safety. 9. Urban navigation and payment technologies. Develop integrated navigation and transport pay- 2. Complete streets and streetscaping. Apply ment apps. Establish open-source data standards complete streets principles and streetscaping to and requirements or incentives for all transport ensure that public roads accommodate diverse service provides to use them. users and uses, including active and public trans- port modes, plus sitting, vending, eating and play- 10. Accessibility evaluation and mapping. Develop ing on sidewalks, and accommodation of nearby tools for measuring the accessibility of different residents and businesses. locations and evaluate how various transport and land use changes will affect accessibility for vari- 3. Road space reallocation. Reallocate road space ous groups and activities. Give special attention to based on a sustainable transportation hierarchy, access for disadvantaged groups. which favors active and public transport over au- tomobile traffic, commercial over private traffic, Table 4.4 lists engineering and technology policy and movement over vehicle parking, and short- measures. over long-term parking. This typically results in wider sidewalks, bike- and bus-lanes where justi- 4.2.4.  Communications Toolbox fied by demand, and more efficient parking man- agement. As defined above, these are measures related stake- holder engagement and enhancing understanding 4. Efficient curb management. Manage curbs to fa- of how to improve conditions of urban transport in vor higher value uses including bus stops, passen- their countries or cities. These measures are generally ger and freight loading, and taxi stands. low-cost, as they are often centered around commu- 5. Public transit improvements. Improve public nication campaigns and require little infrastructure in- transport services with a special emphasis on eq- vestment. Related TDM policy measure are also high- uitable access (including the implementation of lighted in this toolbox. mass transit solutions). Improve service coverage, frequency, speed, comfort, reliability, and ameni- Although these measures are not costly and not ties (such as on-board Wi-Fi services, and attrac- unpopular, often they are not implemented or im- tive waiting areas). Implement bus lanes and other plemented incorrectly, either because government bus priority measures. officials perceive community engagement as an un- necessary and time-consuming stage in a project or 6. Transit Oriented Development (TOD). Support because awareness strategies are based on exces- compact and mixed development around transit sively complicated messages and goals, propose far- stations. Improve transit station access with pe- fetched changes or lack adequate audience research destrian and bicycle improvements, and mobility (Pardo, 2018). The Table below presents a summary services such as taxis and ride hailing, bike- and of measures identified in the discussions within the carsharing, and other amenities. working group. 38 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Table 4.4: Engineering and technology policy measures and their characteristics Policy Measure Impacts and benefits Implementation speed Implementation costs Roadway improvements Medium Medium a High Complete streets and streetscaping High Medium Medium Road space reallocation Medium Medium Medium Efficient curb management Quick Medium Low Public transit improvements Medium-large Quick-slow Medium-high Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Large Medium-slow Medium-high Active transport improvements Large Quick-medium Low-medium Active and public transport integration Low Quick-medium Low Navigation and payment technologies Varies Quick-medium Low Accessibility evaluation and mapping Varies Quick-medium Low Note: This table provides general assessments of various economic reforms. Actual impacts and costs can vary depending on conditions and per­ spectives. It should be noted that technologies such as GPS in cell phones and cars can make it easier to implement these strategies, for instance allowing an individual to pay a toll via the phone for using any road in the city. (a) Can be implemented quickly but may take years or decades to achieve its full impacts and benefits. Source: Authors Key categories of communication measures, includ- port management programs. These programs ing transport demand management, identified by the encourage commuters and visitors at a worksite Working Group are the following: or district to use resource-efficient modes. These programs are often financed through parking fa- 1. Transportation management associations cility cost savings or required for development (TMAs). TMAs are public-private agencies that (GOPR 2018). provide parking and transportation management services in a particular area, such as a commercial 5. Freight transport management. These programs district, medical center or campus. They typically encourage more efficient commercial and freight coordinate parking management activities, pro- transport, including improved routing, consoli- mote active and public transport travel, provide dated loads, shifts from truck to rail and marine rideshare matching, guaranteed rides home (spe- modes, cleaner and safer vehicles, and other lo- cial trips for a ridesharing or public transit com- gistical improvements. muters who occasionally need to return home) 6. Tourist and special event transport man- and other support services. agement. These programs encourage tourists 2. Improve intermodal connections. Improve local and people attending special events to use re- access to transport hubs including bus and train source-efficient transport options. stations, ports and airports. 7. Mobility management marketing. These pro- 3. Transit station area planning program. This is a grams use various marketing methods to encour- targeted planning process to improve pedestrian age travelers to use resource-efficient modes. and bicycle access and encourage TOD around a These can include community-wide and targeted transit station. marketing. 4. Commute trip reduction and campus trans- 8. Traffic safety and speed management. These 39 Table 4.5: Communication policy measures and their characteristics Policy Measure Impacts and benefits Implementation speed Implementation costs Transportation management associations Medium Quick Low Intermodal connections to transport hubs Large Medium Moderate Transit station area planning program Large Medium Low Commute and campus transport management Large Quick Low Freight transport management. Large Medium Low Tourist and special event transport management Medium Quick Low Mobility management marketing Medium Quick-medium Low Traffic safety and speed management Medium Quick Low Stakeholder engagement Medium Quick Low Note: This table provides general assessments of various communication and TDM programs. Actual impacts and costs can vary depending on conditions and perspectives. Source: Authors programs encourage traffic safety and more ap- sures), pedestrian and bicycle improvements to facil- propriate traffic speeds. itate access to transit services (engineering measure), 9. Stakeholder engagement. These programs al- improved user information and payment systems and low and encourage stakeholders (affected people) development policy reforms that create transit-orient- to become involved in transport policy, planning ed development around transit stations (regulatory/ and marketing. This can include various types of institutional measures). outreach, surveys, presentations and workshops Similarly, the incentives for consumers to purchase to share information and obtain feedback. cleaner vehicles (economic measure) are more effec- A full list of the policy measures that were assessed in tive if implemented with requirements to scrap older the process is presented in Table 4.5. vehicles and regulations that favor low-emission vehi- cles in traffic, such as only allowing electric vehicles 4.3.  Synergies and trade-offs to drive in some neighborhoods (regulatory / institu- tional). Many of these policy measures are synergist: they are more effective and efficient as implemented as an Integrated programs are also important because some integrated program if implemented individually. For strategies are more effective than others at achieving example, public transit improvements (engineering various goals: Universal Access, Green, Gender, Safe- measures) will cause greater vehicle travel reductions, ty and Efficiency. For example, improving vehicle fuels and therefore greater benefits (reduced congestion, are most effective at reducing emissions, while public road and parking facility costs, crash risk and pollution transport improvements are most effective at increas- emissions), if they are implemented with transporta- ing urban transport system efficiency and achieving tion demand management (TDM) incentives such as social equity objectives such as gender equity. These efficient road and parking pricing (economic mea- synergies are identified succinctly in Table 4.6. 40 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Table 4.6: Urban access mobility measures and synergies with others Toolbox Measures Synergies Efficiency Gender Green Rural Safe Improve transit with a special emphasis on equitable access x x x x Improve active transport conditions x x x Repurpose existing road space x x x Engineering and Technology Improve access to transit stations x x Traffic calming and traffic speed management x x Freight transport management x x Comprehensive and multimodal planning x x x x Implement a Vision Zero policy x x x Improve local connections to transport hubs x x x x x Regulatory and Institutional Regulation allowing emerging mobility services x x Regulations on efficiency and age of vehicles in the market x x x High quality design standards x x Mixed land use regulations x x Formalization/regularization of public transport operations x x Improved mobility institutional setups x x x x Regulatory and Institutional Implement SUMPs and NUMPs x x x x Enforce improved parking regulations x x Encourage more compact, multimodal development. x x Create an explicit policy for freight in urban areas x x Affordable public transport fares x x Increase fuel taxes and eliminate fuel subsidies x x Incentives for cleaner vehicles and efficiency in occupancy x x Economics and Finance Integration of fares across public transport modes x x Charging real costs for personal motorized vehicle use x x Additional transport system funding x x 41 Toolbox Measures Synergies Efficiency Gender Green Rural Safe Stakeholder engagement x X x Participatory approach to policy-making x X Communications Implement awareness and behavior change (ABC) strategies x X Engage private sector in promoting sustainable mobility x Promoting stakeholder engagement for sustainable transport x x x x Note: This table indicates how potential urban access improvement strategies identified in this paper support goals in other sections of this report. Source: Authors 42 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 5.  THE COUNTRY EXPERIENCES T here are many examples of sustainable urban §§ Equity: The needs of all people (including the dif- mobility programs in cities around the world. ferently able), regardless of the modes of trans- The most successful programs tend to involve port they use, should be the primary criteria in the integrated programs that include policy and plan- design of transport systems. ning reforms which lead to an integrated program §§ Sustainability: The transport system should con- of improvements to resource-efficient and inclusive sume as few resources as possible; yet provide travel modes, incentives for travelers to use the most efficient option for each trip, more compact and con- nected urban development, and technological inno- Figure 5.1: Ranchi strategic transportation plan vations that facilitate positive change. Below are a few examples of these programs. 5.1.  Ranchi, India strategic transport planning Strategic transport plans are key to assembling the combination of policies and projects for more sustain- able urban transport. A good example is the strategic transport plan created for Ranchi, India, the capital of Jharkhand. Ranchi and the other cities of Jharkhand are growing rapidly. The use of personal motor vehi- cles is expanding rapidly in Ranchi, leading to traffic congestion and crash risk. Ranchi current lacks a for- malized public transport system; most people rely on walking and paratransit for their day-to-day travel. Un- til recently, the city’s solution to traffic problems con- sisted primarily of road widening and flyovers. To de- velop more efficient and equitable transport a diverse coalition of civil organizations established the Ranchi Mobility Partnership (RMP) which obtained a grant Source: ITDP (2015), Mobility For All A Strategic Transportation to lead a comprehensive, multi-stakeholder strategic Plan For Ranchi, Institute for Transportation and Development planning process which produced the report (Figure Policy (www.itdp.org) for Ranchi Mobility Partnership; at https:// 5.1), Mobility for All: A Strategic Transportation Plan for bit.ly/2MJACzK. Ranchi. The process began by developing the Ranchi Mobility Note: The Ranchi Mobility Partnership obtained a grant to fund the de- Charter which outlines the coalition’s position on mo- velopment of a comprehensive, multi-stakeholder strategic planning bility issues. It established the principles that should process for more equitable, affordable, safe, accessible, and sustain- guide transport planning: able transport in their city. 43 attractive, comfortable, and convenient service. ities. The resources in this context include urban space, §§ Construct complete streets that allocate street clean air, fossil fuels space equitably among all users. §§ Livability: Urban landscapes should provide am- §§ Develop an effective parking management frame- ple public spaces for uses like casual recreation, work. relaxation, social gathering, and managed street- side vending. §§ Develop compact, pedestrian friendly neighbor- hoods around public transport. RMP’s Charter stresses that transport planning should focus on the movement of people, not vehicles, a goal The planning process used comprehensive and clearly expressed in the National Urban Transport Pol- multi-modal analysis, including a comprehensive icy (NUTP), which was a major change from previous travel survey that included all demographic groups, studies that emphasized vehicle traffic movements. As as illustrated in Figure 5.2. It also investigated specif- a result, the plan included these infrastructure initia- ic concerns and problems, such as special risks that tives: women, transit service quality, vehicle parking prob- lems, and air pollution. The plan includes detailed §§ Improve, expand, and manage a high-quality, administrative and funding proposals, a five-year im- bus-based public transport system. plementation plan, and analysis of resulting econom- §§ Develop design guidelines for complete streets ic, social and environmental impacts. This provides that take into account all street users, especially a foundation for rational decision-making that helps pedestrians, cyclists, and various stationary activ- achieve diverse planning objectives and serves di- verse system users. Figure 5.2: Ranchi mode share data Source: ITDP (2015), Mobility For All A Strategic Transportation Plan For Ranchi, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (www. itdp.org) for Ranchi Mobility Partnership; at https://bit.ly/2MJACzK. Note: The strategic planning process included comprehensive travel surveys: A household survey of 7,100 individuals in various demographic groups; On-road, interview-based surveys; Traffic counts at various strategic locations; Surveys of public transport users; Mapping of existing street and transit services; Government data on the vehicle population, traffic accidents, and ambient air quality. 44 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 5.2.  Successful affluent city vehicle travel and TDM programs (TfL 2018). reductions German, Austrian and Swiss Cities (Buehler, et al. By improving resource-efficient travel options (walk- 2016) ing, bicycling and public transit services), implement- ing TDM programs, and encouraging more compact, The report, Reducing Car Dependence in the Heart infill development many attractive, economically suc- of Europe (Buehler, et al. 2016), finds that the largest cessful and affluent cities have successfully reduced cities in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland – Munich, vehicle travel, particularly to major commercial cen- Berlin, Hamburg, Vienna, and Zurich – have significant- ters and campuses. ly reduced automobile travel over the past 25 years, despite high motorization rates, through an integrat- London, Great Britain ed program of policies that favor walking, bicycling and public transport over automobile travel in road- Between 1997 and 2017, London’s total private car way design, pricing and land use policies. Each city mode share declined from 48% to 36% of total trips, is unique. The German cities have done the most to while public transport share increased from 26% to promote cycling, Zurich and Vienna offer more public 37% (Figure 5.3). London’s strategic transport strat- transport service at lower fares. All five cities have im- egy, based on detailed analysis, aspires to increase plemented similar policies to promote walking, foster walking, cycling and public transport to 80% of trips compact development, and discourage car use. Of by 2041 through a combination of ‘Healthy Streets’ the car-restrictive policies, parking management has pedestrian and bicycling improvements, bus and rail been by far the most important. The five case study service improvements, parking restrictions, car-free cities demonstrate that it is possible to reduce car de- areas, road pricing, transit-oriented development, pendence even in affluent societies with high levels Figure 5.3: Changes in Travel in London, 2001-2017 100% Bicycle Walk 80% 60% Public Transport 40% 20% Private Transport 0% 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 Source: Travel in London Report. Available from https://bit.ly/2PmWYFf Note: During the last two decades London significantly reduced car mode share and increased public transport share. 45 Figure 5.4: Vancouver, Canada sustainable mode share, Figure 5.5: Downtown Seattle mode share, 2000-2017 2013-2018 Source: 2017 Commuter mode split survey report. Available Source: 2017-transportation-panel-survey. Available from https:// from https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/seattle-using-pub- bit.ly/2V2lIZC lic-transit-more-ever of car ownership and high expectations for quality of and communities including efficient urban mobili- travel. ty, reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost savings, consumer savings, increased safety, energy Vancouver, Canada conservation and emissions reductions. As a result, many make large investments in rail transit systems. Between 2013 and 2018, city-wide sustainable mode However, many cities cannot afford to build enough share (walking, bicycling and public transit) increased rail transit to serve their needs; they cannot afford to from 48% to 53% in Vancouver, Canada (Figure 5.4). expand rail lines to new areas or to expand the capac- ity of existing routes to serve demands. Seattle, USA BRT is a high capacity bus system that provides many Between 2000 and 2017, downtown single-occupant benefits of rail at a lower cost. BRT operates offers fre- automobile mode shares declined from 50% down to quent service operating on a separate right-of-way, 25%, and public transit mode share increased from with attractive stations that support transit-oriented 29% up to 48%, in Seattle, USA (Figure 5.5). This was development, creating compact, mixed, walkable accomplished through a combination of numerous communities where residents can meet their access public transit service improvements and a regional needs with fewer cars, less driving and more on walk- commute trip reduction policy that encourages use of ing, bicycling and public transit. BRT started in Curi- sustainable commute modes (Small 2017). tiba, Brazil in 1974 and has since spread around the world. Like rail, BRT helps encourage efficient urban 5.3.  Bus rapid transit access. BRT is particularly appropriate in rapidly-de- veloping cities that cannot afford rail but want to en- High quality public transit, with fast and frequent ser- courage compact, multimodal development. vice, and stations that are well integrated into the urban fabric, tend to provide large benefits to users 46 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 5.4.  Colombia and strategic transport Figure 5.6: Metrobús routes policy In 2002 the Colombian government developed a Na- tional Urban Transport Policy (Rodríguez Porcel, Ber- nal González, & Beltrán Real, 2018). This requires cities with more than 600,000 inhabitants to implement in- tegrated massive transport systems (SITM for its name in Spanish), while cities with less than 600,000 and more than 250,000 should implement SETPs – Strate- gic Public Transport Systems – (DNP, 2015). This national urban transport policy was inspired by the success of the TransMilenio BRT system in Bo- gotá, which inspired the development of BRT systems in other cities. Before TransMilenio, Bogotá’s public transport was entirely provided by private companies, which operated mostly informally, without regulat- ed payment methods, frequencies or stops (Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá, 2003). Although fares were set by the city government and routes were assigned to each Source: Mexico city bus rapid transit model. Available from company, there was little regulation for the operation https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/04/29/mexico-city- of buses and bus drivers were paid by passenger car- bus-rapid-transit-model ried, thus, creating a perverse incentive for competing with other drivers within the same route, picking-up Note: In just twelve years Mexico City developed the seven-route and dropping passengers anywhere on the route and Metrobús BRT system which carries nearly two million daily passen- driving carelessly. This resulted in a high level of traf- gers.This and other examples demonstrate that BRT is a relatively fast fic crashes, poor service levels and, in general, higher and affordable way for cities to significantly improve public transit, levels of risk (Vergel-Tovar, Hidalgo, & Sharpin, 2018). making it competitive with automobile travel. This was particularly harmful to lower-income people – and especially women – who depended most on Mexico City Metrobús public transport and mostly live in the economic strata peripheral areas of the city. “How BRT Eased Mexico City's Furthermore, as private companies operated based Grueling Commutes14” on revenue, peripheral and poor areas of the city of- ten lacked public transport options, while ‘strategic’ areas had an oversupply of routes (DNP, 2002). This Mexico City’s Metrobús  BRT system  started in 2006 situation – informal systems resulting in poor access and has expanded to seven lines that cross the city and affecting particularly those with lower incomes and connect with other forms of transit (Figure 5.6). in the periphery – was the same for every city in the It offers frequent and fast service. Ticketing is by pre- country and is still the situation in many of them. paid proximity smartcard. A single trip costs 6 Pesos (about  €  0.27 or  US$  0.38). Service is free for those After the implementation of TransMilenio, new regu- over 70 years old, or disabled, as well as for children lation was developed to allow and promote the im- under 5 accompanied by an adult. On a typical week- plementation of mass transit systems based on buses. day it carries an estimated 1.8 million passengers, Following the national guidance, six more BRT sys- about a third of the city’s subway ridership. tems have been developed in Colombia (DNP, 2015). 47 Additionally, medium-size cities have gained access when reorganizing existing informal transport systems to international credit for developing their own SETPs, have led to operational problems and lower demand such as credits from the IDB (Rodríguez Porcel et al., than expected (DNP, 2015). Still, several cities, such as 2018). Armenia and Pasto, have operating SETPs and have improved public spaces and implemented cycle infra- The Colombian national government has produced structure as part of the general infrastructure invest- a series of decrees and laws aiming at regulating the ment associated with SETPs (Rodríguez Porcel et  al., provision of public transport in urban areas. These 2018). Moreover, there is an increasing number of me- started with Law 105 of 1993, defining basic disposi- dium-size cities which are implementing or structur- tions, such as operation permits, and came together in ing their own SETPs, aiming to provide more efficient, a policy document which defined the National Urban accessible and sustainable urban public transport for Transport Policy (Rodríguez Porcel et  al., 2018). This their inhabitants. document defined the main problems and external- ities associated with the provision of public transport Finally, it is worth mentioning that both the city-scale in Colombian cities, among these were deficient insti- implementation of SITMs and SETPs and the na- tutional capacity, inadequate regulation, oversupply, tion-wide urban public transport policy have been inequitable and unsustainable infrastructure, conges- complemented by a broader sustainable transport tion and road danger (DNP, 2002). policy aiming at promoting walking and cycling. In the case of TransMilenio in Bogotá, the system has a num- Furthermore, the document defined the national poli- ber of cycle-parking facilities in stations and portals cy and strategy for improving public transport in cities, (terminals) free of charge, which allow users to access which was based on strengthening cities institution- the system by bicycle. At national level, several policies ally in terms of planning, managing, regulating and have been issued aimed at integrating the National controlling transport. The strategy defined responsi- Urban Transport policy with non-motorized transport. bilities for both the national level and local level, dif- Notably, the Sectoral Action Plan for Transport and the ferentiating the latter between cities with populations ‘Cycle-infrastructure guide for Colombian cities’ are over 600,000 inhabitants and cities smaller than that. examples of these focus on multimodality. For the large cities, the actions were focused on im- plementing SITMs (DNP, 2002). 5.5.  Active transport planning in Asia A few years later, the Ministry of Transport published There is a pressing need to overhaul the existing pe- a decree focused on orienting transport solutions for destrian guidelines or develop appropriate guidelines cities with less than 600,00 inhabitants, and estab- for Asian cities. The available guidelines are often am- lished the SETPs (Ministerio de Transporte, 2009). The biguous or inequitable and rarely enforced in cities. first goal of these systems was defined as “Improve Traffic experts still evaluate urban transport system coverage, accessibility and connectivity between dif- performance based primarily on vehicle traffic speed, ferent sectors of the city […] ensuring the entirety of rather than overall accessibility for all users. This over- the strategic system is accessible for the population”. looks the important roles that walking and bicycling As of 2017, eight cities had started the process of de- play in an efficient and equitable urban transport sys- sign and implementation of SETPs (DNP, 2017). tem. The ADB report, Walkability and Pedestrian Fa- cilities in Asian Cities: State and Issues, (Leather, et al Nevertheless, while the implementation of SITMs 2011), the Republic of Korea’s new commitments to and, specifically, the expansion of BRT has been active transport (Shin, et al. 2013), programs to revital- rather successful, medium-size cities have had more ize walking and bicycling in Chinese cities, and pedes- difficulties when developing SETPs. Issues such as trian-oriented planning in various cities are examples the competition from motorcycles serving as pub- of new support for active transport throughout Asia lic transport (known as mototaxismo) and difficulties (Efroymson (2012). The ADB report concludes: 48 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY “These actions need the support of Figure 5.7: Delhi Pedestrian Design Guidelines key stakeholders, identified to be the national government, city government, civil society, development agencies, and the private sector. The city government is identified as the key stakeholder group for pedestrian facility development and implementation. The national government’s substantial role is in the development of policies catering to pedestrians or building the capacity of city governments’ efforts to develop their own policies. Although walking is the most common travel mode in most Asian cities, it often receives little consider- ation in conventional transport planning. Sustainable transport planning recognizes the important roles that Source: Delhi Development Authority, 2010 walking plays in an efficient and equitable transport system and so tends to provide far more support for Note: Multimodal street design guidelines help institutionalize new this mode. New planning resources help make this concepts and practices, such as this document for improving the accom- possible. modation of pedestrians in Indian cities. China’s Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Devel- but growing cities (Surat, Rajkot and Indore). The proj- opment has produced the Guideline for Urban Pedes- ect’s objective is to improve the state of walking and trian and Bicycle Transportation System Planning and pedestrian facilities in Indian cities by policy, strategic Design, the first national- level technical policy doc- documents, regulations and project development. ument of its kind in the field15. The Guidelines were Based on the study findings it developed specific rec- developed by China Academy of Urban Planning and ommendations for improving walking conditions and Design (CAUPD) and China Sustainable Transporta- identified various stakeholders who should play a role tion Center (CSTC), supported by the Energy Founda- in developing policies and projects to improve walk- tion China Sustainable Cities Program (CSCP). ability in Indian cities. Civic groups in India are working to improve walking Bicycle Facility Impacts on Cycling Activity and Risk and cycling conditions (CSE 2009), and some govern- (NACTO 2017) ment agencies including the National Transport Policy Development Committee and the Delhi Development A study by NACTO, Equitable Bike Share Means Build- Authority, which published the Pedestrian Design ing Better Places for People to Ride evaluated the re- Guidelines: Don’t Drive…Walk (Figure 5.7), are institu- lationships between bicycle facility development, cy- tionalizing more pedestrian-oriented urban transpor- cling activity and bicycle crash rates. It found that: tation planning. §§ When cities expand protected bike networks, Clean Air Asia (CAA 2012) conducted a walkabili- more people bicycle.  Studies of North American ty study in six Indian cities, including three big cities cities indicate that such facilities increase bike rid- (Chennai, Pune and Bhubaneshwar), and three smaller ership on those streets by 21% to 171%. 49 §§ Cycling becomes safer as cities build better bike Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program Evalua- lane networks. In five of the seven U.S. cities NAC- tion (FHWA 2014) TO surveyed, the absolute number of bicyclists killed or severely injured declined from 2007 to The U.S. Federal Highway Administration produced a 2014 despite increased cycling. Even in cities comprehensive evaluation of its Nonmotorized Trans- where bicycle casualties increased the increases portation Pilot Program that assessed the program’s where smaller than the increase in bicycling ac- costs, travel impacts, and benefits based on travel sur- tivity. vey data. The program invested about $100 per capita in pedestrian and cycling improvements in four typi- §§ Gains in bike safety are especially important for cal communities (Columbia, Missouri; Marin County, low-income riders and riders of color. 49% of the Calif.; Minneapolis area, Minnesota; and Sheboygan people who bike to work earn less than $25,000 County, Wisconsin), which caused walking trips to in- per year, and Black and Hispanic bicyclists have a crease 23% and cycling trips to increase 48%, mostly fatality rate 30% and 23% higher than white bicy- for utilitarian purposes, plus increased recreational clists, respectively. Building extensive protected and exercise activity. Studies also found evidence of bike lane networks benefits those who are most slower driving speeds and safer conditions for pedes- at risk. trians and bicyclists. It estimated health and environ- §§ Approximately 60% of people surveyed are “in- mental benefits, including quantities of fuel savings terested but concerned” about biking and would and emission reductions. bike with higher-comfort facilities. Of those, 80% would be willing to ride on streets with a sepa- 5.5.1.  Dock less bikeshare systems in China rated or protected bike lane. Recent national research suggests that that people of color are China is the birthplace of Dock less Bikeshare Systems more likely than white Americans to say that add- (DBS), which have expanded rapidly across cities all ing protected bike lanes would make them ride over the world. In China, approximately 70 compa- more. nies operate in dozens of cities, providing inexpen- §§ Bike share systems should be matched with pro- sive travel alternatives to the traditional station-based tected bike lane networks to encourage ridership bikeshare systems. The increased popularity of DBS and increase safety.  People on bike share bikes has led to greater accessibility, reduced private vehi- make up a disproportionate number of the rid- cle use and has solved several problems related with ers on protected lanes, and stations adjacent to the traditional shared bike model: mainly problems bike lanes are busier than ones that are not. For finding a docking point near the desired destination bike sharing to be successful, people need to feel (Shaokun, Wei, & Han, 2017; Zhao, 2018). DBS can comfortable riding. also increase coverage for massive transport systems, thereby having an even greater impact on accessibili- §§ The risk of a bicyclist being struck by a motorist ty. Nevertheless, DBS pose several challenges, mostly declines as the number of people biking increas- taking into account that, although the systems oper- es. Appropriately scaled bike share systems can ate with private funding, they require public infrastruc- dramatically increase the total number of people ture to function (ITDP, 2018b). This issue has prompt- on bikes in a city and help build political momen- ed several problems, such as oversupply, invasion of tum for bike lanes. pedestrian spaces and bicycle misuse (Shaokun et al., §§ Mandatory adult helmet laws reduce bike rider- 2017). As a result, government authorities, both at na- ship and don’t increase safety.  Such laws have tional and local level, as well as private operators, such reduced bike ridership in Sydney, and hampered as Mobike (ITDP, 2018a), have highlighted the need bike share ridership efforts in Melbourne and Se- for clear regulation. attle and tend to be disproportionately enforced against disadvantaged people, further discourag- As a response to this demand, the Ministry of Trans- ing them from riding. port, along with nine other national-level departments in China, issued a guideline on DBS regulation. This guideline establishes some requirements to be ful- 50 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY filled at national level, such as requiring a real name systems. Technology implementation is particularly registration or prohibiting children under 12 to access high in Singapore, Japan and the Republic of Korea the different systems (State Council, 2017), and gives (see Figure 5.9). New technologies, including im- local authorities the mandate to address other issues, proved logistics, vehicles and terminals, are also im- such as parking. portant for improving freight transport sustainability. Following this guideline, a number of cities have Integrated technological implementation requires drafted regulations aiming at reducing the negative coordinated planning between public agencies, pri- impacts of DBS, while profiting from the greater ac- vate companies and users. Government leadership cessibility and sustainable transport opportunities ensures that services are efficiently integrated, for ex- they provide (Shaokun et al., 2017). Among them, the ample, between different mobility service providers case that has received greater attention is that of Tian- and modes, and incorporate features such as payment jin and its Internet Rental Bike Management Interim and problem reporting. This integration increases user Measures (ITDP, 2018c). convenience and system efficiency, which supports use of more efficient transport modes such bikeshar- Although there are still some challenges, and many ing, ridesharing and public transit. cities have yet to regulate bicycle parking provision, cycle infrastructure and public space use for DBS, this Telecommunications technologies are also improv- is a good example of how a national-level regulation ing public transit services in cities around the world can spark actions improving urban access and pro- (Klopp 2016). Users need convenient information mote non-motorized transport modes. about transit systems but in many developing coun- try cities where many people rely on informal public 5.5.2.  Improving Urban Freight Logistics transit, these services are not mapped. If people can’t even see their routes as routes and their system as a Transportation demand management programs of- system, it is difficult to plan improvements. However, ten focus on some type of personal travel such as cellphone use is rapidly expanding in Africa which commuting, but a few focus on increasing freight sys- provides a huge opportunity to collect critical data. For tem efficiency. This is particularly important in dense example, in Nairobi, almost every adult has a phone, commercial areas where deliveries are important to increasingly smartphones. Data can be collected in the economy and contribute significantly to traffic two ways. First, mobile phone geo-location data can congestion, parking problems and pollution. Freight be analyzed to see how the city moves. This was used transport management can be challenging because to optimize bus routes in Abidjan. it involves several stakeholders, including policy mak- ers, planners, shippers and their customers. It there- A second source of useful data through social media, fore requires an integrated program coordinated by a as in Nairobi’s popular ma3route transport app, which transportation management association or city logis- mapped the city’s informal minibus (matatu) system. tics coordinator that includes experts who understand Other cities are now replicating this process with their freight transport needs (CIVITAS 2015 – Figure 5.8). unmapped transit systems including Kampala, Mapu- Clean Air Asia’s  Green Freight Website  (www.green- to, Accra, Lusaka, Amman, Cairo, and Managua. This freightandlogistics.org) provides information on poli- process must be dynamic and responsive. Stops can cies, programs, technologies and logistics suitable for change location and are sometimes not marked or developing countries. named. Routes may not have names or numbers and may not be fixed, so you have to take many trips to 5.5.3.  New technologies learn the most common one. Fares are often not set and fluctuate based on factors like rain. In addition, Some Asian countries are world leaders in develop- most common data format for transit (the general tran- ing and operating state-of-art transportation systems, sit feed specification) was developed for formal sys- including sophisticated traffic management and user tems, so it needs to be modified to take into account information, payment technologies, and traffic control some of these factors. This experience in Nairobi shows 51 Figure 5.8: Freight transport management measures Source: CIVITAS 2015. Clean Air Asia’s Green Freight Website: www.green­freightandlogistics.org Note: Freight transport management can include various strategies which help solve various solutions. An integrated program can reduce costs to shippers and communities. 52 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Figure 5.9: Korean technological implementation plans Source: Authors Note: To maximize impacts and benefits, technological innovation often requires strategic planning and coordination. that creating quality data for informal transit systems is of private vehicles. They can also represent an import- challenging but possible, and that there is demand for ant source of revenue for governments, both at local this information from citizens and planners. and at national level, and can act as disincentives for using private modes, therefore reducing congestion Safetipin App for Bogotá16 and improving travel times and accessibility for urban dwellers. However, implementing fuel taxes can be In Bogotá, the risk of gender-based violence such as highly unpopular and politically costly. Consequently, sexual harassment affects the use of public spaces by they can be better implemented when international women and girls. With the safetipin app, the challenge fuel prices are falling, as was the case for Ghana in will be addressed by providing aid in the collection of 2014 (Kojima, 2016). geo-referenced data on seven variables that influence the perception of personal safety for women and girls. Ghana fuel prices are set by the National Petroleum The collected data from the safetipin app, that shows Authority (NPA) (GIZ, 2014). In November 2014, Gha- where women feel unsafe, will be used to design and na increased the gasoline, diesel, kerosene and LPG implement interventions in mass public transport and levy to 17.5% of ex-depot price. This eliminated the public spaces. This project sets its focus primarily on government expenditure on petroleum subsidies (Ko- women and girls in the City of Bogotá. Yet, in the end, jima, 2016). Ghana fuel prices increased from very low all citizens will benefit from a safer environment in to approximately the international average (GIZ 2018) public spaces. 5.7.  Urban parking policy reforms 5.6.  Eliminating fuel subsidies in Ghana Many cities are reforming their parking policies, in- Fuel prices are one of the most important mechanisms cluding reduced and more accurate parking require- to internalize social costs generated by excessive use ments for new developments, more efficient pricing 53 and management of municipal parking, and support ways find a convenient space. Local sales tax revenues for more efficient management of private parking. increased faster than in other shopping districts and This reduces parking facility costs, encourages vehicle nearby malls with cheaper or free customer parking. travel reductions, particularly in dense urban centers, This indicates that charging market rate parking with and supports more compact development. revenues dedicated to local improvements can be an effective way to support urban redevelopment. Pasadena, California17 (Nelson/Nygaard 2006) UK Parking Management Pasadena, a rapidly growing suburb of Los Angeles, California. During the 1950-70s Old Pasadena’s down- The United Kingdom has a long tradition of imple- town had become run down, with many derelict and menting innovative urban transport solutions that abandoned buildings and few customers, in part due come to be regarded as best practices, from the con- to the limited amount of parking available to custom- struction of the London Underground in 1863 – the ers. The city proposed pricing on-street parking as a first subway system in the world – to the paradigmat- way to increase turnover and make parking available ic London Congestion charge. One of such policies, to customers. Many local merchants originally op- which has received far less attention is the cap on posed the idea. As a compromise, city officials agreed parking in UK cities, based on a national directive. to dedicate all revenues to public improvements that make the downtown more attractive. A Parking Meter The Planning Policy Guidance 13 – Transport (DCLG, Zone (PMZ) was established within which parking was 2001) sets the standards for local authorities to fol- priced and revenues were invested. Because down- low when regulating parking for non-residential uses. town parking had previously been unpriced, the city Among such standards, the guideline recommends didn’t lose anything from the general fund by dedi- not to require from developers more spaces than they cating the revenue to improvements in that area. In are wishing to provide and promoting sustainable fact, the city gained additional revenue from overtime transport choices through parking measures. Further- fines. A PMZ advisory board consisting of business more, the document sets the maximum parking stan- and property owners recommended parking policies dards for non-residential uses throughout England, and set spending priorities for the meter revenues. effectively setting a cap on parking requirements by Investments included new street furniture and trees, local authorities. Maximums for residential uses were more police patrols, better street lighting, more street also set by Planning Policy Guidance 3 – Housing at and sidewalk cleaning, pedestrian facility improve- 1.5 off street spaces per dwelling on average (Guo & ments and marketing (including production of area Ren, 2013). maps showing local attractions and parking facilities. These parking standards have driven major cities to To highlight these benefits to motorists, each park- adopt their own maximums. For instance, London ad- ing meter has a small sticker which reads, “Your Me- opted them as part of the London Plan in 2004 and ter Money Will Make A Difference: Signage, Lighting, set parking caps for both resident and non-residen- Benches, Paving”. tial uses (Guo & Ren, 2013). These standards are set This created a “virtuous cycle” in which parking reve- to be stricter with the New London Plan, scheduled nue funded community improvements that attracted to be released in 2019. According to the draft, every more visitors which increased the parking revenue, new development in opportunity areas located in In- allowing further improvements. This resulted in exten- ner London, as well as areas with high levels of public sive new development and businesses. Parking is no transport accessibility, should be completely car-free longer a problem for customers, who can almost al- (Mayor of London, 2017). 54 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY ENDNOTES 14 https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/04/29/mexico-city-bus-rapid-transit-model 15 https://bit.ly/2GGws5P 16 www.transformative-mobility.org/campaigns/safetipin-app-for-bogot%C3%A1 17 https://bit.ly/2J2VgER 55 6.  ROADMAP OF ACTION T his section provides additional recommenda- provements, incentives, development policy reforms tions for selecting the most appropriate set of and TDM programs. urban access improvement policies in a partic- ular type of city or urban district. As previously de- 6.1.  Evaluating strategies scribed, many of these strategies are synergistic: they are most effective if implemented as an integrated Table 6.1 below identifies recommendations when se- program that includes a combination of mobility im- lecting these sustainable urban access strategies. Table 6.1: Selection considerations Policy Measures Recommendations When Selecting Policy Measures Regulatory and Institution Toolbox Reform for more integrated planning. All jurisdictions should look for ways to better integrate planning. Establish NUMPs and SUMPs All countries should establish NMPS and all cities or regional governments should establish SUMPs to provide strategic policy and planning guidance. Sustainable transport goals and targets All jurisdictions should establish sustainable transport goals and targets. Establish a Vision Zero policy, with plans for Jurisdictions that want to significantly reduce traffic risks should establish Vision Zero implementing necessary safety strategies. policies. Local access to transport hubs Jurisdictions that have bus and train stations, ports or airports. Establish transport-related data collection, All jurisdictions should incorporate transport-related data collection into census, evaluation and mapping programs mapping, travel survey and planning programs. Integrate transportation and land use planning All municipal governments should strive to integrate transport and land use planning, particularly in rapidly-growing areas. Reduce parking requirements and support Most cities should reduce parking requirements and support parking management to efficient parking management. increase efficiency, equity and more compact development. Reform investment practices to reflect least-cost Governments that want to maximize cost efficiency and support multimodal planning planning principles. should apply least-cost planning principles. Change transport planning goals to minimizing Governments that want to encourage sustainable transport should shift planning goals vehicle travel. to minimizing vehicle travel. Formalize informal mobility services such as If a major portion of transport is provided by informal mobility services, governments shared taxis and private buses. should formalize and improve such services. Establish new funding sources for sustainable Jurisdictions that currently lack funding for sustainable modes and TDM programs modes and TDM programs. should develop funding sources for them. 56 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Encourage location-efficient development. Jurisdictions that experience sprawl and associated costs. Encourage or require sustainable transport Unless sustainable transport planning capacity is well established, jurisdictions should capacity encourage or require its development. Reform regulations to allow and support Most jurisdictions should evaluate the ability of current regulations to support innovative mobility services. innovative mobility services and reform them as needed. Develop regulations or incentives that encourage Jurisdictions that want to reduce energy consumption and pollution emissions, or cleaner vehicles. reduce problems associated with older vehicles. Economics and Finance Toolbox Eliminating fuel subsidies. Any country that subsidizes fuels should eliminate them Cost-based fuel taxes. Countries that charge less than international market prices for fuel, or fail to recover roadway costs, should predictably and gradually increase fuel taxes. Efficient road pricing. Any city that experiences significant traffic congestion should consider efficient road pricing. Efficient parking pricing. All cities should charge efficient prices for use of municipal parking facilities and encourage or require private property owners to do so, including unbundling and cashing out parking. Pay-as-you-drive pricing. National and provincial/state governments that are responsible for insurance pricing regulations, or that collect vehicle registration fees or taxes, should consider converting them to distance-based pricing. Affordable public transport fares. Jurisdictions where transit fares are high relative to incomes should consider policies to reduce all transit fares or provide targeted discounts. Engineering and Technology Toolbox Roadway improvements Many growing, developing country cities should pave streets and expand some roadways into property-designed arterials suitable for bus routes, freight trucks and emergency vehicles. Complete streets and streetscaping All cities should establish complete streets policies and develop urban roadway design resources, Road space reallocation All cities should consider road space reallocation based on a sustainable transport hierarchy. This is particularly important in congested cities that currently lack adequate sidewalks, bike- and bus lanes. Efficient curb management All cities should begin the process of developing efficient curb management as part of complete streets and parking management programs. Public transit improvements This is most important in developing country cities with poor public transit services, but virtually all cities can improve transit services in some ways. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) TOD planning should be incorporated into any major public transit development program, in both developed and developing country cities. Active transport improvements This is most important in developing country cities with poor walking and bicycling conditions, but virtually all cities can improve active transport. Active and public transport integration This is most important in cities that are developing high quality public transit networks and TOD but can be useful in most cities. 57 Urban navigation and payment technologies All cities should develop integrated navigation and service payment systems. Accessibility evaluation and mapping All cities should implement accessibility evaluation and mapping programs. Communication Toolbox Transportation management associations (TMAs) TMAs should be developed in large and congested districts such as downtowns, medical districts or campuses. Transit station area planning program All transit stations should have area plans to guide development and transport that maximizes accessibility. Commute trip reduction (CTR) and campus All larger cities should encourage or mandate CTR and campus transport management, transport management programs particularly in congested areas and for large employers. Freight transport management. All jurisdictions should have freight transport management programs. Tourist and special event transport management All large cities or resorts should have tourist and special event transport management programs. Mobility management marketing Large cities and automobile-dependent cities should implement mobility management marketing as part of regional TDM and transit encouragement. Traffic safety and speed management All jurisdictions should have traffic safety and speed management programs. Stakeholder engagement All planning activities should have stakeholder engagement components. Note: This table describes the types of jurisdictions or cities where each urban access strategy is most appropriate. Most strategize are appropriate in must city types, although they can vary widely in their objectives and design. Source: Authors 58 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY 7.  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS W e are in the middle of the great urbaniza- expanding their rapid transit services, and some are tion: more than half of humanity now lives in improving walking and bicycling conditions, these urban areas and this is projected to increase are not always coordinated, making it difficult to ac- to grow to 68% by 2050. As a result, urban conditions cess many destinations without a car. A few cities are will significantly affect our quality of life, economic implementing parking pricing reforms, but fewer are and social opportunities, and the global environment. applying efficient road pricing to reduce traffic con- Policy makers, practitioners (planners, engineers and gestion. Some cities are implementing Smart Growth policy analysts), and the general public need practical development policies, but even they often impose guidance for improving urban transport. excessive parking requirements or restrict affordable infill. This paper describes some examples, and there A new transport planning paradigm helps provides is much more literature describing best practices for this guidance. The new paradigm is accessibili- improving urban access which is readily available in ty-based; it recognizes that the ultimate goal of most websites and knowledge centers from Sum4All mem- transport activity is to access services and activities, bers such as GIZ, World Bank, Walk21, UITP, ITDP and and many factors affect urban accessibility including other professional organizations and development mobility, connectivity, proximity, affordability and user agencies. information. The new paradigm expands the range of impacts and options considered in transport plan- New technologies and data sets support sustainable ning, resulting in better solutions. urban transport. They help planners understand travel demands and transport problems and allow users to Improving urban access can provide many benefits, easily navigate the transport system and pay for ser- including some that tend to be undervalued in con- vices. These innovations are already improving trans- ventional planning. It increases system efficiency, re- port convenience and efficiency in many cities, and duces traffic problems, and helps ensure that all resi- they can become even better if governments provide dents, including economically, physically and socially guidance and standards for information compatibility disadvantaged groups, can access economic and so- and integration. Sustainable urban transport planning cial opportunities. requires appropriate performance indicators and data sets, in order to better evaluate problems, track prog- This report identified basic principles for optimizing ress toward goals, and for research purposes. Better urban access, urban design factors that affect accessi- data availability and monitoring is crucial in order to bility, suitable targets and implementation strategies. understand the impacts of transport policy changes It also identifies various accessibility improvement as described in this paper’s annex. For research pur- strategies, described factors to consider when select- poses, transport data should be consistent with other ing the best strategies to implement in a particular data sets, such as land use, economic and health, so situation. it is possible to determine their interactions. For ex- Most cities are implementing some sustainable trans- ample, to evaluate transport and land use factors af- port reforms, but few are implementing all of the re- fect public health we need data on travel activity (how forms that are justified. For example, many cities are much people walk, bicycle, drive and use public tran- 59 sit) should be collected using the same geographic Sustainable urban access planning is an emerging units as land use data (population and employment and dynamic discipline and provides a foundation for density, road and parking supply, and the quality of the Global Roadmap for Action toward Sustainable walking and bicycling facilities), and health outcomes Mobility. (per capita traffic casualty rates, physical fitness, birth defects, illness and longevity). 60 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY REFERENCES ADB (2009), Changing Course: A New Paradigm for Sustainable Urban Transport, Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org); at www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Paradigm-Sustainable-Urban-Transport/new-para- digm-transport.pdf. Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá. (2003). Empresas Públicas de Transporte de Bogotá Siglo XX. David Alpert (2018) Housing and Transportation are the Same, These Graphs Show, Greater Greater Washington (https://ggwash.org); at https://ggwash.org/view/69622 Shlomo Angel (2011), Making Room for a Planet of Cities, Lincoln Institute (www.lincolninst.edu); at www.lincoln- inst.edu/pubs/1880_Making-Room-for-a-Planet-of-Cities-urban-expansion. Ardila-Gomez, A., & Ortegon-Sanchez, A. (2016). Sustainable Urban Transport Financing from the Sidewalk to the Subway. Baum, J., & Howe, E. (2018). SUTP Technical Document #17 - Using GPS Technology for Demand Data Collection. Eschborn. Recuperado a partir de https://sutp.org/en/resources/publications-by-topic/technical-docu- ments.html. Daniel Bongardt, Manfred Breithaupt and Felix Creutzig (2011), Beyond the Fossil City: Towards low Carbon Transport and Green Growth, Sustainable Transport Technical Document #6, Sustainable Urban Transport Program (www.sutp.org); at https://bit.ly/2wttbCQ. Bruce Belmore (2019), “Rethinking Parking Minimums,” ITE Journal, Vol. 89, No. 2, p. 4 (www.ite.org); at https:// bit.ly/2DZULvE. Marlon G. Boarnet (2013), “The Declining Role of the Automobile and the Re-Emergence of Place in Urban Trans- portation: The Past Will be Prologue,” Regional Science Policy & Practice, Special Issue: The New Urban World – Opportunity Meets Challenge, Vol. 5/2, June, pp. 237–253 (DOI: 10.1111/rsp3.12007). Ralph Buehler, et al. (2016), “Reducing Car Dependence in the Heart of Europe: Lessons from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland,” Transport Reviews (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1177799). Caltrans (2016), The California Sustainable Freight Action Plan, California Department of Transportation (http:// dot.ca.gov); at http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ogm/cs_freight_action_plan/theplan.html. CARB (2010-2017), Research on Impacts of Transportation and Land Use-Related Policies, California Air Resourc- es Board (http://arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/policies.htm). CIVITAS (2015), Making Urban Freight Logistics More Sustainable, CIVITAS (www.civitas.eu); at www.eltis.org/ sites/eltis/files/trainingmaterials/civ_pol-an5_urban_web-1.pdf. Graham Currie and Chris De Gruyter (2018), “Exploring Links Between the Sustainability Performance of Urban Public Transport and Land Use in International Cities,” Journal of Transport and Land Use, Vol. 11/1, pp. 325-342 (http://dx.doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.957); at www.jtlu.org/index.php/jtlu/article/view/957. Lucas Davis (2013), The Economic Cost of Global Fuel Subsidies, UC Center for Energy and Environmental Eco- nomics (www.uce3.berkeley.edu); at www.uce3.berkeley.edu/WP_069.pdf. 61 DCLG. (2001). Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport. London. Floridea Di Ciommo (2018), How the Inaccessibility Index Can Improve Transport Planning and Investment, Dis- cussion Paper, International Transport Forum (www.itf-oecd.org); at https://bit.ly/2QHhwIZ. DfT (2006-2018), Transport Analysis Guidance, UK Department for Transport (www.dft.gov.uk); at www.gov.uk/ guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag. DNP. (2002). Documento CONPES 3167: Política para mejorar el servicio de transporte público urbano de pas- ajeros. DNP. (2015). ¿Cuál es el estado actual de la política del sector del transporte urbano? Bogotá, Colombia. DNP. (2017). Documento CONPES 3869. Seguimiento de la Política Nacional de Transporte Urbano y Masivo: lineamientos para la redistribución de componentes cofinanciables de los SETP. Richard Dowling, et al. (2008), Multimodal Level Of Service Analysis For Urban Streets, NCHRP Report 616, Trans- portation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9470; User Guide at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_w128.pdf. Debra Efroymson (2012), Moving Dangerously, Moving Pleasurably: Improving Walkability in Dhaka; Using a BRT Walkability Strategy to Make Dhaka’s Transportation Infrastructure Pedestrian-Friendly, Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org); at www.adb.org/sites/default/files/projdocs/2012/39335-012-reg-tacr-01.pdf. ESCAP (2017), Monograph Series on Sustainable and Inclusive Transport: Assessment of Urban Transport Systems, Report 2795, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (www.unescap.org); at https://bit. ly/2DKlKuQ. European Commission. (2015). Measuring access to public transport in European cities. EPOMM (European Program for Mobility Management) (www.epomm.eu) is a network of governments engaged in Mobility Management. Reid Ewing and Shima Hamidi (2014), Measuring Urban Sprawl and Validating Sprawl Measures, Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah for the National Cancer Institute, the Brookings Institution and Smart Growth America (www.smartgrowthamerica.org); at https://bit.ly/2I6StdG. Reid Ewing, et al. (2016), “Does Urban Sprawl Hold Down Upward Mobility?” Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 148, April, pp. 80-88; www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016920461500242X. FHWA (2012), Integrating Demand Management into the Transportation Planning Process: A Desk Reference, Office of Operations, Federal Highway Administration (http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov); at http://ops.fhwa.dot. gov/publications/fhwahop12035/fhwahop12035.pdf. FHWA (2014), Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program: Continued Progress in Developing Walking and Bicy- cling Networks – May 2014 Report, John A Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, USDOT (www. fhwa.dot.gov); at https://bit.ly/1KakRWU. Ríos Flores, et al. (2014), “Practical Guidebook: Parking and Travel Demand Management Policies in Lat- in America,” Inter-American Development Bank, (www.iadb.org); at http://publications.iadb.org/han- dle/11319/3577?locale-attribute=en. 62 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Richard Florida, Charlotta Mellander and Karen King (2015), Global Creativity Index, Martin Prosperity Institute (http://martinprosperity.org); at https://bit.ly/2WpEoPN. Ann Forsyth, et al. (2016), Revitalizing Places: Improving Housing and Neighborhoods from Block to Metropolis, Harvard University Graduate School of Design (http://research.gsd.harvard.edu); at http://bit.ly/2fszLii. GIZ (2011), Changing Course in Urban Transport- An Illustrated Guide, Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www. sutp.org) Asia and GIZ; at www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2825. GIZ (2012), Sustainable Parking Management, Transfer Project (http://transferproject.org); at https://bit.ly/2Ad- QdzV. GIZ. (2016). Sustainable Urban Transport: Avoid-Shift-Improve (A-S-I). Eschborn, Germany; at https://bit.ly/2V- k1I48. GTZ (2017), Sustainable Transportation: A Sourcebook for Policy-Makers in Developing Countries, (www.sutp. org), by the Sustainable Urban Transport Project – Asia (www.sutp-asia.org) and Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (www.gtz.de). GIZ (2018), International Fuel Prices, German Agency for Technical Cooperation (www.giz.de); at www.sutp.org/ en/resources/publications-by-topic/international-fuel-prices.html. GOPR (2018), Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, Governor’s Office for Planning and Research, State of California (http://opr.ca.gov); at https://bit.ly/2VmInPR. Gudmundsson, H., & Regmi, M. B. (2017). Developing the Sustainable Urban Transport Index. Transport and Communications Bulletin for Asia and the Pacific, (87), 35–52. Guo, Z., & Ren, S. (2013). From Minimum to Maximum: Impact of the London Parking Reform on Residential Parking Supply from 2004 to 2010? Urban Studies, 50(6), 1183–1200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012460735 ICAO, & UN-Habitat. (2018). Promoting Synergy Between Cities and Airports for Sustainable Development. International Transport Forum. (2016). Shared Mobility: Innovation for Liveable Cities. Recuperado a partir de www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/shared-mobility-liveable-cities.pdf ITDP (2011), Better Street, Better Cities: A Guide to Street Design in Urban India, Institute for Transport and De- velopment Policy and Environmental Planning Collective (www.itdp.org/betterstreets). ITDP (2015), Mobility For All A Strategic Transportation Plan For Ranchi, Institute for Transportation and Develop- ment Policy (www.itdp.org) for Ranchi Mobility Partnership; at https://bit.ly/2MJACzK. ITDP (2016), People Near Transit: Improving Accessibility and Rapid Transit Coverage in Large Cities, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (www.itdp.org); at www.itdp.org/publication/people-near-transit. ITDP. (2017). TOD Standard (3a ed.). New York. Recuperado a partir de www.itdp.org/wp-content/up- loads/2014/03/TOD-2017-v3.pdf ITDP. (2018a). Dockless Bikeshare: What We Know So Far. ITDP. (2018b). Optimizing Dockless Bikeshare for Cities. ITDP. (2018c). Regulating Dockless Bikeshare: Lessons from Tianjin, China. 63 ITDP, & UC Davis. (2017). Three Revolutions in Urban Transportation - Institute for Transportation and Develop- ment Policy. Recuperado el 27 de septiembre de 2018, a partir de www.itdp.org/2017/05/03/3rs-in-urban- transport/ ITE (2019), Curbside Management Practitioners Guide, Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org); at https://bit.ly/2Lp2g4S. ITF (2017), Linking People and Places: New Ways of Understanding Spatial Access in Cities, International Trans- port Forum (www.itf-oecd.org); at https://bit.ly/2tYwxtP. ITF (2018), The Social Impacts of Road Pricing Summary and Conclusions, International Transport Forum (www. itf-oecd.org); at www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/social-impacts-road-pricing.pdf. Jacqueline M Klopp (2016), How Cell Phones Can Improve Transportation in Africa, ITDP (www.itdp.org); at www. itdp.org/2016/09/15/cell-phones-change-transportation. Robin King, et al. (2017), Confronting the Urban Housing Crisis in the Global South: Adequate, Secure, and Af- fordable Housing, World Resources Institute (www.wri.org); at http://bit.ly/2uePjQV. Kojima, M. (2016). Fossil Fuel Subsidy and Pricing Policies: Recent Developing Country Experience (No. 7531). Policy Research Working Paper. Lincoln R. Larson, Viniece Jennings and Scott A. Cloutier (2016), “Public Parks and Wellbeing in Urban Areas of the United States,” PLOS ONE, Vol. 11, No. 4 (DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153211); at http://journals.plos. org/plosone/article/asset?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0153211.PDF. James Leather, Herbert Fabian, Sudhir Gota and Alvin Mejia (2011), Walkability and Pedestrian Facilities in Asian Cities: State and Issues, Asian Development Bank (www.adb.org); at www.adb.org/publications/walkabili- ty-and-pedestrian-facilities-asian-cities-state-and-issues. Henri Lefebvre (1968), Le Droit à la Ville (“The Right to the City”), Ed. du Seuil. Jonathan Levine, et al. (2012), “Does Accessibility Require Density or Speed?” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 78, No. 2, pp. 157-172, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2012.677119; at http://ti- nyurl.com/cpdmmf6. David Levinson, Wes Marshall and Kay Axhausen (2017), Elements of Access, Transportist (https://transportist. org); at https://transportist.org/books/elements-of-access. Todd Litman (2009), Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis, VTPI (www.vtpi.org/tca). Todd Litman (2013), “The New Transportation Planning Paradigm,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vo. 83, No. 6, pp. 20-28 (https://trid.trb.org/view/1256859). Todd Litman (2014), Analysis of Public Policies That Unintentionally Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl, Vic- toria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org), LSE Cities (www.lsecities.net), for the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate (www.newclimateeconomy.net); at http://bit.ly/1EvGtIN. Todd Litman (2017), “Determining Optimal Urban Expansion, Population and Vehicle Density, and Housing Types for Rapidly Growing Cities,” Transportation Research Procedia, for the 2015 World Conference on Transport Research; at www.vtpi.org/WCTR_OC.pdf. 64 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Todd Litman (2018), Toward More Comprehensive and Multimodal Transport Planning, VTPI (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/comp_evaluation.pdf. Mayor of London. (2017). The London Plan. Draft for public consultation. London, United Kingdom: Greater London Authority. Gerhard Metschies (2005), International Fuel Prices, German Agency for Technical Cooperation (www.interna- tionalfuelprices.com). Ministerio de Transporte. (2009). Decreto 3422 de 2009. NACTO (2016), Global Urban Street Design Guide, National Association of City Transportation Officials (www.nac- to.org); at http://nacto.org/2016/10/13/nacto-global-designing-cities-initiative-release-global-street-de- sign-guide. NACTO (2017), Equitable Bike Share Means Building Better Places for People to Ride, National Association of City Transportation Officials (www.nacto.org); at https://bit.ly/2vODz57. Naeem Nawaz, M. Shahzada and Shahzad Alvi (2018), “Energy Security for Socio-Economic and Environmental Sustainability in Pakistan,” Heliyon, Vol. 4,10 (doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00854). Nelson\Nygaard (2006), Traffic Reduction Strategies Study, Report and various appendices, City of Pasadena (www.cityofpasadena.net); at https://bit.ly/2sGK1OK and https://bit.ly/2GSyoY2. NZTA (2010-2017), Economic Evaluation Manual, Volumes 1 and 2, New Zealand Transport Agency (www.nzta. govt.nz); at https://bit.ly/2KC3k17 and https://bit.ly/2P0wpEd. Peter Newman and Jeffrey Kenworthy (2011), ‘Peak Car Use’: Understanding the Demise of Automobil Depen- dence,” Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice, Vol. 17.2, pp. 31-42; at www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/ wtpp17.2.pdf. Pardo, C. (2018). Sustainable Mobility: Getting People on Board (Module 1e GIZ Sourcebook on Sustainable Transport for Policy Makers in Cities). Eschborn: GIZ. Recuperado a partir de www.sutp.org Polis Traffic Efficiency & Mobility Working Group, & Hoadley, S. (2017). Mobility as a Service: Implications for Urban and Regional Transport. Brussels, Belgium. Recuperado a partir de www.polisnetwork.eu/uploads/ Modules/PublicDocuments/polis-maas-discussion-paper-2017---final_.pdf Quiñones, L. M. (2018). Sexual harassment in public transport in Bogotá. The London School of Economics and Political Science. Ricardo-AEA (2014), Update of the Handbook on External Costs of Transport Final Report, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu); at https://bit.ly/2c4e0b1. Rodríguez Porcel, M., Bernal González, J., & Beltrán Real, Ó. M. (2018). Programa de Sistemas Estratégicos de Transporte Público (SETP). Caso de estudio: Colombia. Michael Plante (2011), The Long-Run Macroeconomic Impacts of Fuel Subsidies in an Oil-Importing Develop- ing Country, U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, Dallas, MPRA Paper No. 33823; at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen. de/33823. 65 Philipp Rode and Graham Floater (2014), Accessibility in Cities: Transport and Urban Form, NCE Cities – Paper #3, by the London School of Economics’ LSE Cities program (www.lsecities.net), for the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate’s New Climate Economy Cities Program (www.newclimateeconomy.net); at https://bit.ly/1vaXLJi. Philipp Rode, et al. (2017), Integrating National Policies to Deliver Compact, Connected Cities: An Overview of Transport and Housing, New Climate Economy (https://newclimateeconomy.report); at https://bit.ly/2von- QeQ. Philipp Rode, Catarina Heeckt, Nuno da Cruz (2019), National Transport Policy and Cities: Key Policy Interven- tions to Drive Compact and Connected Urban Growth, Coalition for Urban Transitions (www.coalitionforur- bantransitions.org); at https://lsecities.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/CUT2019_transport_final.pdf. Sclar, E. D., Lönnroth, M., & Wolmar, C. (2016). Improving Urban Access: New Approaches to Funding Trans- port Investment. Taylor & Francis. Recuperado a partir de https://books.google.com.co/books?id=wh- veCwAAQBAJ Eric Scharnhorst (2018), Quantified Parking: Comprehensive Parking Inventories for Five U.S. Cities, Research Institute for Housing America Special Report, Mortgage Bankers Association (www.mba.org); at https:// bit.ly/2LfNk4o. Conor Semler, et al. (2016), Guidebook for Developing Pedestrian and Bicycle Performance Measures, Federal Highway Administration (www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian); at http://bit.ly/2bMCkNL. Jay S. Shah and Bhargav Adhvaryu (2016), “Public Transport Accessibility Levels for Ahmedabad, India,” Journal of Public Transportation, 19 (3): 19-35 (DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.3.2); at http://schol- arcommons.usf.edu/jpt/vol19/iss3/2. Shaokun, L., Wei, L., & Han, D. (2017). The Development and Policy Recommendations for Dockless Bike Share (DBS) in China. Hee Cheol Shin, et al. (2013), Bicycle Transport Policy in Korea, Korea’s Best Practices in the Transport Sector Issue 6, The Korea Transport Institute (www.koti.re.kr); at www.biciudad.org/uploads/1/1/9/3/11936477/ koti____ksp_06.pdf. Donald Shoup (2005), The High Cost of Free Parking, Planners Press (www.planning.org). State Council. (2017). New guidelines to keep China’s bike sharing on track. Andrew Small (2017), How Seattle Bucked a National and Got More People to Ride the Bus, City Lab (www.citylab. com); at https://bit.ly/2zdyhWT. STI (2008), Sustainable Transportation Indicators: A Recommended Program to Define a Standard Set of Indica- tors for Sustainable Transportation Planning, Sustainable Transportation Indicators Subcommittee (ADD40 [1]), TRB (www.trb.org); at www.vtpi.org/sustain/sti.pdf. TfL (2018), Mayor’s Transport Strategy, Transport for London (https://tfl.gov.uk); at: www.london.gov.uk/what-we- do/transport/our-vision-transport/mayors-transport-strategy-2018. The Economist (2017), “Parkageddon: How Not to Create Traffic Jams, Pollution and Urban Sprawl. Don’t Let People Park For Free” The Economist, (www.economist.com); at https://econ.st/2pdbYaD. UITP. (2017). Statistics Brief: Urban Public Transport in the 21st Century. 66 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY UN Habitat. (2013). Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Mobility. United Nations; at https://issuu.com/unric/docs/planning_and_design_for_sustainable. UN. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. UN. (2018). 2018 Revision of World Urbanization Prospects. United Nations. At https://bit.ly/2KwBaDE. United Nations. (2016). New Urban Agenda, Habitat III. Recuperado a partir de http://habitat3.org/wp-content/ uploads/NUA-English-With-Index-1.pdf Christo Venter (2016), Developing a Common Narrative on Urban Accessibility: A Transportation Perspective, Brookings Institution (www.brookings.edu); at www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/trans- portation-digital.pdf. Vergel-Tovar, C. E., Hidalgo, D., & Sharpin, A. B. (2018). Paving the pathways to change: The politics of road safety in Bogotá. Viegas, J., Martinez, L., Crist, P., & Masterson, S. (2016). Shared Mobility. Inovation for Liveable Cities. Interna- tional Transport Forum’s Corporate Partnership Board, 1–56. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jl- wvz8bd4mx-en VTPI (2019), Online TDM Encyclopedia, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org/tdm). World Bank (2018), TOD Implementation Resources and Tools, Global Platform for Sustainable Cities, World Bank (https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/s31121). World Bank and IRU (2017), Road Freight Transport Services Reform: Guiding Principles for Practitioners and Pol- icy Makers, World Bank and IRU (www.iru.org); at www.iru.org/sites/default/files/2017-01/iru-world-bank- road-freight-transport-services-reform-en.pdf. Zhao, Y. (2018). China’s Dockless Biking Boom and the Lessons for Latin America - Ideas matter. 67 ANNEX A. URBAN ACCESS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION S trategic planning requires appropriate perfor- Some types of analysis require additional indicators mance indicators that can be used to identify that reflect specific needs or conditions. For example, problems, evaluate potential solutions, track jurisdictions in environmentally-sensitive areas may progress and perform research. This requires devel- want more detailed indicators of transportation pol- oping appropriate indicators that reflect sustainability lution and habitat displacement. Health organizations goals (ESCAP 2019; Gudmundsson & Regmi, 2017; may want more detailed information on fitness, health STI 2008). and safety impacts. Social planners may want more detailed information on disadvantaged populations’ There are three major indicator types: inputs (such transport costs, independent mobility, and econom- as per capita public transit service or active transport ic opportunity, and how these vary by neighborhood. funding), outputs (such as changes in vehicle owner- Transit agencies and Transit-Oriented Development ship and use, and mode share) and outcomes (such as planners should apply the BRT Standard and the TOD per capita energy consumption, pollution emissions Standard (ITDP, 2013, 2017). Active transport planners and accident deaths). It is usually best to include some need data for walking and bicycling Level of Service of each: inputs indicate how well policies and organi- indicators (Dowling, et al. 2008). Emerging issues may zations support sustainable transportation strategies, require new indicators such as the ICLEI EcoMobility output indicate whether programs are effective, and Alliance’s EcoMobility SHIFT planning system. outcomes indicate whether strategies are ultimately successful at achieving goals. New data collection methods can help transportation performance evaluation (Baum & Howe, 2018). Digital Table A1 is an example of a comprehensive set of sus- remote sensing, geographic information systems, au- tainable transport indicators based on various eco- tomated traffic counting, and new travel survey meth- nomic, social and environmental goals, objectives that ods can collect more diverse and consistent data. For help achieve those goals, and performance indicators example, a government can establish transportation that can measure progress toward or away from those service information and payment system standards, objectives. This defines the data that should be col- so users need only one app to use public transit, taxi, lected for problem identification, evaluation and re- ride hailing, car- and bike-sharing, as well as paying search purposes. A strategic data collection program parking and road tolls. Similarly, governments can re- can improve data quality and availability and ensure quire fuel vendors to provide detailed fuel sales data, that all jurisdictions and organizations use consistent and mobile telecommunications service providers to definitions and collection methods to allow perfor- provide mobile telephone movement data (which can mance tracking, comparisons and research analysis be used to measure travel activity) to transportation between different times and locations (STI 2008). agencies for free or at cost. Inputs Outputs Outcomes (infrastructure, service and (Changes in per capita vehicle (Changes in travel time, fuel funding levels, such as per capita ownership and use, and consumption, pollution transit service) travel activity) emissions, accidents, etc.) 68 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Table B-1: Sustainable Transport Performance Indicators Sustainability Goals Objectives Performance Indicators I. Economic Economic productivity Transport system efficiency. • Per capita GDP Transport system integration. • Portion of budgets devoted to transport. Maximize accessibility. • Per capita congestion delay. Efficient pricing and incentives. • Efficient pricing (road, parking, insurance, fuel, etc.). • Efficient prioritization of facilities Economic development Economic and business development • Access to education and employment opportunities. • Support for local industries. Energy efficiency Minimize energy costs, particularly • Per capita transport energy consumption petroleum imports. • Per capita use of imported fuels. Affordability All residents can afford access to basic • Availability and quality of affordable modes (walking, (essential) services and activities. cycling, ridesharing and public transport). • Portion of low-income households that spend more than 20% of budgets on transport. Efficient transport operations Efficient operations and asset management • Performance audit results. maximizes cost efficiency. • Service delivery unit costs compared with peers. • Service quality. II. Social Equity / fairness Transport system accommodates all users, • Transport system diversity. including those with disabilities, low • Portion of destinations accessible by people with incomes, and other constraints. disabilities and low incomes. Safety, security and health Minimize risk of crashes and assaults and • Per capita traffic casualty (injury and death) rates. support physical fitness. • Traveler assault (crime) rates. • Human exposure to harmful pollutants. • Portion of travel by walking and cycling. Community development Helps create inclusive and attractive • Land use mix. communities. • Walkability and bikability • Quality of road and street environments. Cultural heritage preservation Respect and protect cultural heritage. • Preservation of cultural resources and traditions. Support cultural activities. • Responsiveness to traditional communities. III. Environmental Climate stability Reduce global warming emissions • Per capita emissions of greenhouse gases (CO2, CFCs, CH4, etc.). Mitigate climate change impacts 69 Prevent air pollution Reduce air pollution emissions • Per capita emissions (PM, VOCs, NOx, CO, etc.). Reduce harmful pollutant exposure • Air quality standards and management plans. Minimize noise Minimize traffic noise exposure • Traffic noise levels Protect water quality & Minimize water pollution. • Per capita fuel consumption. hydrologic functions Minimize impervious surface area. • Management of used oil, leaks and stormwater. • Per capita impervious surface area. Open space and biodiversity Minimize transport facility land use. • Per capita land devoted to transport facilities. protection Encourage compact development. • Support for smart growth development. Preserve high quality habitat. • Policies to protect high value farmlands and habitat. IV. Good Governance and Planning Integrated, comprehensive and Clearly defined planning process. • Clearly defined goals, objectives and indicators. inclusive planning Integrated and comprehensive analysis. • Availability of planning information and documents. Strong citizen engagement. • Portion of population engaged in planning decisions. Lease-cost planning. • Range of objectives, impacts and options considered. • Efficient and equitable funding allocation Note: This table summarizes sustainability goals, objectives and performance indicators. Source: STI (2008), Sustainable Transportation Indicators: A Recommended Program to Define a Standard Set of Indicators for Sustainable Transportation Planning, Sustainable Transportation Indicators Subcommittee (ADD40 [1]), TRB (www.trb.org); at www.vtpi.org/sustain/sti.pdf. High quality data has the following attributes: years, depending on type. §§ Comprehensiveness. An adequate range of statis- §§ Availability. Statistics should be readily available tics should be collected to allow various types of to users. As much as possible, data sets should analysis. This should be disaggregated in various be available free on the Internet in spreadsheet or ways, including by geographic area (particularly database format. by urban region), mode and vehicle type and de- Some major international organizations currently pro- mographic group. vide transportation-related data: §§ Consistency. The range of statistics, their defini- tions and collection methodologies should be §§ SuM4All’s Data Portal (http://datatopics.world- suitably consistent between different jurisdictions, bank.org/sum4all) is collecting standardized data modes and time periods. For research purposes, related Universal Access, Efficiency, Safety and transport data should be consistent with other Green Transportation for each country. data sets, such as land use, economic and health, §§ The Observatory for Urban Mobility (http://omu. so it is possible to determine their interactions. caf.com) is collecting data on 50 indicators for 29 §§ Accuracy. The methods used to collect statistics Latin American cities (www.datos-transporte.org). are suitably accurate. §§ The BRT Standard (http://brtstandard.org) and §§ Transparency. The methods used to collect statis- TOD standard (http://todstandard.org) . tics must be accessible for review. §§ The “Mobility in Cities” database (previously the §§ Frequency. Data should be collected regularly, “Millennium Cities Database” provides detailed which may be quarterly, annually, or ever several information on more than 60 major cities around 70 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY the world (www.uitp.org/MCD). mobility services, particularly by disadvantaged §§ The EU Transport Scorecard (http://ec.europa.eu/ groups. transport/facts-fundings/scoreboard) provides in- §§ Analysis should measure transport costs and af- formation for comparing and evaluating transport fordability (cost burdens on lower-income house- system performance for each country. holds). Census data, travel survey and consumer §§ The Federal Highway Administration’s, Highway expenditure survey data can be used to calculate Statistics Annual Report provide detailed informa- household expenditures on local transportation tion on U.S. roadway facilities and activities (www. (vehicle ownership, vehicle operation, public fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/hss/hsspubs.cfm). transportation fares and taxi fares), identify when these costs unaffordable (defined as more than However, these data sets have problems that limit 15% of household expenditures devoted to trans- their utility for urban transportation performance eval- portation, or more than 45% of household expen- uation. Some key data are not comparable between ditures devoted to housing and transportation jurisdictions or over time. For example, European and combined.18 North America data sets differ not only in their units §§ Analysis should measure safety and health im- (Metric versus Empirical), but also in how vehicle types pacts, including per capita traffic casualty rates (in- are defined, and which costs and pollution data are juries and deaths), average daily minutes devoted collected. Much of the data is collected at the nation- to active transport, and portion of the population al or state level and unavailable at geographic scales that achieves physical activity targets of at least 22 suitable for urban planning. To maximize their utility daily minutes devoted to moderate physical activ- jurisdictions should collect the same data, using con- ity. sistent definitions, and meet minimum data quality standards, so results can be compared between juris- §§ Analysis should measure environmental impacts dictions and over time. including per capita fossil fuel consumption and pollution emissions, portion of residents exposed Below are factors to consider when selecting urban to excessive noise and air pollution, and per cap- access performance indicators. ita impervious surface area (buildings, roads and parking facilities). §§ For equity analysis, indicators should be disaggre- gated by demographic and geographic factors §§ Analysis should include freight and logistical ef- such as income class, age, gender, physical ability ficiency. The GRA “Transport Efficiency” report and location. Equity analysis should give special identifies freight transport efficiency indicators attention to basic access, which refers to people such as the World Bank’s Logistics Performance In- ability to reach essential services and activities dex (LPI) which rates freight transport from 0 (least such as education, employment, affordable stores efficient) to 5 (most efficient). Other commercial and healthcare. transport indicators can include the quality of freight transport planning and management, ship- §§ Equity analysis can also include the quality of trav- ping speed and prices, and indicators of freight el options for non-drivers (walking, bicycling and vehicle external impacts such as crash casualties, public transport) compared with the quality of energy consumption and pollution emissions per driving conditions, and the portion of public ex- tonne-kilometer. penditures on transportation facilities and services (including government-mandated parking facili- §§ Analysis should evaluate the quality of planning, ties provided by businesses) devoted to different including the degree that transportation plan- modes, and therefore the degree that non-drivers ning is comprehensive and multimodal, including received a fair share of infrastructure investments. whether it considers emerging planning issues, and invests in non-auto modes and TDM solutions §§ Analysis should evaluate user convenience, in- when they are most cost effective overall, the de- cluding the ease of obtaining information for nav- gree that planning is integrated between different igating the transport system, and for paying for 71 agencies and jurisdictions, including transport parent and includes public engagement. and land use planning to create more accessible §§ Analysis should evaluate and report the quality, and multimodal community, such as transit-orient- consistency and availability of data required for ed development, and whether planning is trans- transport planning and performance evaluation. ENDNOTES 18 Housing and Transportation Affordability Index (https://htaindex.cnt.org/). 72 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY ANNEX B. USEFUL GUIDES TO IMPROVE URBAN ACCESS Numerous guides can be used to help improve urban access. Box 1 below lists some information sources that can help identify and evaluate these. Box: C1 ACCESS - Eurocities for a New Mobility Culture (www.access-eurocities.org) promotes a new mobility cul- ture. Association for Commuter Transportation (www.actweb.org) supports TDM programs. Despacio and ITDP (2013), Practical Guidebook: Parking and Travel Demand Management Policies in Latin America, InterAmerican Development Bank; at https://bit.ly/1NIpZEo. European Program for Mobility Management (www.epomm.eu) is a network of Mobility Management im- plementers. FHWA (2012), Integrating Demand Management into the Transportation Planning Process: A Desk Refer- ence, Federal Highway Administration (http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov); at https://bit.ly/2UXJxlg. GOPR (2018), Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, Governor’s Office for Plan- ning and Research, State of California (http://opr.ca.gov); at https://bit.ly/2VmInPR. Randy Machemehl, et al. (2013), Travel Demand Management Guidebook, TxDOT Project 6-0702, Center for Transportation Research, The University of Texas at Austin; at https://bit.ly/2UITJJe. MRSC (2014), Transportation Demand Management, Municipal Research and Services Center (http://mrsc. org); at https://bit.ly/2IQSgPZ. SANDAG (2012), Integrating Transportation Demand Management into the Planning and Development Pro- cess: A Reference for Cities, San Diego Regional Planning and HNTB; at https://bit.ly/2WeYQSP. Marc Schlossberg, et al. (2013), Rethinking Streets: An Evidence-Based Guide to 25 Complete Street Trans- formations, University of Oregon’s Sustainable Cities Initiative; at www.rethinkingstreets.com. SFPD (2018), TDM Menu of Options, San Francisco Planning Department (http://sf-planning.org); at https:// sfplanning.org/transportation-demand-management-program. SGN (2002 and 2004), Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Policies for Implementation, and Getting to Smart 73 Growth II: 100 More Policies for Implementation, Smart Growth Network (www.smartgrowth.org). SSTI (2018), Modernizing Mitigation: A Demand-Centered Approach, State Smart Transportation Initiative and the Mayors Innovation Project; at (https://bit.ly/2TCxtBD). Sustainable Transportation: A Sourcebook for Policy-Makers in Developing Countries (www.sutp.org), by the Sustainable Urban Transport Project – Asia (www.sutp-asia.org) and GIZ (www.gtz.de). Texas A&M (2018), How To Fix Congestion, Texas A&M Transportation Institute (https://policy.tti.tamu.edu); at https://policy.tti.tamu.edu/congestion/how-to-fix-congestion. VTPI (2019), Online TDM Encyclopedia, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org/tdm). WRI (2019), Reducing Demand for Vehicle Trips in Cities – Learning Guide, The City Fix; at https://bit.ly/2C- uAxc2. WRI (2019), The Role of Companies in Improving Urban Mobility – Learning Guide, The City Fix (https://the- cityfixlearn.org); at https://bit.ly/2vobC63. Lloyd Wright (2009), Environmentally Sustainable Transport for Asian Cities: A Sourcebook, United Nations Centre for Regional Development (www.uncrd.org.jp); at https://bit.ly/1W6mwSa. 74 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY ANNEX C. LIST OF POLICY MEASURES T he list of policy measures identified in this pa- ward Sus¬tainable Mobility provides the consolidated per to achieve universal urban access has been list of measures. consoli¬dated and harmonized with the policy measures to achieve all other policy goals toward sus- The consolidated policy measures that have an impact tainable mobility. The Global Roadmap of Action to- on universal urban access are shown in the Table be- low. Table C.1: Policy Measures with Description (by toolbox and thematic area, with an impact on universal urban access) Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Toolbox: Regulatory and Institutional Thematic Area: Plans and Strategies Develop an Integrated National Transport Plan Develop and implement an integrated national transport plan to cover the four policy goals, all modes of transport, and passenger and freight traffic. Set Targets across Policy Goals Set clear targets to be achieved in the long term and in the interim for the four policy goals, aligned with an integrated sustainable mobility plan. Develop Mobility Plans at the Sub-National Develop a sustainable urban mobility plan and implement strategies at the sub- Level national level that are consistent with the integrated national sustainable transport plan. Adopt TOD Principles in Land Use Planning Adopt integrated land use planning that supports transit-oriented development (TOD), mixed land use and compact city planning, reforming development policies and zoning codes, limiting urban expansion, and incorporating rail network development in urban planning. Embed the Safe System Approach into Embed the safe system approach to road safety in all aspects of national and sub- Transport Planning national transport planning Provide Policy Certainty to Businesses and Ensure a stable regulatory and policy framework, setting a timeline sustainable mobility Investors targets, to increase the confidence for businesses and financial investors to make long- term decisions. Thematic Area: Institutional Design, Cooperation, and Coordination Coordinate Planning across Government Coordinate across agencies to ensure integrated planning and shared responsibility Agencies for results across levels of government, jurisdictions, and agencies, including but not limited to the coordination of road safety responsibilities and the coordination of response to extreme weather events. 75 Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Define Roles and Accountabilities across Define government roles, responsibilities and accountabilities in the transport sector Agencies across the four policy goals, modes of transport, national and sub-national government levels, and passenger and freight transport. Establish a Metropolitan Transport Governance Establish a governance structure and an institutional framework for transport at the metropolitan level. Establish Joint Gender Programs Across Establish joint programs with ministries and agencies responsible for gender to include Agencies transport in their work program. Thematic Area: Regulations for Transport Services Adopt a Coherent Competition Policy Adopt a coherent competition policy for passenger and freight transport based on the principles that competitive markets are central to efficiency, and acknowledge that market failures in the transport sector require regulation. Regulate Freight Delivery Hours in Urban Introduce regulations about the hours and areas in which freight delivery in urban areas Areas is allowed to reduce congestion and noise pollution, mindful of the important role of freight delivery for economic activity. Review Legal Framework for Women's Security Review the national framework for security and safety in public spaces used to access in Transport transport, and for in-vehicle protection from harassment. Allow and Regulate Vehicle Sharing and TNCs Reform regulations to allow and support vehicle sharing programs (cars, bicycles, scooters), transportation networking companies (TNCs), and demand-responsive transport solutions, with a focus on last mile connectivity to high capacity modes, and support vehicle-sharing community networks such as car-sharing fleets within companies and administrations. Review transport regulations periodically Promote the periodic review of the regulations to allow the fast-moving mobility solutions to evolve towards a sustainable and inclusive transport system Thematic Area: Regulations for Vehicles and Vehicle Use Ensure Legal Certainty Regarding Driver Adopt standards and compliance regimes for the provision and withholding of driver Permits licenses and permits, including compliance regimes designed to prevent and reduce fatal and serious injury risk. Define and Enforce Speed Limits Define and enforce speed limits according to modal mix, road function, and protective qualities of roads. Define Low Emission Zones in Cities Define low emission zones (LEZ) in cities, i.e., areas where the most polluting vehicles are regulated through access restrictions, which could be based on vehicle emission standards or vehicle age, and enlarge them progressively. Limit the Number of Parking Spaces in New Replace parking minimum requirements with caps (maximum limits) and other policies Developments that support parking management. Establish Electric Vehicle Manufacturing Establish mandates for manufacturing electric vehicles and gradually increase their Mandates supply. Limit the Number of New License Plates for Implement restrictions on vehicle ownership by limiting the number of new license Cars plates issued. 76 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Limit the Import of Second-Hand Vehicles Limit the import of second-hand fossil fuel motor vehicles beyond a maximum age, including 2- and 3-wheelers. Establish More Stringent Fuel Economy Establish stricter fuel economy standards and CO2 emission standards for new motor Standards vehicles, as well as stricter fuel specifications, for example, the use of low-sulphur petroleum products. Set Fuel Quality Requirements and Blending Determine fuel quality requirements, for example, the use of low-sulphur petroleum Mandates products, and blending mandates to support alternative fuels. Thematic Area: Regulations for Data Collection, Share and Use Establish Data Protection Regulations Establish personal and travel data protection regulations, with processes that handle personal data with the appropriate safeguards and ensure that data are not made available to the public without explicit informed consent. Require Service Providers to Report Establish standardized data reporting requirements for all transport service providers, Standardized Data including transportation network companies (TNC), public transport operators, and bike- or car-share companies. Develop Data Repositories and Data Collection Develop centralized data repositories and establish data collection guidelines at the Guidelines national and metropolitan levels, and facilitate data access to different stakeholders (academics, private sector, etc.) while stablishing a legislative framework defining the context and purpose of its use. Require Use of Data to Support Decision Require using operational data to support decision making and regulatory oversight. Making Thematic Area: Procurement and Contracts Prepare Public Procurement Rules and Prepare procurement rules and procedures, standard contract documents for Procedures infrastructure construction and maintenance, supported by an e-procurement platform, and harmonize those at a regional or international level to foster economies of scale. Procure Contractors on a Competitive Basis Procure contractors on a competitive basis, using packaging of batches of projects to attract multiple capable contractors. Integrate Gender in Public Procurement and Integrate gender in bidding documents for standard public procurement and public- PPPs private partnerships (PPPs) by requesting bidders to demonstrate gender experience, by setting gender-specific targets for women’s employment and entrepreneurship, for example, quotas for contracts to be awarded to women-owned and managed businesses. Establish a Pool of Technical and Financial Establish a pool of independent experts capable to undertake technical and financial Experts audits of projects. Thematic Area: Capacity Building and Human Resource Development Identify and Empower Sustainable Mobility Identify and Empower Country Champions to Help Move Forward the Sustainable Champions Mobility Agenda, for example, ministers and mayors. Build Capacity Across Levels of Government Build national and local capacity across levels of government, jurisdictions, organization, and modes, including providing training and information resources. Provide Training for Workforce in Leadership Provide training for the current and future transport workforce in leadership positions, Positions enabling well-trained staff to drive change toward sustainable mobility. 77 Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Facilitate Capacity Building at the Facilitate sector specific capacity building at the international level. International Level Train more Women on Skills Needed in Create incentives for training more women with the skills needed in transport, for Transport example, operating heavy duty vehicles. Build Capacity on Gender-Inclusive Build capacity on accessibility planning that includes gender impacts, for example, Accessibility Planning consider access to centers of interest for women and gendered information on access to jobs and education. Train Security and Transport Staff in Gender Train security and transport stakeholders in gendered aspects of transport, especially Aspects security. Create Mentoring Programs and Professional Create programs to promote role models, mentoring and networks of transport Networks professionals, including programs targeted to women. Toolbox: Engineering and Technology Thematic Area: Technical Standards Establish Technical Standards for Transport Establish high technical standards for transport infrastructure design, for example, Infrastructure performing climate vulnerability screening, protecting roads against water penetration, and using local materials and resources when feasible. Recruit Qualified Firms for Project Design and Recruit qualified consulting firms for preparing feasibility reports and engineering Feasibility designs, and supervising civil works. Ensure Safe Roads Design with Lower Design Plan and design safe roads and roadsides for lower speeds, including features that calm Speeds traffic, and considering the increasing use of bicycles and pedestrian flows in urban areas. Ensure Integration of Public Transport and Ensure physical integration between public transport and bicycles, for example, Bicycles providing bicycle parking and allowing bicycles in public transport (with limitations because of vehicle size or passenger density). Improve Intermodal Connections in Transport Improve local access to transport hubs including bus and train stations, ports and Hubs airports. Set Design Standards for Sidewalks and Set high quality design standards for sidewalks and bicycle paths, for example, safe Bicycle Paths and convenient pedestrian crossing and adequate street lighting, ensuring accessibility to persons with disabilities and considering gender sensitive aspects (for example, dropped kerbs at crossings, size of refuge islands, and timing of traffic signals). Ensure Transport Project Design Includes Include considerations for women and for people with disabilities in transport Gender Aspects infrastructure project design and planning. Set and Implement Climate Change Set climate change adaptation and resilience standards and practices, and integrate Adaptation Standards them into project design across transport infrastructure, including roads, airports, and seaports. Set Low-Noise Engineering and Traffic Set traffic management practices to reduce noise pollution, for example, speed Management Practices limitations, speed humps, traffic lights coordination and roundabouts, and low-noise road engineering and maintenance practices, for example low-noise pavement and noise barriers. 78 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Thematic Area: Asset Construction Build Rail and Maritime Transport Build infrastructure for energy- and space-efficient modes such as rail and waterborne Infrastructure transport, including high-speed rail for corridors with sufficient demand. Expand Public Transport Infrastructure Expand the public transport network adjusted to demand requirements, with an emphasis on equitable access and considering the most appropriate modes in each context, including bus, rail, demand-responsive service, cable-propelled transport and ferry transport. Prevent the Construction of Urban Prevent the development of new urban expressways to avoid the segregation of Expressways neighborhoods and to avoid additional car travel. Develop Infrastructure for Road Transport Develop infrastructure for road transport electrification, such as charging stations, Electrification electric road systems, including electricity and hydrogen power for trucks, cars, buses, etc. Improve First and Last Mile Access Evaluate and improve first and last mile access to major transport services in urban and Infrastructure rural areas. Expand the Network of Bicycle Lanes Build quality and safe infrastructure for cycling, with a focus on protected bicycle lanes. Repurpose Road Space to Allow Access for All Repurpose existing road space with complete street designs accommodating diverse Modes users and uses, with access for all modes, particularly pedestrians and cyclists and their access to public transport stations. Ensure an Optimal Level of Vehicle Availability Ensure an optimal level of vehicle availability and use, for example, adapt bus or train and Use capacity to activity and load factor, invest in buses and rolling stock to reduce public transport crowding. Thematic Area: Design and Deployment of Transport Services Improve the Quality and Safety of Public Improve the quality and safety standards of public and private as well as formal and Transport informal public transport operations, such as service frequency, reliability, cleanliness, and safe driving practices, and implement bus lanes and other bus priority measures. Provide Effective Car and Bicycle Sharing Provide effective shared car and bicycle-sharing systems as an alternative to vehicle Systems ownership. Ensure Access to Transport Services in Ensure complete transport services by extending services to underserved areas and Underserved Areas populations. Prioritize Pedestrians and Cyclists in Traffic Adopt traffic management strategies that prioritize pedestrians and cyclists. Management Implement ITS Solutions for Providing Implement online platforms and other ITS solutions for providing information on traffic, Transport Information routes, and transport mode options for both passengers and freight transport Conduct Accessibility Evaluation and Mapping Develop tools for measuring the accessibility of different locations and evaluation how various transport and land use changes will affect accessibility for various groups and activities, with a special attention to access for disadvantaged groups. 79 Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Implement Mobility as a Service Packages Implement government-coordinated mobility as a service (MaaS) packages combining different services and platforms for transport users to review travel options, changing the focus from providing a specific service on one mode of transport to mobility solutions that are consumed as a service. Introduce Pedestrian and Bicycle Means of Introduce pedestrian and bicycle-friendly means of delivery. Delivery Integrate New Mobility Solutions to Existing Support the complementarity of new shared solutions such as car-sharing, electric Transport vehicles rentals and autonomous vehicles with existing public transport networks, for instance by supporting new solutions to direct traffic to public transport stations or as a replacement after operating hours. Thematic Area: Design and Deployment of Programs Deploy Road Safety Cameras Deploy road safety cameras to monitor the condition on the road and enforce traffic violations. Ensure Adequate Post-Crash Intervention Ensure adequate post-crash intervention through efficient emergency notification, fast transport of qualified medical personnel, correct diagnosis at the scene, stabilization of the patient, prompt transport to point of treatment, quality emergency room and trauma care, and extensive rehabilitation services. Support Data Sharing Programs and Platforms Establish a framework and promote data sharing programs and platforms across different sectors to exchange data relevant for transport policy, such as data collaboratives models including the public and private sector. Provide Incentives to Increase Car Occupancy Provide incentives to increase private vehicle occupancy, for example, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Provide Sustainable Alternatives for Encourage initiatives that provide sustainable mobility options for employees, such Commuting Trips as employer-sponsored transport programs, carpooling schemes, and public transport commuter benefits. Implement Telecommuting Policies Implement policies that allow flexible work schedules and telecommuting, i.e., working from home schemes, to avoid non-essential trips. Develop Vehicle Rental Platforms for Different Provide effective shared car and bicycle-sharing systems as an alternative to vehicle Types of Use ownership. Promote the use of vehicles adapted to daily needs (i.e. small BEV for daily trips) and offer alternatives renting solutions for exceptional journeys (i.e range- extender or large BEV holidays). Thematic Area: Asset Management Develop Asset Management Standards and Develop asset management standards and plans to preserve, maintain, and manage Plans transport infrastructure and their systems over their life cycle. Set Up Audits for Construction Design and Set up independent audits of asset management industries and of construction design Safety and safety to ensure the quality of assets. Thematic Area: Safeguards Ensure Project-Induced Resettlement is Ensure that project-induced displacements are economically justified and handled with Conducted Fairly fair and dignified treatment of those affected, ensuring that safeguards are in place. 80 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Toolbox: Economics and Finance Thematic Area: Project or Program Cycle Use a Robust Framework for Project Use a robust investment evaluation framework to prioritize the allocation of public Prioritization infrastructure funding to infrastructure projects and associated services. Establish Performance Monitoring and Establish performance and result monitoring and evaluation schemes to inform the Evaluation Schemes regular adjustment for projects, policies and programs, for example, the evaluation of road safety interventions and their institutional delivery. Conduct Impact Evaluation Studies Conduct impact evaluation studies to improve the evidence base available to policymakers, considering the impact of transport infrastructure projects on economic growth and employment, and considering differentiated impacts on women. Thematic Area: Allocation of Public Funds Require Projects to Meet Cost-Effectiveness Require transport projects to meet an economic viability threshold based on a cost- Thresholds benefit analysis and estimate the economic internal rate of return (EIRR), reflecting least-cost planning principles Thematic Area: Fiscal and Financial Measures Enable Municipal Revenue through Tax and Enable city-level revenue generation, such as taxation and bonds, for transport projects Bonds to be funded locally, especially in medium and large cities. Apply Innovative Solutions Financing for Asset Apply sustainable and innovative financing schemes for asset creation, including new Creation financing mechanisms, new fund management techniques, and new institutional arrangements. Set User Fees to Support Transport Adopt transport user fees to help fund transport infrastructure and allow for return on Infrastructure Funding investment, for example, toll roads. Mobilize Public and Private Capital for Mobilize public and private capital for transport finance, using PPPs to improve sector Transport Finance efficiency when appropriate, and help bridge the transport infrastructure gap. Use Land Value Capture Schemes Use land value capture schemes to increase funding for urban transport systems, capturing the increase in property value around new transport infrastructure development. Thematic Area: Pricing for Efficiency and Inclusion Implement Fuel Taxes and Phase Out Fuel Implement and increase fuel taxes while phasing out fossil fuel subsidies to offset the Subsidies social cost of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Use Congestion Charging or Pay-as-You-Drive Use congestion charging or pay-as-you-drive schemes to charge for the congestion costs Schemes imposed by personal motorized vehicle use, with rates that increase under urban-peak conditions to reduce traffic congestions. Implement or Increase Vehicle Registration Implement or increase vehicle registration fees to support road maintenance funding, Fees reducing the incentives for purchasing a vehicle. Apply Market-Based Parking Pricing Apply market-based pricing schemes to on-street and off-street parking, such as variable pricing based on demand. 81 Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Provide Financial Incentives to Reduce Provide financial incentives, for example subsidies, tax credits, or low tax rates to Environmental Impact reduce the environmental impact of transport, including financial incentives for cleaner vehicles, cleaner fuels, old vehicle abatements, and the circular economy. Make Public Transport Fares Affordable for the Make public transport fares affordable for the poor using means testes approaches to Poor ensure cost-recovering mechanisms. Ensure Integrated Fare Payment across All Develop integrated fare payment systems across all modes of public transport, parking Modes and road charges. Thematic Area: Innovation Policy and Enhancement Support R&D to Reduce Environmental Support systematic research and development for technologies that reduce the Impacts environmental damage from transport through joint industry and government research, for example, research to optimize the life cycle of batteries for vehicle electrification, alternative fuels (sustainable biofuels, biogas, synthetic fuels, hydrogen) and intelligent transport systems (ITS). Toolbox: Communication Thematic Area: Consultation and Public Engagement Consult with Stakeholders during the Full Consult extensively with stakeholders during project formulation and establish a Project Cycle framework for continuous consultation during project implementation. Use Participatory Planning Methods Use participatory planning methods, including creation of a website, to help communities propose interventions. Promote Public Discussion on New Mobility Promote public discussion with civil society about new mobility solutions to generate Solutions new ideas, innovations and tools. Ensure Neutrality on Technology related Ensure neutrality and transparency on technology related communication, taking into communication account the whole life-cycle of technologies when making technology decisions, using for instance LCA (Life Cycle Analysis) methodologies. Thematic Area: Promotion Campaigns and Public Awareness Implement Awareness and Behavior Change Implement awareness and behavior change (ABC) strategies to help shift attitudes Strategies towards sustainable modes, for example, public transport, walking and cycling, complementing other engineering, legal or economic measures. Implement Anti-Harassment Campaigns in Implement anti-harassment awareness campaigns in public transport spaces. Public Transport Raise Road Safety Awareness Ensure sustained communication of road safety as a core business for government and society, emphasize the shared responsibility for the delivery of road safety interventions, and raise awareness about the dangers of speeding. Make Information Publicly Available on Make information accessible to increase the public support to transport policies and Projects and Policies projects. Foster a Security Culture in Public Transport Foster a security culture to improve efficiency and attractiveness of public transport, based on the psychological elements that make passengers feel secure while using buses, trains, and other modes of public transport. 82 UNIVERSAL URBAN ACCESS GLOBAL ROADMAP OF ACTION TOWARD SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY Policy Measure Policy Measure Description Thematic Area: Knowledge Management and Dissemination of Best Practices Share Knowledge on Successes and Best Share successes and best practices with other agencies at the local, national and Practices international level, based on a well-designed knowledge transfer framework. Inform Users about New Sustainable Solutions Promote physical and online information centers aiming to reinforce the demand for sustainable mobility products, and facilitate the understanding of new technologies. 83