80237




Thailand:
Green Transport Policy Directions
                                                      February 2013




Thailand:
Green Transport Policy Directions
for improved freight and passenger travel outcomes,
with lower energy use and emissions
           Thailand:
Green Transport Policy Directions
for improved freight and passenger travel outcomes,
        with lower energy use and emissions




       THE WORLD BANK                  NESDB
                                                                      Table of Contents

Key Messages		                                                                               i

1.	   The Challenge of Greening Transport	                                                   3
	     1.1	Context	                                                                           3
	     1.2	 Objective and Scope	                                                              3
	     1.3	 Analytical Framework	                                                             4
2.	   What is Green Transport?	                                                             7
3.	   Why Green Transport?	                                                                10
	     3.1	 Current Situation and Future Trends	                                             10
	     3.2	 Key Issues	                                                                      15
	     3.3	 Meeting Transport Challenges	                                                    19
4.	   How to Facilitate Green Transport?	                                                  22
	 4.1	 Applying the System-Mode-Vehicle Framework	                                          22
	 4.2	 Inter-city Transport Including Logistics and High Speed Passenger Train	             23
		     4.2.1	 Efficient Logistics	                                                          25
		     4.2.2	 The Potential for High Speed Train	                                           27
	 4.3	 Urban Areas: Opportunity for Integrated Transport/ Land use Planning	                30
		     4.3.1 	 Model A – Weak Center	                                                       32
		     4.3.2 	 Model B – Full Motorization	                                                 34
		     4.3.3 	 Model C – Strong Center	                                                     35
		     4.3.4 	 Model D – Poly-Centric Development	                                          36
	 4.4 Conclusion on Facilitating Green Transport	                                           38
5.	   What Scenarios for Green Transport?	                                                 40
	     5.1 	National Scale	                                                                  40
	     5.2 	Bangkok Metropolitan Region	                                                     42
	     5.3	 How to Prioritize Measures?	                                                     45
	     5.4	 Summary of Key Indicators for BMR and Thailand	                                  46
6.	   How to Action Green Transport?	                                                      47
	     6.1	 Overcoming the Barriers	                                                         47
	     6.2	 Holistic Approach	                                                               48
7.	References	                                                                             57




                                                      Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions
List of Tables

Table 2.1: Consider Transport’s Impacts in Three Dimensions	               8
Table 4.1: Potential Impacts of System, Mode and Vehicle Interventions	   22
Table 4.2: Potential Range of Inter-City Transport Interventions	         25
Table 4.3: Potential Range of Urban Transport Interventions	              31
Table 4.4: Model A – Weak Center	                                         33
Table 4.5: Model B – Full Motorization	                                   34
Table 4.6: Model C – Strong Center	                                       36
Table 4.7: Model D – Poly-Centric Development	                            38
Table 5.1: Characteristics of Scenarios for BMR	                          42
Table 5.2: Key Indicators for Land Transport Energy Use	                  46
Table 6.1: Institutional Responsibilities	                                48
Table 6.2: Simplified Priority, Future Direction & Next Steps	            50
                                                                                List of Figures

Figure 1.1: 	 Analytical Framework	                                                                6
Figure 3.1: 	 Thailand’s Total, Transport and Industry Energy Intensity	                          10
Figure 3.2:	   Transport Energy Intensity and GDP Per Capita in 2005, Various Countries	          10
Figure 3.3: 	 Growth Index of Thailand Logistics Costs, 2001-2010 (2001=100)	                     11
Figure 3.4: 	 Road Travel Demand (vehicle-km), 1995-2009	                                         12
Figure 3.5: 	 Modal Shares of Goods Transported, 2001-2010	                                       12
Figure 3.6: 	 Domestic Sales of Automotives, 2005-2011	                                           13
Figure 3.7: 	 New Vehicle Registration, 2002-2011	                                                13
Figure 3.8: 	 Mean of Yearly Temperature, Whole Country, 2000-2009	                               14
Figure 3.9: 	 The Observed Quantity of Rain in July, August and September 	                       14
		             in Northern Thailand
Figure 3.10: 	 Flood – Number of Occurrences and Affected Villages	                               15
Figure 3.11: 	 Drought – Number of Occurrences and Affected Villages	                             15
Figure 3.12: 	 Shipment Index and GDP	                                                            16
Figure 3.13: 	 GDP and Share by Major Sectors	                                                    16
Figure 3.14: 	 Thailand’s Logistics Costs to GDP	                                                 17
Figure 3.15: 	 Share of Transport Expenses to Household Expenses	                                 17
Figure 3.16: 	 GHG Emission Projections Under the Business as Usual Scenario	                     18
Figure 3.17: 	 Areas Affected by Flood in Land Transport	                                         19
Figure 3.18: 	 Damages from Flood on Road Infrastructure	                                         19
Figure 3.19: 	 Energy Use Per $1,000 GDP Vs GDP Per Capita in 25 Cities	                          21
Figure 4.1: 	 Top 20 Provinces’ Real GPP and Population Growth, 1995-2011	                        24
Figure 4.2: 	 Energy Consumption versus Speed for HST	                                            29
Figure 4.3: 	 Average CO2 Emissions per Passenger-km for Long Distance Passenger 	                30
		             Transport (in Europe)
Figure 4.4: 	 Four City Models	                                                                   32
Figure 4.5: 	 Singapore’s Ring Plan	                                                              37
Figure 5.1: 	 Estimated Energy Impacts of Thailand-specific Scenarios (ktoe/year)	                41
Figure 5.2: 	 Estimated Energy Impacts of BMR-specific Scenarios (ktoe/year)	                     44




                                                            Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions
Abbreviations

ADB	     Asian Development Bank                   MRT	     Mass rapid transit (rail)
B	Billion                                         MRTA	    Mass Rapid Transit Authority
BMA	     Bangkok Metropolitan Administration      NCCC	    National Climate Change Policy Committee
BMCL	    Bangkok Metro Company Limited            NESDB	 National Economic and Social
BMR	     Bangkok Metropolitan Region              	        Development Board
BMTA	    Bangkok Mass Transit Authority           NESDP	   National Economic and Social
BRT	     Bus Rapid Transit                        	        Development Five Year Plan
BTS	     Bangkok Transit System                   NGOs	    Non-governmental organizations
CDM	     Clean Development Mechanism              NMT	     Non-motorized transport
CDP-SD	 Country Development Partnership in        NPV	     Net Present Value
	        Sustainable Development                  OECD	    Organization for Economic Co-operation
CLTCB	   Central Land Transport Control Board     	        and Development
CMLT	    Commission for the Management of         ONEP	    Office of Natural Resources and
	        Land Traffic                             	        Environmental Policy and Planning
CNG	     Compressed natural gas                   ORR	     Outer ring road
CH4	Methane                                       OTP	     Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and
DEDE	    Department of Alternative Energy         	Planning
	        Development and Efficiency               pa	      per annum
ETA	     Expressway and Rapid Transit Authority   pax	passengers
EURO	    European emission standard               PLTCB	   Provincial Land Transport Control Board
EPPO	    Energy Policy and Planning Office        PM10	    Particulate matter (<10 microns)
GHG	     Greenhouse gas                           PPP	     Public-Private Partnership
GIZ	     German International Cooperation         PWD	     Public Works Department
HST	     High Speed Train                         SEPO	    State Enterprise Policy Office, Ministry of
IEA	     International Energy Agency              	Finance
IFC	     International Finance Corporation        SRT	     State Railways of Thailand
ITS	     Intelligent transportation systems       TA	      Technical assistance
IFIs	    International financial institutions     TGO	     Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management
JICA	    Japan International Cooperation Agency   	        Organization (Public Organization)
Ktoe	    kilo tonne of energy equivalent          THB	     Thai Baht
LTCB	    Land Transport Control Board             TOR	     Terms of Reference
M 	Million                                        UNFCCC	 United Nations Framework Convention on
MONRE	 Ministry of Natural Resources and          	        Climate Change
	Environment
                                                                            Acknowledgement

This study was undertaken by a World Bank team under the Country Development Partnership for Sustainable
Development (CDP-SD), which is a knowledge-based partnership program between the World Bank and
Royal Thai Government for analytical work on key areas of the country’s infrastructure development agenda.

The study team was led by Chanin Manopiniwes (Infrastructure Economist), and consisted of Philip Sayeg
(Transport Consultant), Pajnapa Peamsilpakulchorn (Infrastructure Consultant), Photchara Vichalai (Research
Assistant), and Chutima Lowattanakarn (Team Assistant).

The study team benefited greatly from technical discussions with relevant government agencies. These
agencies included the Office of National Economic and Social Development Board of Thailand (NESDB),
Office of Transport and Traffic Policy and Planning (OTP) of the Ministry of Transport (MOT), and Department
of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency (DEDE).

The study team is grateful for helpful comments from Baher El-Hifnawi (Lead Transport Economist),
Zhi Liu (Lead Infrastructure Specialist), Shabih Mohib (Senior Economist), Manida Unkulvasapaul (Consultant),
Shomik Mehndiratta (Lead Urban Transport Specialist), Reindert Westra (Senior Urban Transport Specialist),
Om Prakash Agarwal (Senior Urban Transport Specialist), Ranjan Bose (Consultant), and the staff of NESDB,
OTP, DEDE.

The study was conducted under the general guidance of Annette Dixon (Country Director of the World Bank,
Thailand), Arkhom Termpittayapaisith (Secretary General, NESDB), Julia Fraser (Sector Manager, South-
east Asia Sustainable Development Unit, World Bank), and Danucha Pichayanan (Director of Infrastructure
Development Unit, NESDB).




                                                            Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions
                      Currency Equivalent
                                Currency unit = Baht (THB)

                             Exchange rate at March 31, 2012:

                                  US$1.00 = THB31.6229

                                  THB1.00 = US$0.03162




                          Government Fiscal Year
                                 October 1- September 30




                         Weights and Measures
                                         Metric units

                                  1 meter (m) = 3.2 feet (ft)

                             1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 miles (mi)




                                    Price Units
Prices in this report are expressed in approximately early 2012 prices unless otherwise noted
                                                                                Key Messages

The aim of this Policy Note is to describe in plain language what ‘green transport’ is, why it is important,
and how it can be effectively adopted by Thai policy makers. The primary focus is on green transport
options that improve welfare, mitigate excessive energy use, reduce global emissions and air pollution.
While recognizing that the issue of adaptation is another key aspect of green transport, the Note does not
consider measures that might be taken in the transport sector to better adapt to climate change. The key
messages arising from the analytical work undertaken are:

	 •	 Energy intensity in Thailand across the board is not improving. Transport’s share of national
		 energy use equals that of manufacturing with each representing over a third of the national total.
		 Transport like, manufacturing and other sectors, is an inefficient user of energy compared to selected
		 comparator nations. Further, Thailand’s transport sector has not demonstrated a significant
		 improvement in energy use per unit of economic output (i.e. energy intensity) over the past three
		decades.

	 •	 Addressing transport’s energy use and associated greenhouse gas emissions is therefore critical
	 	 for realizing Thailand’s ‘green growth’ vision where economic growth is sustained without
		 compromising the environment and natural resources.

	 •	     Transport impacts individual consumers, firms and the public directly and indirectly and in
		       several dimensions. Although transportation services facilitate individuals and firms to access
		       goods and services and to conduct their business, the production of transportation services
		       consumes energy, generates greenhouse gas emissions, and creates air pollution affecting users
		       and the community at large. Moreover, public resources are used to finance transport infrastructure
		       which is expensive and costly to operate and maintain.

	    •	 Consequently, achievement of ‘green transport’ to support the vision of ‘green growth’ requires
	    	 consideration of transport’s impacts across all relevant dimensions: (i) economic efficiency; (ii)
	    	 environmental sustainability; and (iii) social sustainability.

	    •	 The characteristics of transport infrastructure and services should exhibit the following important
	    	 characteristics to be considered ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’: (i) efficiency of use of resources; (ii)
	    	 resilience to climate risk; (iii) financial sustainability; and (iv) institutional sustainability.

	 •	     A narrow focus for example on only reducing energy consumption or greenhouse gas emissions
		       may be counterproductive. For example, very expensive measures may yield significant green
		       benefits (i.e. reduction in energy and emissions). But the same resources applied elsewhere in
		       the transport sector, or elsewhere in the economy, might be able to achieve even more significant
		       benefits. Prioritizing transport policy or infrastructure initiatives for implementation therefore needs
		       to quantify and monetize all impacts as far as possible and compare them to implementation and
		       operations costs on a whole-of-life basis.




                                                              Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions           i
     	 •	 Left unchecked transport’s energy use will continue to rise at a faster rate or closely follow
     		 economic growth. Increased motorization and growth in demand for national and cross border
     		 transport services are contributing to this trend.

     	 •	    The efficiency of Bangkok and other cities is critical to reducing the energy intensity of the
     	 	     nation’s transport sector. The Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR) is continuing to grow and is
     		      currently estimated to represent 25% - 30% of national transportation energy use and an
     		      increasing share of national economic output. Accompanying the growth in urban motorization,
     		      a steady decline in use of public transport and increase in dispersion of urban land use is increased
     		      commuting distances and travel times. Significant adverse welfare and environmental impacts
     		      are also being incurred as a consequence. The path taken by cities like Seoul and Tokyo offers a
     		      greener alternative for Bangkok. Getting on this path calls for a significant reduction of energy
     		      intensity of economic activities (energy use per GDP) and improvements in energy efficiency overall.

     	 •	 Carefully considered and prompt action could unlock a 25% saving in energy use and
     		emissions in the period 2020-2030 compared to the ‘business as usual’ across national and
     		 urban transport systems as has been confirmed by several recent studies by DEDE (2011) and
     		 World Bank (2009a and 2009c).

     	 •	    Transitioning to effective implementation requires comprehensive and timely implementation of
     		      the full suite of potential measures including (i) pricing and policy; (ii) technology improvement/
     		      fuel economy/ alternative fuels; and (iii) rapid transport infrastructure and improved public
     		      transport. Fuel economy standards that alone can achieve half of the estimated energy saving
     		      (by 2030) are currently being formulated but will take at least two years to bring into force.
     		      However, they will affect only new vehicles and so their potential impact will require 20 years to
     		      flow through the vehicle fleet. Transport infrastructure and improved public transport should be
     		      designed to effectively support a desirable land use arrangement (location and density of activities)
     		      and to operate efficiently to maximize benefits in all dimensions. The lead time for provision of
     		      transport infrastructure is of the order of 5 to 10 years and even longer to facilitate favorable land
     		      use change. Consequently, implementation of appropriate infrastructure and services for vehicles
     		      and non motorized modes should also be implemented without delay.

     	 •	    While a range of potential measures to achieve the potential reduction is known the challenge
     		      lies in bringing plans and policy to action. Comprehensive and effective implementation requires
     		      a holistic plan of action with cross-sectoral leadership that incentivizes and coordinates each
     		      responsible agency’s contribution to the common goal.

     	 •	    Improved pricing of fuels and vehicle access and user charges are critical for underpinning the
     		      veracity of any plan for green transport. Pricing measures avoid the need for detailed project
     		      management of many individual measures since appropriate pricing signals would be expected
     		      to induce favorable behavior of firms and individuals. But pricing measures present complex
     		      political and social challenges that only high level leadership can overcome.




ii   The World Bank Group
                           The Challenge of Greening Transport
                                                                                       1
	 1.1	Context
Thailand’s policy makers are seeking to strengthen the foundations for sustainable economic and
social development. Responding to the threat of climate change, the aim includes reducing energy
intensity and greenhouse gas emissions throughout the economy. The underlying vision advocates
a ‘low-carbon society’ and ‘green growth’ that implies a development path without compromising
the environment and the integrity of the nation’s natural resources.

Representing 35% of final energy use in 2010 transportation’s share is slowly growing and now
equals that of manufacturing (DEDE 2012). Almost totally reliant on fossil fuels, transportation is
a major source of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. The efficiency of
passenger and freight transportation systems throughout the nation is critical. Although transport
is a major consumer of energy, it provides a vital role in the economy by connecting homes to
jobs, education and community services and links hinterlands to economic zones and producers
to markets.

Traffic congestion in Bangkok and the major regional cities and on inter urban highways has a
major daily impact on all transport users. With fewer opportunities to optimize home and job loca-
tions, or the timing of their trips, the poor are disproportionately disadvantaged by congestion. Air
pollution from transport is a major source of damage to human health. Road trauma through loss
of life and injury is a serious public health and social issue.

Transportation infrastructure and services plays a vital role in times of natural disaster aiding
evacuation and also emergency response. During the 2011 flooding in Bangkok, rail transit systems
operated virtually unimpeded and assisted many parts of the city to function as normally as possible.

Policy makers are faced with the task of addressing the day to day challenges posed by trans-
port while positioning transport to effectively contribute to ‘green growth’ over the long term. The
‘greening’ of transport requires a comprehensive approach that considers all the potential positive
and negative impacts that transport may have. It requires action spanning the energy, environment
and urban sectors rather than each sector acting independently and without overall coordination.

	 1.2	 Objective and Scope
The objectives of this Policy Note are to:
	 •	 Examine green transport’s development challenges;
	 •	 Provide a conceptual and policy framework for green transport;
	 •	 Indicate the potential impacts of measures to achieve green transport; and
	 •	 Prioritize green transport interventions.



                                                       Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions      3
    The scope is limited to land passenger and freight transport that represents almost 80% of total
    transport energy use in Thailand. Most of the balance of transport-related energy use is represented
    by aviation.

    Further, the focus is on green transport options that improve welfare, and mitigate excessive energy
    use, global emissions and air pollution. Transport may have other ‘green’ attributes. For example,
    the appropriate design of transport facilities may enable it to function better during extreme weather
    events, or long term changes in weather patterns, that may or may not be due to climate change.
    Such attributes are briefly described in Section 2 but are not dealt with in detail in this Note.

    The contents of this Note are consistent with the World Bank’s broader global and regional efforts
    in particular the ‘East Asia Pacific: Sustainable Urban Energy and Emissions Planning 1’ that
    commenced with support of AusAID in January 2011.

    	 1.3	 Analytical Framework
    The Note first reexamines the role of the transport sector in the economy and the contributions
    of ‘green transport’ to ‘green growth’ in a broad context. This is important to recall the role and
    functions of transport in the economy and to better understand the relevance of green transport.
    Key trends in energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and land transport performance are then
    reviewed to provide the rationale for the required shift towards greener transport.

    The spatial pattern of economic activities is a key determinant of the demand for transport and
    its impacts. Transport enables communication of people and goods throughout the nation and
    within urban areas. Through transport services people can participate in activities at their destina-
    tion and goods can be shipped from production zones to markets and international gateways.
    Transport is therefore often called a ‘derived demand’ where the real demand is for the activities
    and services available at different locations in a nation or urban area. Consequently, transport
    infrastructure and services are needed to support economic activities and the spatial distribution
    of population centers, economic hubs and ports through the underlying accessibility it confers. In
    some circumstances, transport can strongly influence where these activities occur and is therefore
    of value as a policy instrument to support broader goals.

    Transport interventions may therefore be aimed at one or more of three distinct levels2 at the
    national or metropolitan scales:

    	 •	   System level (travel demand) – supporting economic structural change (e.g. shift to service
    		     sector) or influencing settlement patterns (e.g. support development of major regional centers)
    		     and therefore give rise to potentially ‘favorable’ changes in travel demand such as avoiding
    		     the need for travel with potentially strong positive impacts on economic welfare, social
    		     sustainability and environmental sustainability. At a national level, transport is an important


    1 	Refer Vietnam Urban Briefs – SUEEP Program: Overview and Application� Accessed on October 18 <www-wds.
    	worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/07/16/000333038_20120716020848/Rendered/
    	PDF/710100BRI0VN0U00Box369258B00PUBLIC0.pdf].


4   The World Bank Group
		 input to achieving system level outcomes but the success of the policies tends to rely on
		 factors outside of the transport sector.

	 •	 Modal level (travel alternatives) – here the availability, quality and quantity of modes is
		 important with the main beneficial impacts being on efficiency with lesser impacts on ‘social
		 sustainability’ and ‘environmental sustainability’.

	 •	 Vehicular level (or trip) – the performance of vehicles and trips (such as by non-motorized
		 means) is important. Here the main impacts are usually environmental and possibly social
		 through choice of vehicle types, fuel types, fuel efficiency and load factors.

The analysis upon which this Note is based addresses more than 80% of energy use and emis-
sions generated by land transport in Thailand. In analyzing the transport system and types of
interventions, the framework is applied to the inter-urban corridors in Thailand and the BMR, the
major contributors to energy use and emissions from land transport.

Qualitative assessments of performance or transport outcomes are provided in this report in
three dimensions: (i) economic efficiency; (ii) environmental sustainability; and (iii) social sus-
tainability. The analytical framework of the study is shown in Figure 1.1.

The potential impacts of interventions are quantified in respect of energy use (and associated
greenhouse gas emissions). To do this, the Note relies on the analysis of two recent studies carried
out by the World Bank for the Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR) and Thailand as a whole. For
the national level analysis, the Note summarizes and extends the effect of interventions to improve
energy efficiency in Thailand’s inter-urban and urban freight and passenger transport sub-sectors
analyzed by a recent policy study entitled “Thailand: Making Transport More Energy Efficient�
(World Bank 2009a).

Fuel sales data indicates the BMR and adjoining urbanizing areas represent a significant share
of Thailand’s total transport-related energy use.3 Consequently, for urban transport, a more
detailed simulation of Bangkok’s urban transport performance is especially important. A more




2 	Shipper et al. (1999) described this Framework as “Activity, Share, Intensity, Fuel Mix.� GIZ (2007) described it as the
	 “Avoid-Shift-Improve� Framework although the concepts were articulated earlier, for example, by Thomson (1974),
	 (pages 159-170). For this report, an identical but simpler form of the same framework (System-Mode-Vehicle) has been
	 proposed as also articulated by GIZ (2007). ‘Intensity’ and ‘Fuel Mix’ used in ASIF is encompassed in the term ‘Vehicle’
	 where both the load factor and type of fuel used are prime concerns. The ‘System-Mode-Vehicle’ framework also seems
	 more appropriate when discussing national transport systems in the context of associated settlement patterns where
	 optimization of land use and minimization of trips (as implied in the term ‘Avoid’) are but one consideration for locating
	 cities and towns, in contrast to the allocation of activities within urban areas, as described in Section 4.2.

3 	Fuel sales data indicates that about half of Thailand’s land transport energy use is represented by the BMR. But this
	 would overstate the actual energy use since some four million persons live outside, but close by, the BMR and statistics
	 on fuel sales in the BMR may be for fuel shipped and used up-country. In Section 5, it is estimated using a ‘bottom up’
	 approach that 20% of Thailand’s total transport-related energy use is consumed in the BMR but this appears to be an
	 underestimate. It is likely the actual figure is somewhere in the range 25% to 30%.



                                                                    Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions                5
    detailed analysis using more comprehensive analysis methods especially for the BMR4 is thus
    beneficial. Such detailed analysis would necessarily require the use of a comprehensive computer-
    ized transport model for the region to simulate the effect of planned interventions and other policy
    options on transport demand, energy use, emissions (greenhouse gases and vehicle exhausts),
    and transport user effects (e.g. travel time). The World Bank’s 2010 Flagship Report entitled “Winds
    of Change: East Asia’s Sustainable Energy Future�5 provided strategic but detailed modeling of
    several alternative scenarios for provision of infrastructure and implementation of other policies
    in Bangkok. The results of the BMR transport analysis were not reported separately in “Winds of
    Change� but are reported in this Note extended by the addition of two scenarios.


                                       Figure 1.1: Analytical Framework




             Source: Study Team




    4 	Due to ‘network’ effects and interaction of transport supply, land use and travel demand.

    5 	The “Winds of Change� report analyzed alterative energy scenarios for East Asia including Thailand and proposed
    	 a strategic direction for the region to meets its energy needs on a sustainable basis. In support of the study detailed
    	 transport analyses were undertaken of 10 cities in Asia including the BMR.


6   The World Bank Group
                                                        What is Green Transport?
                                                                                             2
	   •	 How does ‘green transport’ differ from ‘environmentally sustainable transport’ or just ‘transport’?

Transport has impacts in the economic, environmental and social dimensions. Economic effi-
ciency, as often measured by travel time reductions to users, is the principal objective of improved
transport. However, transport affects the environment in terms of energy use, greenhouse gas
emissions and air pollution. Transport also impacts on the social dimension by promoting (or re-
ducing) social inclusion and generating other co-benefits such as safety. The three dimensions of
transport impacts are summarized in Table 2.1.

A growing concern for environmental sustainability directs more attention to ‘sustainable
transport’ and ‘green transport’. In simple terms, the majority of transport except for walking and
other non-motorized modes is not green or sustainable. Most transport uses some form of fossil
fuel and is likely to do so for the foreseeable future. Modern urban rail systems such as those that
operate in Bangkok at present use electricity as their motive source that is almost entirely produced
by the combustion of fossil fuels6.

Although virtually all motorized transport systems are fossil-fuel based some systems are
greener than others. Conceptually, the ‘green’ element of a transport system can be measured
in three ways: energy-efficiency, carbon-intensity and extent to which it produces local pollutants
that are harmful to human health. Rail and bus mass transport may achieve ‘green’ credentials by
attracting significant volumes of drivers from cars. Alternatively, the ‘green’ effect may arise from
the inherent and direct energy efficiency of the mode’s motive power such as a use of a hybrid
(gasoline/ electric) engine compared to, for example, a conventional gasoline engine. Transport
used in an effective way and operated efficiently with high load factors can therefore achieve strong
economic benefits, reduce energy consumption and emissions.

A focus on the ‘green’ components of transport expands the scope of sustainable transport
to comprehensively consider environmental and energy impacts. But for transport to be truly
sustainable it needs to fully consider green concerns. For the purposes of this Note ‘sustainable
transport’ and ‘green transport’ are therefore considered identical concepts.

Achieving green transport requires comprehensive analysis of costs and impacts (i.e. benefits
and disbenefits) across the three dimensions to achieve an optimal outcome. Viewing transport
from the perspective of ‘green transport’ or ‘low-carbon transport’ or ‘environmentally sustainable
transport’ or any other point of view does not mean the other dimensions would not be important.
The approach advocated is to always think about transport in all its dimensions even when focusing

6 	92% in 2005 according to “World Bank Development Indicators.�




                                                               Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   7
    on ‘green transport.’ The dimensions are closely related and the opportunity cost of implementa-
    tion needs to be considered. For example, very expensive measures may yield significant green
    benefits (i.e. reduction in energy and emissions). But the same resources applied elsewhere in
    the transport sector, or elsewhere in the economy, might be able to achieve even more significant
    benefits. Prioritizing transport policy or infrastructure initiatives for implementation therefore needs
    to quantify and monetize all impacts as far as possible and compare them to implementation and
    operations costs on a whole-of-life basis.

    Economic, social and environmental benefits often go hand in hand. For many transport projects,
    maximization of ‘green’ impacts requires projects to deliver strong user benefits (i.e. economic
    efficiency) through faster and more reliable travel times to induce travel behavior changes such as
    mode shift that may deliver the desired ‘green’ benefits. The optimal choice of transportation initia-
    tives needs to be those that achieve the highest economic return where ‘impacts’ in all dimensions
    are comprehensively quantified and monetized.


                Table 2.1: Consider Transport’s Impacts in Three Dimensions




            Source: Study Team


    Green transport infrastructure and services should also have the following desirable charac-
    teristics:

    	   •	 Efficiency of resources use – such as energy and water during implementation and operation;

    	 •	 Resilience to climate risk – the design of both the transport infrastructure and consideration
    		 of the way it will operate needs to consider changing requirements such as due to shifts in


8   The World Bank Group
		 weather and climate patterns (e.g. flood frequency and severity) and the role of transport in
		 aiding communities to function during, and recover after, major floods and other natural
		disasters;

	 •	 Financial sustainability to ensure well selected infrastructure and services continue to
		 operate as planned;

	   •	 Institutional sustainability to support desirable planning, implementation and operations.

Irrespective of the importance of these subjects they are not dealt with further in this Note with
instead the main focus being on economic, social and environmental impacts. The focus of this
Note is on green transport initiatives to mitigate energy use and emissions but at the same time
to maximize user economic benefits and promote social inclusion without compromising safety.




                                                       Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   9
            3
     Why Green Transport?
     	    •	 Why green transport is important for green growth?
     	    •	 What are the emerging challenges?

     	 3.1	 Current Situation and Future Trends
     Transport and industry consume over 70% of the country’s energy, however, energy intensity in
     both sectors has not improved much. Final energy consumption in Thailand reaches 70,247 ktoe
     in 2010 and the share of the transport sector is 35% following only the manufacturing and mining
     sector with a 36% share. Together and individually the efficiency of these two sectors has a major
     influence on the nation’s total energy use. Transport energy consumption has been growing at a
     faster rate than GDP growth and transport’s energy intensity, similar to industry energy intensity,
     has not improved significantly since 1982 (Figure 3.1). In contrast, other countries have been able
     to reduce transport energy intensity as their GDP per capita grows. Thailand’s transport energy
     intensity thus compares poorly with either comparable (except the net oil-exporter Malaysia) or
     well-performing nations (Figure 3.2).

         Figure 3.1: Thailand’s Total, Transport        Figure 3.2: Transport Energy Intensity
             and Industry Energy Intensity              and GDP Per Capita in 2005, Various
                                                                       Countries




     Source: Calculated by the Study Team with data    Source: Calculated based on transport energy
     from Ministry of Energy and Bank of Thailand.     consumption data from IEA available at http://data.
                                                       iea.org/ieastore/default.asp, and GDP data from
                                                       World Bank’s Data Development Platform/World
                                                       Development Indicators Database.

     Rising oil prices impact the energy-intensive transport sector. In the long-term real global oil
     prices will continue to increase despite short-term fluctuations. According to the International
     Energy Agency (2011), the oil price is projected to reach 118 USD per barrel in year 2020 and
     140 USD per barrel in year 2035 (in 2010 prices) in IEA’s Current Policies Scenario. This oil price

10   The World Bank Group
increase will affect the transport sector, particularly on logistics costs 7, but the extent of the impact
will depend on the flexibility of the transport system to adjust and consumer behavior in response
to any price increases that are passed on to them. Real transportation costs that represent 47%
of total logistics costs have risen by over 46% during 2001-2010 for road transport (Figure 3.3).

  Figure 3.3: Growth Index of Thailand Logistics Costs, 2001-2010 (2001=100)




Source: National Economic and Social Development Board.

Key trends in transport sector will be characterized by continued growth in demand for travel for
both freight and passengers. Vehicle-kilometers have grown steadily since 1995 with passen-
ger vehicle-kilometers growing by 74% to 2009 roughly equivalent to GDP growth with freight
vehicle-kilometers growing by 30% over the same period 8. Freight and passenger travel demand
(measured in vehicle-kilometers, passenger-kilometers and tonne-kilometers) will continue to grow
with higher GDP. With an already extensive road network nation-wide, road will continue to carry
the majority of freight and passengers. The share of the transport task as measured by aggregate
vehicle-kilometers performed by motorcycles, passenger cars and trucks (freight vehicles) from
1995 to 1999 indicates relatively stable shares. Similarly, in terms of freight tonne-kilometers of
travel in 2010 the role of road (85%), rail (2%), air (less than 1%) and coast shipping (5%) have
not changed much from 2001 – 2010 as shown in Figure 3.4. However, inland water transport
had significantly increased its share of freight carried from 5% in 2001 to about 7% in 2010 at the
expense of road. Despite this road continues to dominate the freight task and passenger task.
Due to this dominance, the structure of national modal shares in the next 10 years or more is not


7 	According to NESDB, logistics costs comprise of transportation cost (47%), inventory holding cost (44%) and logistic
	 administration cost (9%).
8 	These data only represent traffic volumes on roads which belong to Department of Highways and not on other roads
	 which belong to the Department of Rural Roads and local municipalities.



                                                                 Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions              11
     expected to change much. However, there is potential for rail to play a more significant freight
     transport role as a result of government’s planned major investments in rail infrastructure (e.g.
     dual-track expansion) in selected corridors.

                  Figure 3.4: Road Travel Demand (vehicle-km), 1995-2009




                  Source: Department of Highways


                 Figure 3.5: Modal Shares of Goods Transported, 2001-2010




                  Source: Ministry of Transport




12   The World Bank Group
Growth in motorization rate is expected to moderate while vehicles technology is likely to
improve resulting in some improvement in fuel efficiency. Domestic sales for motor vehicles and
motorcycles have been growing at a slower pace since 2005 (Figure 3.6) while the trend in new
vehicle registration shows that the share of small passenger cars has been increasing in recent
years (Figure 3.7). Vehicle availability is increasing with currently fewer than 25% of households
having no car or motorcycle available compared to over 50% in the early 1990s (World Bank 2007).
New vehicles being introduced to the fleet are expected to be more fuel-efficient as well as safer
as a result of global market development and consumer preferences. However, a conscious effort
to introduce fuel economy and enhanced fuel quality standards could play a vital role in re-shaping
the vehicle market and improving fuel efficiency.

       Figure 3.6: Domestic Sales of                          Figure 3.7: New Vehicle Registration,
         Automotives, 2005-2011                                            2002-2011




Source: Thailand Automotive Institute                         Source: Department of Land Transport.

Bio-fuels have been penetrating the fuel market. Responding to higher oil prices, Thailand has
developed a strong bio-fuel policy with B5, E10, E20, and E85 already available in the market9.
The major motive for bio-fuel promotion in Thailand is energy security. E10 is well-penetrated in the
gasoline market while E20 and E85 sales are still very limited. In 2011, total bio-fuels consump-
tion reached 3,734 ktoe accounting for 57% of total gasoline consumption and 4% of total diesel
consumption. The government has set a target to further promote bio-fuel for both diesel and
gasoline in the future with a target to replace 44% of imported oil with bio-fuels by the year 202110.
However, with a close relationship and complex interaction between food and bio-fuels production,
economic and environmental sustainability concerns need to be considered more carefully and
comprehensively. Since bio-fuels are blends with gasoline and diesel subsidizing bio-fuels may
not necessarily yield green transport outcomes if lower prices encourage excessive energy use.

9 	 B5 and B10 are bio-diesel mixes with 5% and 10% bio-diesel with 95% and 90% conventional diesel respectively. E10,
	 E20, and E85 mixes are ethanol mixes with 10%, 20% and 85% ethanol and 90%, 80% and 15% conventional gasoline
	respectively.
10 	According to the government’s Ten-Year Alternative Energy Development Plan, it aims to increase ethanol consumption
	 to 9 million liters per day, biodiesel to 5.97 million liters per day and diesel substitutes with new technologies to 25
	 million liters per day. The government also plans to phase out ULG 91 by 2021.



                                                                   Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions               13
     Higher variations in global weather patterns are projected resulting in more occurrence of
     extreme events. The impact of global warming on long term changes in climate is still surrounded
     by some uncertainty due to limits in the duration of temperature and weather records and under-
     standing of climate processes. Nevertheless, some significant variations in weather patterns are
     being observed. The highest maximum temperate recorded in the last 10 years was recorded in
     2009 (Figure 3.8) although the mean temperature did not vary much from year to year. In 2011,
     the quantity of rain during the rainy season was the highest recorded since 1900 (Figure 3.9) with
     rainfall exhibiting a slow increasing trend over the past 100 years. Thailand’s Second National
     Communication to UNFCCC anticipates that rainfall across all the regions in the country has a
     potential to increase by about 10-20% and the weather will tend to be warmer due to an increase
     in maximum and minimum temperatures by 2 degrees Celsius.


     Figure 3.8: Mean of Yearly Temperature, Figure 3.9: The Observed Quantity of
           Whole Country, 2000-2009          Rain in July, August and September in
                                                        Northern Thailand




     Source: National Statistical Office.                          Source: GPCC v5 analysis 1901–2009, monitoring/
                                                                   first guess analysis 2010–2011. From: [knmi.nl]
                                                                   accessed November 2011 quoted in World Bank
                                                                   (2011b).

     Droughts and flooding are projected to become more common with increasingly severe impacts.
     Global warming is expected to aggravate flooding, droughts and other natural disasters. Statistics
     indicate that although the occurrence and severity of flooding vary from year to year the magnitude
     of impact and associated damages have tended to be higher in recent years. In 2009, more than
     30,000 villages were affected by flood which is the highest number of villages affected since 2000
     (Figure 3.10). In the same year, 4.5 million people were affected by drought which is the highest on
     record since 2002 (Figure 3.11). In 2011, Thailand endured a very severe flood event caused by
     heavy rain combined with multiple tropical storms throughout the extended rainy season resulting
     in unprecedented damage in terms of life and costs11. There is thus a growing awareness of the


     11 	
        Flash floods were reported in several areas in the north in May, and tropical depression Haima arrived in June followed
      	 by Nock-Ten in July, the combination of which caused widespread flooding. The southwest monsoon in August-September
     	 and the northeast monsoon in October added to the flooding, which was making its way into the central plains, filling
     	 many major dams to capacity and causing breaches in 10 major flood control structures. Some 66 provinces were


14   The World Bank Group
need for: (i) comprehensive disaster risk management incorporating climate factors; and (ii) the
design of more resilient transport and other infrastructure in terms of their ability to continue to
operate during, or quickly recover, after natural disaster events.


Figure 3.10: Flood – Number of Occur- Figure 3.11: Drought – Number of Occur-
     rences and Affected Villages          rences and Affected Villages




Source: National Statistical Office.                         Source: National Statistical Office.



	 3.2	 Key Issues
Continued GDP growth, gradual restructuring of the economy, improving regional connectivity
all imply continued growth of demand for transport services. Passenger and freight transport
growth is closely related to GDP growth (Figure 3.12). It is expected the economy will continue to
adjust and restructure to increase the significance of the services sector while reducing that of in-
dustry. While this trend will lower the demand for transport service inputs since the services sector
is less transport intensive than industry, it is expected that this shift will occur gradually. The role
of the service sector has actually slowly reduced since 1970 as a proportion of GDP but the future
growth in services is expected to be in more productive activities than the past with emphasis on
financial and commercial services. Over the past decade the significance of manufacturing was
maintained (at 39%-40% of GDP) while the agricultural sector increased its contribution to GDP
from 11% in 2000 to 17% in 2011 (Figure 3.13). In addition, improving regional physical connec-
tivity in the context of wider and deeper regional economic integration and growing trade volume
will impose additional demand for freight and passenger transport.




	   affected by severe, record-high flooding, including the Bangkok metropolitan area and its surrounding areas.
	   By November more than 5.5% of total landmass in the country had been inundated, and at the time of writing,
	   approximately 11.2 million rai (18,000 km2) of farmland remained under water. Overall, the floods affected more than
	   13 million people and resulted in more than 680 deaths.


                                                                   Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions             15
     Figure 3.12: Shipment Index and GDP Figure 3.13: GDP and Share by Major
                                                        Sectors




     Source: Office of Industrial Economics and National   Source: National Economic and Social Develop-
     Economic and Social Development Board.                ment Board.


     Traffic congestion in the BMR has a significant effect on quality of life, undue economic losses,
     externalities and excessive fuel use due to the BMR’s high share of national transport energy
     use. Bangkok has not seen recent major declines in peak hour traffic speeds in the central area
     despite the continuing growth of population and vehicle ownership. Congestion was likely more
     severe in the 1980s and early 1990s, when the road and expressway network was less compre-
     hensive and modern Mass Rapid Transit system did not exist. Today’s average peak hour speed
     of 20 kilometers per hour observed on major roads is typical of that experienced in many large
     cities. But congestion has spread outwards geographically and to the off-peak periods. With more
     dispersed land use and congestion, commuting times for many trip makers remain time consuming
     and unreliable. With some 40% of daily person trips still made by road-based bus services and
     limited use of bus priority measures, large numbers of bus passengers must endure slow, unreli-
     able travel on a daily basis. With continued economic growth, congestion will continue to deepen
     and spread geographically and temporally. There are significant opportunities for addressing traffic
     congestion through: (i) modern traffic control systems to manage traffic more efficiently that ought
     to be able to achieve, perhaps on average, a 3% reduction in delay and excessive fuel use; (ii)
     supporting traffic management to allocate road space to buses and other priority users; and (iii)
     improved pricing to moderate demand (e.g. removal of diesel fuel subsidies) or more comprehen-
     sive forms of road user charging.

     Transport cost is one of the factors contributing to the competitiveness of the overall economy.
     There is a close linkage between transport system performance, as reflected in efficiency and
     transport costs, and the economy. Efficient transport has a direct impact on national competitive-
     ness and national welfare. The cost of logistics is one of the key factors which determine industry
     competitiveness. Although the proportion of Thailand’s logistics cost to GDP has declined from 18%


16   The World Bank Group
in 2001 to 15% in 2010 (Figure 3.14) the transportation component of logistics cost is declining
slowly. Compared to inventory, storage and administration components of total logistics costs in
Thailand, transportation represents the highest share at 47% of the total cost compared to 49% in
2001. Transport’s expenses also account for a significant share of households expenses at 18.9%
in 2011 representing an increase of 17% from 2001 (Figure 3.15).


Figure 3.14: Thailand’s Logistics Costs Figure 3.15: Share of Transport Expenses
                to GDP                          to Household Expenses




Source: National Economic and Social Develop-             Source: National Statistical Office.
ment Board.


Given that fuel price is a key factor in determining transportation costs the manner in which
the transport sector can respond to future oil price increases will have significant implications
for the economy. The long-term fuel price elasticity in Thailand is estimated to be -0.31 for the
period during 1986-2007 (World Bank 2009a). In Europe which relies more heavily on rail, barge
transport, bus and non-motorized transport, the short-term gasoline price elasticity of road traffic
is estimated at -0.27 with the long-term elasticity lying between -0.6 to -1.012. Thailand’s relatively
low long-term fuel price elasticity compared to Europe’s, together with high fuel intensity for diesel
and gasoline, suggests that Thailand’s transport system is less able to adjust fuel consumption in
response to fuel price increases over the long term.

Transport is recognized both as a major energy consumer and source of GHG emissions.
Transportation is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.
Transport sector’s emission in 2008 accounts for around 18% of total emissions. The share of the
transport sector’s emission is projected to increase to 22% in the year 2050 (Figure 3.16)13.




12 	Goodwin and others (2004); Graham and Glaister (2004)
13 	Joint Graduate School for Energy and Management (2010) quoted in ADBI (2011).




                                                               Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   17
      Figure 3.16: GHG Emission Projections Under the Business as Usual Scenario




     Source: Joint Graduate School for Energy and Management (2010) quoted in ADBI (2011).



     At the same time, transport activities generate external costs to the society which should be
     minimized. In addition to imposing externalities by emitting greenhouse gas emission from vehicle
     fuel combustion, transport is also a major source of damage to public health by contributing to
     air pollution and road trauma through loss of life and injury. Congestion imposes external costs on
     the economy by decreasing productivity and lowering quality of life14.

     Transport needs to adapt to cushion the impacts of weather variations and natural disaster in
     order to provide reliable and undisrupted services to the economy. The impact of an extreme
     weather event on the transport sector was demonstrated by the major flooding in Thailand in
     2011. Damages and losses to the transport sector (Figure 3.17) are estimated to have been THB
     23 billion. The damage is almost entirely to the road sector with some damages to rail infrastruc-
     ture and airport which was inundated (Figure 3.18). Losses were incurred in the form of increased
     costs of transport across the road network post-flood compared with pre-flood as well as losses
     in tolls revenues (World Bank 2011b). As an example of how transport contributed to continuous
     community functioning during times of natural disaster is provided by Bangkok’s new urban rail
     systems. Although they service less than 10% of all daily person trips in the BMR continued, these
     rail systems continued to operate virtually unimpeded during most of the extended period of flooding
     in 2011.




     14 	
        For example, estimates of external costs in the USA show that congestion, accidents and local air pollution have the
     	 highest costs on the economy at 105 cents per gallon, 63 cents per gallon, and 42 cents per gallon, respectively.


18   The World Bank Group
Figure 3.17: Areas Affected by Flood in Figure 3.18: Damages from Flood on
            Land Transport                        Road Infrastructure




Source: World Bank (2011b).                         Source: World Bank (2011b).



	 3.3	 Meeting Transport Challenges
Serving growing demand with quality services under resource constraints in the environment
of higher risk and uncertainty. The transport sector is facing several challenges from both the
demand and supply side. To fulfill its function in the economy, the transport system must strive to
deliver safe, efficient and cost-effective services at zero or minimal environmental and social costs
in an environment of higher risk from climate change impacts. Besides meeting typical constraints
such as funding availability, transport must also deal with growing energy supply constraints and an
increased obligation to climate change mitigation efforts. At the same time, lessons learnt from the
recent major floods suggest that the concept of disaster resilience must be more comprehensively
integrated into transport infrastructure planning.

Effectively responding to future trends in global oil prices. With a relatively high transport
energy intensity that has remained static for the last two decades, the transport sector will need to
improve its efficiency to better cushion the impact of long term oil price increases. A more efficient
and diversified transportation system together with appropriate pricing will allow consumers and


                                                        Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions      19
     the economy to have more flexibility (e.g. in making choices of location, travel mode, and vehicle
     type) to adjust their behavior to respond to price increases. Improved efficiency will also have a
     direct impact on the nation’s transportation costs, economic competitiveness, balance of payments
     and energy security.

     Realizing large untapped potential in the transport sector for energy savings and GHG emission
     reductions. The country’s national energy efficiency plan highlights transport as the key sector to
     achieve energy savings and contribute to the target of reducing Thailand’s final energy consump-
     tion. The recently announced Twenty-Year National Energy Efficiency Development Plan (NEEDP)
     2011-2030 sets the target to reduce the country’s energy intensity by 25% in year 2030 from the
     base year in 2005, or from 16.2 ktoe per THB billion of GDP in 2005 to 12.1 ktoe per THB billion
     of GDP in 2030. This target is equivalent to reducing energy consumption by 20% or 30,000 KTOE
     from the BAU scenario in 2030. The sectoral targets for energy reduction are: (i) transport (44.3%);
     (ii) industry (37.7%); (iii) medium and small commercial buildings and residential buildings (10.7%);
     and (iv) large commercial buildings (7.3%). The most important policy measure is improved fuel
     efficiency in vehicles that is expected to contribute 77% of the estimated total energy savings in
     transport (i.e. of 12,470 ktoe). The second highest potential is modal shift for both passenger and
     freight transport which has the potential to achieve 17% of the target, followed by travel demand
     management measures which could achieve 6% of the remaining potential saving. In addition, as
     transport is a major emitter of greenhouse gas enhanced transport energy efficiency will contribute
     to reducing emissions and meeting Thailand’s relevant international obligations.

     Translating the ‘green growth’ and ‘green transport’ vision into reality. While it is recognized
     that green transport can make a major contribution to the green growth vision, ‘Green Growth’
     and ‘Low-carbon Society’ are ambitious concepts. In order for these concepts to be meaningfully
     integrated into transport policy and planning efforts several actions are required including: (i) defini-
     tion of a clear planning and policy framework; (ii) choice of appropriate policy instruments and well
     prioritized investments; (iii) efficient and accountable implementation; and (iv) establishment of a
     robust monitoring and evaluation framework.

     Choosing the right path for future growth of Bangkok and secondary cities. In addition to
     efforts at the national level, cities are the most important operating units where to take action on
     initiating greener transport and economic policies. Figure 3.19 illustrates that most developing
     cities in Southeast Asia currently have relatively low GHG emissions (and energy use) per capita,
     although their energy intensity (energy use per $1,000 GDP) may be higher, when compared to
     many cities around the world. However, as GDP per capita increases, urban GHG emissions and
     energy use may take different paths as illustrated by various cities in the region. Seoul and Tokyo
     have higher GDP per capita than Bangkok, yet their energy intensity per $1,000 of GDP is lower,
     and their GHG emissions per capita are less than half of Bangkok. These cities appear to offer an
     alternative greener growth path that could be pursued by Bangkok in the long term. This greener
     alternative calls for a significant reduction of energy intensity of economic activities and improve-
     ments in energy efficiency across all sectors not only transport.




20   The World Bank Group
    Figure 3.19: Energy Use Per $1,000 GDP Vs GDP Per Capita In 25 Cities




Note: (tGHG per capita – circa 2006, except Da Nang, Surabaya and Cebu – 2010)
Source: World Bank (2012)




                                                     Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   21
          4
     How to Facilitate Green Transport?
     	   •	 What specific initiatives might be considered for inter-urban and urban areas?

     	 4.1	 Applying the System-Mode-Vehicle Framework
     Transport interventions at different level have different economic, social and environmental
     outcomes. Table 4.1 sets out in general terms how transport interventions aimed at the three lev-
     els (described in Section 1.3) may influence outcomes in the economic, social and environmental
     dimensions. Because they are designed to be comprehensive, System level interventions have
     the potential for strong beneficial impacts in the economic, social and environmental dimensions.
     Modal interventions (e.g. urban rail) are primarily aimed at improving the efficiency of travel for a
     given land use and economic structure. They can therefore be expected to have strong economic
     impacts, a lesser impact on social aspects (e.g. inclusion, equity etc.) and a weak association with
     the environment that would be strongest where significant modal switch from less efficient modes
     (e.g. single occupancy cars) is likely. Vehicle level interventions aimed at reducing emissions or
     improving fuel efficiency are unlikely to improve the speed or quality of travel. Consequently, the
     impact is potentially strongest for the environment and to a lesser extent for the social dimension
     as reduced vehicle emissions would reduce damage to human health.

          Table 4.1: Potential Impacts of System, Mode and Vehicle Interventions




     Note: OOO = strong impact; OO – moderate impact; O – low impact.
     Source: Study Team.


22   The World Bank Group
	 4.2	 Inter-city Transport Including Logistics and High Speed
			 Passenger Train
At a national level transport is not usually the decisive factor that determines where people
live, urban centers flourish or where economic investment occurs. But the historical proximity of
agricultural and mineral resources to suitable sites for river ports and seaports, and the abundance
of water for urban and agricultural use, has had a major influence on the nation’s settlement pattern.
Combined with the influence of government policies15 on, for example, investment and infrastruc-
ture development the present day spatial arrangement of population centers and economic hubs
has arisen. Where regional centers do not have a substantial economic base improved inter-city
transport may facilitate access away from these centers to others with greater advantages.

Agglomeration forces are still dominating with a continuing concentration of economic activi-
ties and population density in Bangkok and surrounding areas. Thailand’s regional cities16 are
much smaller in size than the BMR that has a current population of around 11 million people. While
there has been a long held desire to ‘deconcentrate’ Bangkok in fact urbanization is continuing
with the largest share of growth in urban population represented by the BMR and urbanization of
the adjacent peri-urban area17. Projections indicate that while 43% of Thailand’s population lived
in urban areas in 2005 with the share expected to grow to 50% by 2015. An increasing share of
the nation’s economic output is being produced in the BMR region as shown in Figure 4.1. The
ongoing improvements in regional highways, bus services and air services all of which center on
Bangkok have likely contributed to enhancing its primacy more than promoting decentralization.

Nevertheless, the regional cities are growing and obtaining greater critical mass. Policies outside
of the transport sector are likely to have been more influential in enhancing the relative attractive-
ness of regional centers. Such policies including development of major universities in principal
regional cities, investment in infrastructure, and the relatively recent phenomenon of enhancing the
autonomy of provincial and local governments. Regional cities also increasingly require transport
infrastructure and services to support their own internal needs.




15 	That may not always have achieved their goals.
16 	The metropolitan populations of the second and third major cities in Thailand after Bangkok in 2005 were: Chiang Mai

	   (500,000) and Nakhon Ratchasima (340,000).
17 	Kmonwatananisa, N. (2008) – data contained in Table 3 plus other data from ADB (2006).




                                                                  Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions              23
         Figure 4.1: Top 20 Provinces’ Real GPP and Population Growth, 1995-2011




     Source: National Statistical Office and National Economic and Social Development Board.


     At a national level, system-level interventions would primarily be driven by an economic
     rationale which would influence the pattern of travel demand. In this case the question for green
     transport is what is the best way to serve growing travel demand and improve efficiency in key
     freight and passenger corridors? The potential policies and investments for improving inter-city
     transport need to be assessed comprehensively. To inform appropriate decisions on the range of
     potential interventions shown in Table 4.2, the full range of economic, social and environmental
     impacts need to be assessed and balanced against the whole-of-life costs of implementation and
     operation18. The results of this assessment are summarized in Section 5 of this Policy Note.




     18 	
        It is not within the scope of this Policy Note to undertake a comprehensive assessment of any of the interventions listed
     	   in Table 4.2. Several of the interventions (Inter-city passenger rail, Inter-city freight rail and multi-modal logistics,
     	   Interurban bus, truck and bus retrofits to reduce emissions and energy use, the adoption of fuel economy standards
     	   to reduce vehicle-related energy use and emissions) were assessed from an energy efficiency perspective by
     	   World Bank (2009).


24   The World Bank Group
           Table 4.2: Potential Range of Inter-City Transport Interventions




     Source: Study Team


Two particular issues are of concern to the government at the time of writing this report: (i) improve-
ments to Thailand’s logistics system to make it more efficient and greener; and (ii) the potential
for high speed train (HST) to contribute to economic and sustainability goals. These topics are
discussed below.


		 4.2.1	Efficient Logistics

A shift in the economy to emphasize knowledge-based industries requires deepening of eco-
nomic clusters and geographic clustering to realize agglomeration economies. These industries
form vital links in global and domestic supply chains and require fast, reliable and secure access
to airports, seaports, and good quality national transport systems, to meet the requirements of
downstream production processes. To achieve this goal, logistics systems, including freight trans-
port, which could provide efficient services that meet the price, on-time attributes and other quality
attributes desired by customers will be required.


                                                         Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions      25
     Thailand’s freight transport services appear to exhibit several major inefficiencies due to aged
     fleets, with low load limits and low fuel efficiency, a low penetration of multi-modal logistics providers,
     limited capital for new investment by small firms and limited use of Electronic Data Interchange for
     facilitating shipment and delivery and supply chain management (NESDB and World Bank, 2008;
     JETRO, 2003; ADB et. al. 2005). There is substantial room for efficiency gains and associated
     energy savings. While transport infrastructure investment is needed to address capacity shortages,
     the key challenges will be in achieving more efficient services through appropriate management
     of both road and rail modes.

     The extensive national highway network is of good quality and has benefited the logistics
     industry greatly. Outside the BMR, vehicles are generally able to travel without excessive delays.
     Within the BMR, there is no overwhelming evidence that truck transport is greatly inefficient due
     to traffic congestion. Truck transport benefits from the presence of strategic road infrastructure
     around and within Bangkok that supports the bypass function, and the plentiful supply of industrial
     land within the region permitting industrial firms to locate conveniently near their supply chains.
     Moreover, distribution of goods within the central city of Bangkok is provided by a large fleet of
     small trucks operated by thousands of private firms in a competitive market that has adapted to
     the operating environment over many years.

     Operational inefficiencies may exist because the sector relies heavily on third party truck
     operations, but these are of varying quality and fragmented. It also appears that there is inad-
     equate use of Electronic Data Interchange in supply chain management for the production and
     distribution of high-value goods (e.g. electronics and automobile). However, given the dominant
     role of the private sector and market in this sector, public policy might have a limited role in ad-
     dressing these issues.

     The truck fleet is old and inefficient, consisting of many energy-inefficient and polluting 6 and
     10 wheel diesel-fueled trucks which are cheap to purchase and maintain. Current medium and
     heavy truck taxes or charges are not differentiated by age, emissions, and energy performance,
     thus providing no incentive for the use of less polluting and more energy efficient vehicles. A re-
     view of vehicle taxation and charges is needed as a basis to formulate differentiated taxation and
     charges. This could help minimize the distortions between old and new trucks, between heavy and
     light trucks, and among rail, water and truck transport. In addition, Thailand’s heavy truck and bus
     industries rely on the practice of rebuilding vehicles on an old chassis to lower the perceived costs
     of ownership. Rebuilding on the scale that has existed allowed vehicle owners to avoid investing
     in new trucks and buses with advanced technologies, and consequently lose the opportunity for
     progressive improvements in emissions, fuel economy and safety performance

     The government can facilitate continued reduction in freight transport costs by: (i) enhancing land
     use-transport links such as better access to industrial and warehouse areas; (ii) ensuring adequate
     road capacity to meet freight transport needs; (iii) improving the standard and appropriateness
     of trucks through regulatory changes, e.g. limiting the extent to which old trucks are continually
     recycled, allowing the introduction of larger trucks that reduce freight transport costs and which
     have axle distributions and suspension that cause less damage to roads than current trucks, and

26   The World Bank Group
strict enforcement of truck standards; (iv) facilitating truck operations (including periodic re-exami-
nation of constraints on the movement of trucks in Bangkok to ensure that the balance meets the
ongoing needs of the city); and (v) improving the standard of safety in the truck industry, covering
drivers, vehicle loading and vehicles. This requires sufficient motivation and capacity in government
to pursue such change over the medium term in conjunction with the private sector, seeking to
maximize the level of self-enforcement with sound auditing and enforcement arrangements.


		 4.2.2	The Potential for High Speed Train

High Speed Train (HST) lines to connect Bangkok to principal regional centers would represent
a generational step in technology and potential benefits, but also present high costs and risks.
The Thai Government is considering HST for several reasons including a desire to reduce energy
consumption used in Thailand’s long distance passenger transport. It is also recognized that the
main benefits would be welfare benefits to travelers due to fast and convenient travel and possible
favorable effects on regional development.

HST systems are extremely capital-intensive, and require new dedicated rail corridors. Viability
therefore depends on achieving good load factors and high use of the available infrastructure by
HST services. According to a study initiated by the World Bank in 201019 the criteria for HST to
be economically and financially viable are:

		•	 Congested rail and transport corridors characterized by extensive urbanization.

		•	 Two very large cities located 250-500 km apart (e.g. Seoul-Busan, 420km;
			 Brussels-Paris, 275km; Rome-Milan, 514km: London-Paris, 495km).

		•	 Longer corridor that has several very large urban centers located every 150-300km
			 (e.g. Tokyo-Osaka, 700km; Beijing-Shanghai, 1,300km; and Beijing-Guangzhou, 2,100km)
			 with maximum speeds of 300kph to maintain competiveness with air transport.

		•	 Annual passenger demand of 20 million to 30 million and more – 20 million
			 passengers per year is the minimum required to cover the working expenses and interest
			 costs of HST assuming they are paying commercial fares.

None of these criteria are currently or likely to be met in the next several decades in Thailand.
With a population of 11 million, metropolitan Bangkok (i.e. the BMR) is large but Thai regional
cities are quite small and located at distances from Bangkok that are either too far apart for HST
to be competitive with aviation or possibly too close to be competitive with car or bus for large
segments of the population. Large population hubs at each end of a HST line and a large
proportion of the urban hub populations able to access HST line stations conveniently are both


19 	Figure 5 in P. Amos, R. Bullock and J. Sondhi (2010) “High-Speed Rail the Fast Track to Economic Development�.

	   Prepared by World Bank, July.



                                                               Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions           27
     needed to ensure high demand. But current circumstances are not favorable. For example, Chiang
     Mai (745 km from Bangkok) and Nakhon Ratchasima (256 km from Bangkok), the second and
     third largest cities respectively, have urban populations of 513,000 and 250,00020 which combined
     represent only 7% of the BMR’s population.

     The recent pre-feasibility study for long term railway development found that of 16 routes
     studied three were worthy of implementation by 2014 as rapid trains operating initially at 120
     kph: (i) Bangkok – Nakhon Sawan (240 km); (ii) Bangkok – Khon Khaen (443 km); and Bangkok –
     Hua Hin (225 km). In the long term, it was recommended that the Khon – Khaen Line be extended
     to Nong Khai and a line to Hat Yai be developed. Although proposed to be implemented as rapid
     train the aim was to develop to HST standard over time as double tracking and electrification are
     progressively implemented.

     Closely ranked was the Chiang Mai line which is the current government priority. The results of
     the pre-feasibility showed very little difference between the implementation cost of rapid train (160
     kph) and HST (250 kph) but higher benefits for the latter with the result: (i) that 160 kph rapid train
     was generally ranked higher than 120 kph rapid train; and (ii) 250 kph HST was ranked higher than
     160 kph rapid train. The results of this or any pre-feasibility study should be used with caution. A
     more detailed analysis of options, potential designs, initial investment and whole of life operation
     costs and risks is required prior to making a large financial commitment to developing a HST line
     at a cost of several billion dollars with likely high recurrent financial commitments to bridge the gap
     between revenues from passengers and operating and maintenance cost. Such a detailed study
     is proposed for the Chiang Mai line.

     The case for rapid inter-city passenger train could be better than that for HST. Modern rapid
     train services using specially acquired rollingstock can travel at service speeds of up to 160 kph
     on well constructed narrow gauge21 dedicated railway track. Where double tracking is already
     planned then modern rapid trains might be considered to be added for a moderate incremental
     cost (trains, control systems, appropriate engineered corridor, higher strength ballasted track etc).
     Although slower than HST, modern inter-city passenger train services could greatly improve the
     quality and speed of long distance passenger travel in Thailand.

     Modern inter-city passenger train services providing in-service speeds of 160 kph consume
     less than half the energy of HST operating at 300kph as shown in Figure 4.2. As CO2 emissions
     are closely related to energy consumption22 in Thailand they would be expected to rise similarly
     with speed also.




     20 	
        The population of the Chiang Mai Urban Plan Area in 2005 was 513,000 persons. Greater Nakhon Ratchasima which
     	 is defined as the region covered by the City Plan had a population of 340,000 persons in 2008.
     21	1,067 mm as used in Thailand.
     22	According to Power Development Plan 2010 (2010-2030) 69% of Thailand’s future power generation (i.e. in 2030) will

     	 be generated by fossil fuels.


28   The World Bank Group
In Europe it was found that intercity trains generates significantly fewer CO2 emissions per
capita than HST but are unlikely to generate lower emissions than long distance bus. As shown
in Figure 4.3, a recent European study found that intercity trains generates significantly fewer CO2
emissions per capita than HST and dependent on the precise characteristics of the rail corridors
(and demand) may sometimes generate as few emissions as inter-city bus. The latter have low
CO2 emissions per passenger because they normally operate with high load factors as in Thai-
land. Intercity train was found to be usually more efficient than car from a CO2 perspective under
European conditions23.


                   Figure 4.2: Energy Consumption versus Speed for HST




Source: Figure 5 in P. Amos, R. Bullock and J. Sondhi (2010) “High-Speed Rail the Fast Track to Eco-
nomic Development�. Prepared by World Bank, July.




23 	This European study based its comparative analyses of modes on CO emissions per passenger but European intercity
                                                                     2
	   transport experiences carries much higher volumes of passengers than Thailand. Consequently, Thai decision makers
	   should be aware that the European results give an overly optimistic view of the potential effect of HST and Intercity train
	   on CO2 emissions.


                                                                      Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions                 29
      Figure 4.3: Average CO2 Emissions per Passenger-km for Long Distance Pas-
                              senger Transport (in Europe)




     Source: Figure 8 in Van Essen H, Olivier B, Dings J and Van Den Brink R (2003). “The environmental
     performance of the principal modes of freight and passenger transport in the policy-making context�.
     Prepared by CE, Delft, Netherlands.


     	 4.3	 Urban Areas: Opportunity for Integrated Transport/ Land
     			 use Planning
     Continuing urbanization and motorization have aggravated Bangkok’s well known transport
     problems. Due to poor land use planning and management, land use has dispersed increasing
     commuting distances and time spent traveling to jobs, educational establishments, shops and
     community facilities. Within BMR, urban densities are high with affordable housing not always
     conveniently located with respect to job locations or schools. This process of land use dispersion
     has also been driven by a growing demand for modern, spacious housing and offices away from
     the traditional city center and at the fringes of the urban boundary (that is expanding outwards). As
     a result public transport’s role is declining, further encouraging the switch to private vehicles, and
     exacerbating traffic congestion. Air and noise pollution are rising with harmful effects on human
     health and a general deterioration of the amenity of urban life. Increased energy use and greenhouse
     gas emissions are accompanying this growth in motorized travel with impacts on climate change.

     There is a complex interaction between city structure and relative accessibility. The geography
     of a city, its history and the ability (or inability) of government to plan and manage land use, have
     influenced the current land use arrangement of the BMR and the region’s current transport perfor-
     mance in the economic, social and environmental dimensions.

     Transport can be used to structure urban land use and contribute to favorable transport and
     system level outcomes. How might the array of urban transport interventions set out in Table 4.3
     best be used to support the desirable development of cities? Due to the strong nexus between
     transport (modal level) and land use (system level), the range of actual impacts in urban areas, the


30   The World Bank Group
impacts of typical interventions (e.g. as shown in Table 4.3) at the urban scale may vary consider-
ably depending on the precise nature of the intervention (e.g. its capacity and extent of integration
with other modes) and what areas they serve.

            Table 4.3: Potential Range of Urban Transport Interventions




Source: Study Team

Four conceptual city models are described below to provide some guidance on how transport
and land use may be mutually reinforcing to provide favorable transport and broader outcomes.
These models are summarized in Figure 4.4 and are based on three city archetypes described by
(Thomson 1977, pages 99-223). The fourth model is that proposed for the BMR by PCI (2005).
The starting assumption is that the level of population, jobs and other demographic characteristics
are the same in each city model.


                                                        Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions     31
     While some models are likely to produce better transport outcomes than others they are not nec-
     essarily achievable or ideal. The models are described in terms of various key characteristics such
     as the proportion of jobs in the key activity centers and public transport mode share but these
     numbers are only indicative. The articulation of the city models is aimed at assisting national and
     local government policy makers to visualize the current transport challenges facing their cities and
     how they would like the cities to develop in the future.

                                             Figure 4.4: Four City Models




     Source: Thomson (1977) pages 99-223 and PCI (2005) and others.

     		 4.3.1	Model A - Weak Center

     This first model ‘Weak Center’ characterizes present day Bangkok, Chiang Mai and Nakhon
     Rachasima (refer Table 4.4 for a summary of attributes). Here the city has grown beyond the tradi-
     tional city center as per capita incomes and motorization have increased. Public transport’s mode
     share is less than that for car and motorcycle (at between 10% and 40% of total trips) and public
     transport, dominated by bus and song-taew,24 is primarily radial in orientation since it is focused on
     the city center (or Central Business District, CBD) which despite pressure to disperse still contains

     24 	
        Fixed route open light vans usually registered as a fixed route public transport vehicle.


32   The World Bank Group
a high percentage of the metropolitan region’s jobs. The strong radial focus of public transport,
including new urban rail systems in Bangkok, have reinforced the high level of accessibility of the
city center but despite this the city is continuing to decentralize assisted by expressways and new
bridges across the Chao Praya River that have been completed in the last 30 years.

                                     Table 4.4: Model A – Weak Center




Source: Study Team


The transport outcome is mixed with public transport playing an important but declining role
with a heavy reliance on cars. While public transport carries a significant quantity of trips to the
central area that reinforces its accessibility, private cars and motorcycles are the primary means
of travel in outer suburban areas. Over time, public transport’s share of total trips is declining as
motorization increases and the city suburbanizes. Commuting distances and commuting times
are tending to increase under this model as is transport energy use per trip.



25	 The indicators cited are broad measures of welfare (first and fourth bullet) and fuel use/ energy use (second and third

	   bullets). Other indicators could be considered for other purposes e.g. (i) kilometers of high capacity transit per 1,000
	   people that is a crude but easily measured surrogate indicator for welfare and other things; (ii) fatal accidents per 1M
	   people as a measure of safety; (iii) carbon emissions for capita or per unit of transport system output as a measure of
	   carbon intensity; (iv) transport energy intensity (e.g. MJ/ passenger-km); and (v) measures of air quality (e..g. particulate
	   matter emissions per VKT)
26	 Burapatana and Ross (2011).
27	Ibid.




                                                                       Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions                  33
     The trend is for further motorization as characterized by Model B. However, given Bangkok’s
     historical development path, and its density, the almost total reliance on private vehicles repre-
     sented by Model B is unlikely to ever be reached. For Chiang Mai and Nakhon Rachasima, there
     is a greater risk that they will dramatically increase their reliance on private vehicles in the future
     since public transport already represents less than 15% of all trips in these cities respectively and
     this share is declining.


     		 4.3.2	Model B – Full Motorization

     The second model ‘Full Motorization’ represents an extreme reliance on cars (refer Table 4.5
     for a summary of attributes). Under this model, the land use and jobs are dispersed and private
     vehicle is the principal means of movement. In order to support the high use of cars, large tracts
     of land are devoted to both at-grade car parking or in denser areas, car parking buildings. Due to
     the reliance on private vehicles, but also the physical design of roadways and the buildings nearby,
     walking and other non motorized travel are inconvenient and unsafe. Further, since access to build-
     ings relies on private vehicles pedestrian access may be indirect with limited legibility. While there
     is a distribution of centers most serve as sub-centers with perhaps some higher order functions.
     There is a historical central area but the concentration of jobs in that center is likely less than 20%
     of the region’s total.

                                Table 4.5: Model B – Full Motorization




     Source: Study Team


34   The World Bank Group
Transport energy use is high due to the role of cars and limited use of public transport and the
resultant dispersed pattern of land use. Road development is actively pursued to create new
suburbs and new outlying industrial and sub-regional shopping complexes to support wide scale
private vehicle use. Public transport has been largely provided at a very basic level for those that
do not have access to a private vehicle. Commuting distances, commuting times and transport
energy use per trip are already quite high and likely increasing slowly.


		 4.3.3	Model C – Strong Center

The third model ‘Strong Center’ represents a dense urban form that is exhibited by megaci-
ties around the world (refer Table 4.6 for a summary of attributes). Cities such as London (14M
metro population), Paris (12M), New York (20M), and Tokyo (32M) exhibit the characteristics of a
strong center. A major proportion of the region’s jobs are contained in a very extended and dense
central area. These cities tend to have developed over a long time and were already established
centers prior to the commencement of the motorization age. Urban rail services and other public
transport support the high order functions and services provided by the center and facilitate growth
in employment and agglomeration economies. Due to high urban densities, car ownership is
discouraged with, for example, only around 50% of households in London and New York owning
a car28.

Transport benefits from a dense land use with high share of public transport and non-motorized
modes and low transport energy use. The net result is that travel by public transport and by
non-motorized modes dominate travel within London in 2007, only one third of daily trips were
made by car, and one third each by public transport and non motorized modes. In New York, for
trips to work, 40% was made by rail, 15% by bus, 8% by walking and 37% by car. With extensive
arterial streets well used by pedestrians, non motorized transport, buses and private vehicles,
frontage shops and developments take advantage of the street level activity. Major expressways
exist but at a lesser level than in cities are more motorized. These expressways are used to facili-
tate external traffic to bypass the city or to access airports, sea ports and other regional economic
hubs. Commuting distances and commuting times are moderate for these highly populated cities
and transport energy use per trip likely to be low to moderate.




28	 In 2007, 50% of households did not own a car in 2007 (Office for National Statistics UK) while in 2003 in New York

	   54% of households did not own a car in 2007 (Texas Transportation Institute: Urban Mobility Report 2003).



                                                                  Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions            35
                                      Table 4.6: Model C - Strong Center




     Source: Study Team


     		 4.3.4	Model D – Poly-Centric Development

     The fourth model ‘Poly-Centric Development’ represents a structure where the aim is to guide
     and manage the dispersion of land use (refer Table 4.7 for a summary of attributes). The CBD is
     linked by rapid transit to surrounding satellite centers each with their own employment and popu-
     lation base but are still reliant on the CBD for many higher order services.

     Poly-centric development has been proposed for ‘structuring’ land use in the expanding
     Bangkok region (PCI et al. 2005). Under this model, transport investment and urban development
     are synchronized and transport is used to enhance accessibility to desired areas. Areas to be
     protected from urban development are also identified and planning measures plus the withhold-
     ing of key infrastructure is used to accomplish this measure. In principle, high quality rail and bus

     29	Burapatana and Ross (2011).
     30	 Rat (2001).
     31	 Rat (2001).



36   The World Bank Group
transit is used to link the satellite centers surrounding the urban area and the central city, and high
efficiency is obtained by achieving balanced flows in each direction which increases load factors,
energy efficiency, and economic and financial performance of these transit systems. Accordingly,
commuting distances and commuting times are likely to be very similar to that for the Weak Center
model until such time as the restructuring effect becomes significant.

Early integrated transport and land use planning in urbanizing areas at the fringes and outside
of the BMR could achieve a better transport outcome. For the BMR that has already decentral-
ized to a great extent, the possibility of reversing the forces of disperson and aiming to become
a strong center city are remote. However, it seems feasible to intervene in developing areas to
guide where subsequent new urban development and infill occurs through appropriate provision of
transport and other major infrastructure supported by suitable urban management policies. Since
urban development in the region is already well advanced, achieving a sigificant change in travel
and energy efficiency is unlikely in the short to medium term. And to achieve this change requires
considerable and sustained effort to strengthen land use policies and coordinate land development
with infrastructure provision.

For other cities, the poly-centric model can achieve significant long term benefits if implemented
in a formative stage of city development. For cities like Chiang Mai and Nakhon Ratchasima,
there is a strategic opportunity to integrate land use and urban transport planning to achieve
more efficient and greener transport outcome as demonstrated in the poly-centric model. A good
example is Singapore which since the 1960s pursued an “…orderly path for decentralization while
maintaining a strong centered development pattern� in its “Ring Plan� (refer Figure 4.5). A key
aim was to achieve efficient commuting patterns (i.e. balanced flows) through the coordination of
development of new towns and transit systems. Singapore’s one party rule over several decades
has been the reason the plan has been followed closely (Cervero 1998).


                             Figure 4.5: Singapore’s Ring Plan




Source: Cerveo (1998) reproduced from original source L. Wang, “Residential New Town Development
in Singapore, Background, Planning and Design. New Towns in East and South East Asia: Planning and
Development.� D. Phillips and A. Yeh (eds.) (Hong Kong; Oxford University Press, 1987).


                                                         Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions      37
                        Table 4.7: Model D – Poly-Centric Development




     Source: Study Team


     	 4.4	 Conclusion on Facilitating Green Transport
     There are several broad conclusions that can be drawn from the foregoing:

     	 •	 Transport is important to support the implementation of regional development policies but
     		alone is insufficient to guarantee the success of those policies.

     	 •	 Efficient inter-city transport options would enhance economic, social and environmental
     		 outcomes in inter-urban corridors. Where justifiable, improved inter-city train and freight rail
     		 services and other public transport could play an important role.

     	 •	 At the urban scale, rapid transit, public transport and, where appropriate, roads should be
     		 used to structure land use and support the accessibility of activity centers with desirable
     		 economic, social and environmental outcomes. Coordination of provision of transit and road
     		 systems along with appropriate land use regulations in urbanizing areas is feasible but
     		demanding.


     32 	
        Rat (2011).


38   The World Bank Group
	 •	 Policies to support energy efficient and low emission vehicles are vitally important in the
		 short term while the longer term modal and system level interventions are planned,
		 implemented and take effect.

For urban areas, the analysis of the city models provides some insights on the relative advan-
tages and disadvantages of modes under various circumstances:

	 •	   Urban roads are not unambiguously good or bad. Secondary and distributor roads that
		     relieve primary roads and provide access to land-locked development in the urban area
		     may promote a more efficient and compact land use form. Further, buses may use such
		     roads to provide enhanced access to residential areas.

	 •	   Expressways that promote efficient access across urban areas for long distance freight
		     traffic from hinterlands to sea ports may be quite beneficial compared to the alternative of
		     heavy trucks having to negotiate congested arterial roads with increased congestion and
		     emissions for all.

	 •	   Urban expressways that promote access to already congested activity centers such as the
		     downtown area are likely to have poor economic, social and environmental outcomes
		     compared to rail or bus rapid transit systems that are best suited to serve such centers.
		     Expressways and other major roads are more likely than rapid transit to disperse land use
		     with unfavorable impacts.

	 •	   Rapid transit systems permit the growth of activity centers without the same level of
		     disruption and emissions that may result from trying to expand road infrastructure in a
		     dense downtown area. Further, the knock-on effects of enhanced accessibility and growth
		     of activity centers are likely to be positive from a transport and broader perspective.

	 •	 An urban land use arrangement that is suited to high public transport use is also likely
		 to encourage walking and cycling for its own sake but also to access rapid transit stations
		 and other public transport with considerable economic, social and environmental benefits.




                                                       Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions    39
           5
     What Scenarios for Green Transport
     	   •	 What is the potential impact of green transport interventions and their priority?

     Given the right policy interventions, the transport sector could be made much more efficient
     and greener than the business-as-usual case. There are several studies which have quantified
     the impacts of policy interventions on energy savings and carbon emissions. All confirmed that with
     appropriate mix of various policy and investment interventions, the transport sector could achieve
     significant improvement across the board.

     This Note summarizes the results reported by two recent World Bank studies that analyzed
     the potential transport-related energy reduction potential for Thailand (including BMR) and the
     BMR alone33. The impacts are principally expressed in terms of the impacts on energy which is
     correlated with CO2 and to a lesser extent local emissions34. The Bangkok study also quantified
     welfare impacts as represented by per capita travel times. To enable a comparison of the two
     studies a common horizon year of 2020 was adopted. This is only eight years away. In reality the
     policies and investment measures discussed in this section will take several years to implement
     even with a prompt decision to ‘go ahead’. Consequently, the 2020 horizon should be viewed not
     as rigid deadline but representative of feasible reductions in energy and emissions in the period
     2020 to 2030 dependent on the speed of implementation.


     	 5.1 National Scale
     Without any interventions, transport energy use is projected to increase by 70% over 2006 to
     2020. Energy use associated with transport activity in Thailand35 was estimated at 16,700 ktoe/
     year in 2006. In the BAU scenario at 2020, without particular interventions to reduce energy use,
     energy use was projected to grow by 70% to 28,100 ktoe/year. About one quarter of the total
     transport-related energy use that was modeled is consumed in the BMR, i.e. around 4,000 ktoe/year.

     The impacts of several scenarios or policy options aimed at enhancing energy efficiency for
     land transport for the whole country were examined by World Bank (2009a). These scenarios
     combined the effects of 16 individual interventions into logical and mutually supportive packages.
     The policy options cover those at the modal level (rail investment and reform, better urban bus
     services), and trip level (better vehicle and fuel) as well as pricing measures. Refer Box 5.1.



     33 	For Thailand, the “Making Transport More Energy Efficient� by World Bank (2009a) and, for Bangkok, background analysis

     	   for the World Bank’s 2010 Flagship report “Winds of Change: East Asia Sustainable Energy Future� (World Bank 2009c).
     34	Such as particulate matter that is damaging to human health.
     35	Modeled for Bangkok, intercity roads and railways which together represent almost 75% of Thailand’s transport

     	 sector-related energy consumption.


40   The World Bank Group
The results show that all scenarios for Thailand as a whole are expected to achieve a maximum
potential reduction in energy usage in the land transport sector of 27% at 2020 (compared to
the BAU). This is equivalent to a saving of 7,500 ktoe in energy at 2020 which is more than the
estimated energy usage projected for the BMR at 2020. Refer Figure 5.1 for the results of the
respective scenarios.

Measures with the highest impacts are better vehicle standards (i.e. fuel economy) and policy
and pricing measures. The results show that better vehicle standards (i.e. fuel economy measures)
and policy and pricing measures each are expected to contribute almost equally to 70% of the
total estimated energy reduction. As a result, both of these scenarios were shown to demonstrate
high cost effectiveness (World Bank 2009a).

                         Box 5.1: Transport Scenarios for Thailand

Fuel efficiency and fuel switching: upgrade engine technologies for buses and trucks, and use natural
gas and other alternative fuels selectively in vehicle fleets, especially commercial vehicles.

Better vehicle standards: establish and (progressively) tighten fuel economy standards of passenger
vehicles to match European standards, and improve logistics practices in the road-based freight transport
sector to better match truck sizes to the task and operating environment.

Rail investment and reform: reform and modernize the rail sector, expand the role of rail in freight transport
and long-distance passenger services; and in the BMR, expand mass rail transit and improve its integration
with bus services, and improve accessibility and walkability to bus stops and mass rapid transit stations.

Better urban bus services: increase the speed and quality of bus services through expansion of BRT
and investment in new fleet which will bring improved passenger comfort, better fuel efficiency and lower
emissions.

Policy and pricing measures: upgrade the vehicle registration system and associated charges that reflect
actual vehicle use; improve traffic management; and promote more efficient bus services through reforms
that encourage competition and new investment.


Source: World Bank (2009a).


Figure 5.1: Estimated Energy Impacts of Thailand-specific Scenarios (ktoe/year)




Source: Adapted from World Bank (2009a).


                                                             Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions         41
     	 5.2 Bangkok Metropolitan Region
     Various scenarios for 2020 were modeled starting from a do-minimal to a most comprehen-
     sive scenario for BMR. The various scenarios shown in Box 5.2 build on the minimal intervention
     case which includes completion of urban rail construction as committed in 200936 (Scenario 1)
     to the completion of the urban rail master plan for Bangkok (Scenario 2) to adoption of measures
     to develop an integrated, high quality public transport system (Scenario 3). The comprehensive
     scenario (Scenario 4) includes measures to discourage car use. A fifth scenario was modeled that
     represented a case of no capital investment but only the effect of demand management measures.

     For the purposes of the analysis to support this Note two minor scenarios were added to:
     (i) examine the impact of operational improvements to Bangkok’s bus services to improve
     passenger loadings per bus trip through creation of more direct and efficient routes and services
     and (ii) technology measures to improve the fuel economy and reduce emissions for diesel buses
     (and trucks). The key characteristics of the scenarios are shown in Table 5.1.

                            Table 5.1: Characteristics of Scenarios for BMR




     Notes: (1) Linked trips are the trips between origin and destination. Unlinked trips are for individual stages
     of a journey between origin and destination. Hence, data on ticket sales for each mode are also the
     equivalent of unlinked trips. A mechanized trip is one which has one or more legs using a mechanical
     mode of transport as opposed to one which has all legs using non mechanized modes such as walk
     or bicycle. Walk and cycle modes not simulated here except for access to mechanized modes. (2) On
     the basis of linked mechanized trips mode share is normally reported to be around 35-40% of all trips
     for BMR in 2005. It is not clear why these numbers are low but they are considered useful in a relative
     sense. (3) Average travel time per linked trip would be higher – at least 25% more on average in line
     with the ratio of unlinked to linked trips.

     Source: Data contained in “Transport Analysis� spreadsheet supporting World Bank (2009c).


     36 	
        The year in which the study was being undertaken.


42   The World Bank Group
In the 2020 with ‘business-as-usual’, the BMR’s energy use is expected to rise by 85% with
a continuing decline in public transport mode share and average traffic speeds. In 2007, total
energy use in BMR’s land transport sub-sector was estimated to be 4,300 ktoe. In the BAU at 2020,
as represented by Scenario 1, total energy use in BMR’s land transport sub-sector is estimated
to rise to 7,900 ktoe representing a growth of 4.8% per year.37 The baseline forecast at 2020 (i.e.
Scenario 1 compared to 2007 Reference) shows that the population would grow by 15.6% to 12.9
million up from 11.16 million in 2007. Public transport mode share would decline from 22.4% to
20.2% of all mechanized trips. Average car speeds would decline dramatically although this effect
may be exaggerated due to limitations of the transport model to simulate the feedback between
land use and transport on a comprehensive basis.

Scenario 4 with the most comprehensive series of measures to improve public transport and
limit car use indicates potential energy savings of 26% compared to the 2020 BAU level. Public
mode share increases to 27.4% representing a 36% increase compared to the BAU at 2020 and
car speeds would improve dramatically compared to the BAU but still be slightly lower than in
2005. Scenario 4 as modeled here includes two additional sub-scenarios or measures applying to
Bangkok’s bus services (refer Box 5.2) shows the 26% reduction in energy use compared to the
2020 BAU represents 2,000 ktoe of energy at 2020 for BMR.

But this improved scenario at 2020 still represents an increase of 38% in BMR’s annual energy
use compared to the 2007 reference year. On a per capita basis the growth would be just under
20% between 2007 and 2020. The results of all these original scenarios as modeled by World Bank
(2009c) and the two additional sub-scenarios applying to Bangkok buses are shown in Figure 5.2.


                            Box 5.2: Transport Scenarios for Bangkok

    Scenario 1: Do-minimal: complete current urban rail construction (as committed in 2009) and do not
    make any improvements to the quality of public transport. With the analysis for the reference year of
    around 2007, Scenario 1 represents the BAU for the Bangkok transport analysis.

    Scenario 2: Implementation of the urban rail masterplan: all major projects as part of the urban rail
    masterplan published in 2007 are implemented by 2020 but no significant efforts are made to integrate
    bus services with urban rail or improve the quality of bus transport.

    Scenario 3: Scenario 2 plus complementary measures to create a high quality public transport system
    including timed ‘transfers’ between modes, high quality transfer facilities and integrated fares. Addition-
    ally, bus services were assumed to have increased coverage and be given on-street priority possibly at
    the expense of private vehicles.

    Scenario 4. Scenario 3 plus additional measures to discourage car use (comprehensive scenario).
    These measures included higher vehicle and fuel taxes, and higher parking costs and longer distances
    to between final destination and car parks.



37	 Which is slightly faster than estimated by World Bank (2009a) for the “Thailand: Making Transport More Energy

	     Efficient� report.



                                                               Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions          43
     Scenario 5: No capital investment. That is, only the demand management measures are included.

     The two minor scenarios were developed as follows (i) a 10% reduction in unproductive bus
     kilometers – the bus improvements considered in the scenarios were oriented to improving coverage
     and quality and not specifically directed to improving bus productivity and so an additional scenario was
     added; (ii) diesel bus fuel economy and emissions improvements of 17%, the same as that for gasoline
     powered vehicles. This technological effect is achievable and was omitted by World Bank (200c) and
     was therefore added in this current study.

     Source: World Bank (2009c).


       Figure 5.2: Estimated Energy Impacts of BMR-specific Scenarios (ktoe/year)




     Source: World Bank (2009c) plus supplementary analysis


     Fuel economy standards for private vehicles are the single most important measure but pricing
     and other measures combined are likely to be more important in the long term. The results of
     individual measures (including demand management, land use densification on a scale likely to be
     achievable by 2020, technological measures to improve fuel economy and reduce emissions for
     private vehicles and buses) show that fuel economy standards for private vehicles could achieve
     60% of the total projected reduction in energy use by 2020. This analysis is confirmed by World
     Bank (2009a) and the recent analysis by the Ministry of Energy (2010) for their Energy Conservation
     Plan 2011-2030. But the other measures combined deliver the balance of BMR’s energy savings
     at 2020 of 756 ktoe (i.e. another 40%). Pricing and land use measures would be expected to influ-
     ence the structure, level and location of transport demand and associated transport effects in the
     long term and so would likely come into prominence with the passage of time.

     The energy savings in the BMR represents a major part of the total potential energy savings
     nation-wide but other secondary cities also offer potential. As reported in Section 5.1 measures
     to reduce transport-related energy consumption in Bangkok are estimated to represent about one
     quarter or more of the total transport-related energy savings projected for Thailand. The energy
     saving projected for all urban areas would be around 2,500 ktoe in 2020 with most of this attribut-
     able to the BMR. Besides the BMR, Chiang Mai and other secondary cities also offer significant
     potential for energy savings and GHG emission reductions (refer Box 5.3).



44   The World Bank Group
                       Box 5.3: Sustainable Urban Transport in Chiang Mai

    Chiang Mai, the major city in northern Thailand, is facing pressing challenges as urban sprawl continues
    horizontally and the city is gradually losing its compact character. Common urban transport problems
    such as congestion, air pollution, unavailability of high quality public transport, are starting to emerge as
    the city and suburban areas grow. It is estimated that if the city could shift away from the business-as-
    usual scenario (without proper and forward-looking urban transport planning and investment) towards a
    sustainable urban transport planning and implementation scenario (where Chiang Mai could move on the
    sustainable urban transport path and fully implement urban transport plan and policies, i.e. adopt integrated
    land use and transport planning seriously, improve the role of non-motorized transport in the old town
    to serve short-trips, invest in efficient and modernized public transport, etc.) the city could reduce GHG
    emissions by 77,036 tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions annually by transforming the modal shares with
    greater role of public and non-motorized transport. Sustained efforts and comprehensive implementation
    of a mix of policies and investment in a long-run will be critical to achieve this desirable outcome.


Source: Study Team based on the Global Environment Facility’s document for the Chiang Mai Sustainable
Urban Transport Project.


All the measures proposed for the national scale and BMR are technically feasible, however, the
challenge is to implement them comprehensively and without excessive rebound. The reported
estimates for energy reductions are realistic estimates of the potential through implementation of
policies on a comprehensive basis. They are challenging to implement in their entirety but are all quite
technically feasible. However, these estimates do not take into account the effect of ‘rebound38’
that would tend to erode the benefits of improvements. World Bank (2009a; 2009c) specifically
called for improved pricing measures, as well as other demand management, to minimize rebound.


	 5.3	 How to Prioritize Measures ?
Cost effectiveness and ease of implementation criteria could be used to derive a simple index
of priority in conjunction with quantified benefits. Simplified cost-effectiveness of interventions
from an energy or greenhouse gas perspective can be carried out by comparing the expected
cumulative reduction in energy and emissions to the cost of implementation to prioritize these
measures. However, the ease of implementation also has to be considered and a practical
opportunistic approach may be required in practice.

Only fuel economy standard measures exhibited high cost-effectiveness and low implementation
difficulty while other measures were considered very important but face serious implementa-
tion challenges or were of high cost. This simple analytical approach was used by World Bank
(2009a) to prioritize measures to improve energy efficiency in Thailand’s land transport sector. It
was found that fuel economy measures exhibited high cost-effectiveness and low implementation


38	 ‘Rebound’ occurs as additional travel is induced in response to transport supply improvements and give rise to

	     additional energy use and emissions (that are called ‘leakage’)



                                                                        Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   45
     difficulty. Other measures which are also important but have high implementation barriers or exhibit
     low cost-effectiveness are: (i) improved traffic management in Bangkok; (ii) enhanced bus industry
     efficiency and integration with urban rail in Bangkok; (iii) improved pricing of fuels and of transport
     generally; (iv) upgraded long distance freight rail in corridors where it can be competitive; and (v)
     enhanced land use planning and densification of land use in key activity centers starting with areas
     around urban rail stations.

     A more detailed analysis might look at the incremental cost and benefits of each measure or
     package of measures to determine an optimal mitigation strategy. However, as pointed out in Section
     2, most transport interventions tends to have impacts in the economic, social and environmental
     dimensions and an analysis from solely an energy or greenhouse gas perspective would be
     insufficient to determine overall priority e.g. in the case of the current High Speed Train proposal.


     	 5.4	 Summary of Key Indicators for BMR and Thailand
     Significant improvement in selected key indicators is possible and they provide a useful means of
     high level monitoring of implementation progress. Based on the indicators proposed in Section
     4, the potential performance of the Thailand and BMR scenarios are shown in Table 5.2 for 2020
     (and subsequent decade). For Thailand the measure of transport energy intensity indicates a re-
     duction of 26% in energy use per capita that is consistent with the findings on absolute energy
     reduction reported above. For the BMR, a wider range of indicators were calculated by World
     Bank (2009c). Energy intensity was calculated but also public transport mode share (an indirect
     measure of transport efficiency) and the average time spent commuting per passenger trip. The
     indicators showed that for BMR the potential reduction in energy intensity was also 26%; public
     transport mode share could be improved by almost a quarter; and average commuting time per
     passenger trip (across all modes) could be reduced on average by one fifth.

                    Table 5.2: Key Indicators for Land Transport Energy Use




     Source: Data from Figure 5.1, Figure 5.2 and Table 5.1.


46   The World Bank Group
                                      How to Action Green Transport?
                                                                                           6
	 6.1	 Overcoming the Barriers
While the range of potential measures to achieve the potential reduction is known the challenge
lies in bringing plans and policy to action. Transitioning to effective and purposeful implementa-
tion requires overcoming stakeholder concerns and then comprehensive and timely implementa-
tion of the full suite of potential measures: (i) pricing and policy; (ii) technology improvement/ fuel
economy/ alternative fuels; and (iii) rapid transport infrastructure and improved public transport.

Several barriers exist for implementing improvements to transport whether considered ‘green’
or ‘conventional’. These barriers would need to be considered when engaging relevant agencies
to progress a green transport agenda:

	 •	   Legal and institutional: National and regional governments are always critical for
		     transportation policies and regulation, and the role of city governments in setting policies and
		     regulations is currently limited although developing. The divisions of responsibilities between
		     different agencies are generally subject to poor coordination, co-operation and integration.
		     The barrier can be experienced within the transport sector (with institutions both horizontally
		     and vertically) but also in its relationship with other agencies since demand for transport is
		     intrinsically linked with decisions made in other sectors.

	 •	   Methodological: Given energy and GHG emissions’ cross-sectoral nature, governments need
		     to evaluate options holistically. Within urban and regional planning frameworks, transport
		     options must be assessed across sectors as well as across time because sustainability
		     initiatives do not always have immediate impacts. This barrier tends to be characterized by
		     a lack of appropriate performance indicators and targets and the absence of full cost
		     accounting methods for transport impacts. Evaluation methods need therefore to include
		     indirect costs in terms of energy security, environmental (local pollution), congestion and safety
		     costs. Co-benefits from interventions in the transport sector are often much larger than climate
		     benefits (if both are monetized), which considerably enhance the cost effectiveness of
		     activities in the transport sector.

	 •	   Capacity: Another major barrier is the lack of skills to develop and implement appropriate
		     technologies and methods in a wide variety of fields such as integrated transport planning;
		     vehicle, fuel and infrastructure standards; assessment, evaluation and accounting of transport
		     impacts. Given the complexity and emerging knowledge in the field it would appear that
		     government agencies at different levels require support to promote solutions that would help
		     delink high levels of carbon-intensive energy use from urban growth and to define a
		     governance system for its implementation. Without such support it would be quite difficult to
		     see how a large metropolitan region like BMR or other fast growing cities like Chiang Mai


                                                          Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions       47
     		 can achieve and measure the progress towards making their cities less carbon intensive,
     		 more environmental-friendly and socially inclusive.

     	 •	   Market and Commercial: Technology is a necessary condition to pave the way towards
     		     low-carbon growth. But emerging low-carbon technologies in the transport sector vary as to
     		     their technical readiness and commercial attractiveness. In many developing countries the
     		     market for low-carbon alternatives is not fully developed. The implication is that significant
     		     and accelerated efforts toward technological innovation and diffusion of low-carbon transport
     		     technologies are needed.


     	 6.2	 Holistic Approach
     Comprehensive and effective implementation requires a holistic plan of action with
     cross-sectoral leadership that incentivizes and coordinates each responsible agency’s
     contribution to the common goal. Implementing the priority policies will require concerted
     action and appropriate technical support. Consistent with the ‘cross-sectoral’ nature of making
     improvements in transport energy efficiency, there are several agencies which are responsible in
     various aspects of green transport ranging from climate change policy, energy policy, transport
     policy and industrial policy. Several agencies and units in government agencies have been recently
     established to directly deal with climate change issues that are closely related with energy efficiency.
     The current institutional responsibilities for policy making cover transport, energy and environment
     including Climate Change are as displayed at Table 6.1.

                                Table 6.1: Institutional Responsibilities




     Source: Study Team.


     Improved pricing of fuels and vehicle access and use charges is critical for underpinning the
     veracity of any plan for green transport. Pricing measures avoid the need for detailed project by
     project implementation since appropriate pricing signals would be expected to induce favorable
     behavior by firms and individuals. But pricing measures present complex political and social
     challenges that only high level leadership can overcome.

48   The World Bank Group
The identification of practical steps and clear responsibilities is the key to making progress.
Table 6.2 regroups the proposed options set out in World Bank (2009a) and based on the updated
assessment of priority (refer Section 5), sets out a desirable future policy direction and identifies
possible next steps to enable implementation during the period of the 12th Plan.

Timing matters greatly, as transport policy, measures and infrastructure investment need
long lead time (5-20 years) to materialize and achieve their intended outcome. Fuel economy
standards that alone can achieve approximately an estimated one quarter of the estimated energy
saving39 by 2020-2030 are currently being formulated but will take at least two years to bring
into force. However, they will affect only new vehicles and so their potential impact will require
20 years to flow through the vehicle fleet. Transport infrastructure and improved public transport
should be designed to effectively support a desirable land use arrangement (location and density of
activities) and to operate efficiently to maximize benefits in all dimensions. The lead time for provision
of transport infrastructure is of the order of 5 to 10 years and even longer to facilitate favorable land
use change. Consequently, implementation of appropriate infrastructure and services for vehicles
and non-motorized modes should also be implemented without delay.




39	 As shown in Figure 5.1 for ‘’better vehicle standards’ that represents an estimated 2,500 ktoe/year energy saving

	   or 22% of the estimated total of 11,500 ktoe.



                                                                 Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions            49
                         Table 6.2: Simplified Priority, Future Direction & Next Steps
                               Note: XXX – First priority; XX – second priority; X - third priority


     	            Options	             Priority	       Future Direction	           Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan

          All Vehicles

         Fuel economy                   XXX        Introduce fuel economy          •	DEDE acting as lead agency – using
         improvements in                           standards for new               	 energy efficiency and labeling mandate
         private sector’s                          gasoline and diesel
         vehicles                                  vehicles                        •	Cabinet to ratify and implement
                                                                                   	 by 2014
                                                   Government role: (i) set
                                                   standards in consultation
                                                   with industry, (ii) set time-
                                                   table for implementation;
                                                   (iii) implement.

                                                   Key agencies: DEDI/
                                                   MOE, MOI-TISI, industry
                                                   etc


          Freight Transport


         Non-fixed Route Truck           XX        Maintain ‘status quo’           •	DLT to review and upgrade standards
         use CNG                                                                   	 for CNG installations in new and in-use
                                                   Market-determined:              	 vehicles and monitor compliance
                                                   operators will switch
                                                   dependent on prices &
                                                   quality of CNG distribution
                                                   network

                                                   Government role: to
                                                   regulate standards of
                                                   equipment operation

                                                   Key agencies: MOT/ DLT


         More efficient freight rail     XX        Fostering a commercial          •	NESDB to continue to implement their
                                                   freight logistics culture       	 logistics strategy
                                                   apart from only a focus on
                                                   rail infrastructure.            •	MOT/ OTP with SRT to undertake



50   The World Bank Group
	           Options	           Priority	       Future Direction	           Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


                                           Government role: (i) priori-    	   a demand-oriented study of potential
                                           tize key lines based on fuel    	   opportunities for enhanced freight rail
                                           consideration of all benefits   	   and supporting policies leading to
                                           and costs; (ii) undertake       	   selective prioritization of rail lines
                                           selective industry mo-          	   (Budget US$500,000)
                                           dernization; and (iii) adopt
                                           active policies to promote      •	NESDB/MOT implement priority line
                                           multi-modal logistics           	 upgrading and supporting actions
                                                                           	 under 12th Plan
                                           Key agencies: MOT/OTP,
                                           SRT, NESDB



    Fuel efficiency improve-     XX        Facilitate the truck indus-     •	DLT to limit use of aged chassis that
    ment in diesel vehicles                try to upgrade the level of     	 permit constant truck rebuilding and
    due to engine and tech-                technology. Can include         	 perpetuation of outdated vehicles
    nology upgrades                        retrofits but regulatory
                                           approach needs to ‘make         •	Draft new regulation on prohibiting use
                                           trucks’ meet higher stan-       	 of old chassis for implementation by
                                           dards in terms of emissions     	 DLT under 12th Plan.
                                           and energy efficiency. A
                                           key step forward would
                                           be achieved by removing
                                           regulations that favor main-
                                           taining aged, inefficient
                                           and polluting trucks on the
                                           road.

                                           Government role: set and
                                           enforce standards, industry
                                           facilitation

                                           Key agencies: DLT


    More efficient and high-     XX        Foster a commercial freight •	MOT/ DLT to rationalize vehicle
    er payload trucks                      logistics culture            	 registration charges to make trucks
                                                                        	 ‘pay their way’
                                           Government role: (i) set
                                           and maintain performance •	Draft new regulation on vehicle
                                           standards; (ii) revise heavy 	 taxation for implementation by DLT



                                                                   Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions            51
     	            Options	         Priority	       Future Direction	         Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


                                               vehicle taxation; and (ii) pro- 	 under 12th Plan
                                               vide key infrastructure
                                                                               •	NESDB/ MOT to identify strategic
                                               Key agencies: MOT/ DLT 	 infrastructure barriers to efficient
                                                                               	 logistics (budget: US$200,000) with
                                                                               	 key infrastructure to be implemented
                                                                               	 under the 12th Plan

                                                                             •	Identify scope for more stringent
                                                                             	 operator performance standards in
                                                                             	 return for being permitted to transport
                                                                             	 higher loads to raise operator quality
                                                                             	 and efficiency (budget: US$ 50,000)

         Inter-city Passenger
         Transport

         Improving passenger          X        Focus on developing           •	MOT/ OTP with SRT to review 2010’s
         train (inter-urban)                   services that correspond      	 High Speed Train study.
                                               to rail’s competitive
                                               strengths i.e. travel         •	Based on potential demand and
                                               300-700km.                    	 economic potential, prioritize passenger
                                                                             	 rail lines/ services and identify supporting
                                               Government role:              	 policies (Budget US$ 100,000)
                                               (i) prioritize key lines
                                               based on fuel consider-       •	Complete detailed feasibility study for
                                               ation of all benefits and     	 Bangkok-Chiang Mai examining rail
                                               costs; and (ii) facilitate    	 system needs including potential for
                                               appropriate integrated        	 rapid transit and HST.
                                               bus services

                                               Key agencies: MOT/ OTP/
                                               SRT

         Urban Passenger
         Transport

         Improve traffic manage-     XX        Modernize and                 •	OTP to review performance of Area
         ment                                  professionalize traffic       	 Traffic Control system in Bangkok
                                               management in Bangkok         	 (US$100,000) & determine barriers to
                                               – a symptom of current        	 improved performance
                                               challenges is BMA’s Area




52   The World Bank Group
	          Options	     Priority	       Future Direction	           Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


                                    Traffic Control (computer-      •	OTP to make recommendations for
                                    controlled traffic lights)      	 improvement including the roles and
                                    system has not been             	 responsibilities of BMA/ local
                                    permitted to work               	 governments and the Police to the
                                    unimpeded                       	 Commission for the Management of
                                                                    	 Land Traffic
                                    Government role: (i) clearly
                                    allocate the responsibilities   •	Identify in consultation with stakeholders
                                    for traffic management          	 cooperative actions for implementing
                                    between BMA and the             	 new arrangements under the 12th Plan
                                    Police; and (ii) provide
                                    systems and services to         •	Identify changes to relevant laws and
                                    support and upgraded and        	 regulations for later implementation
                                    more professional
                                    approach

                                    Key agencies: MOT/
                                    Ministry of Interior, BMA
                                    and Police



    Improve road user      X        Understand the available        •	OTP to keep a ‘watching brief’ on new
    pricing                         options and costs and           	 developments in approaches to road
                                    benefits                        	 user pricing globally

                                    Government role: (i) moni-      •	OTP to specifically identify practical
                                    tor latest developments;        	 measures to make pricing more
                                    and (ii) study the              	 efficient by 12th Plan (US$100,000)
                                    advantages of ‘average
                                    cost’ pricing using
                                    variable vehicle registration
                                    charging and/or vehicle
                                    insurance; and (iii) encour-
                                    age early introduction of
                                    variable insurance
                                    pricing ie pay dependent
                                    on distance.

                                    Key agencies: MOT/ OTP




                                                            Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions            53
     	           Options	       Priority	       Future Direction	         Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


         Improve bus industry     XX        Improve efficiency and        •	MOT/OTP/ DLT to develop a Bangkok
         efficiency                         market-orientation of         	 Metropolitan Region Bus Route and
                                            bus routes and services       	 Services plan that meets market
                                            in Bangkok Metropolitan       	 demand & is integrated with rail
                                            Region including enhanced
                                            integration with new urban    •	OTP/ DLT to set up a ‘task force’ to
                                            rail                          	 plan the phased implementation of
                                                                          	 new routes & services starting in
                                            Government role: (i) plan     	 existing and new rail corridors
                                            and implement revised
                                            routes and services; and (ii) •	Prepare one ‘concrete’ implementation
                                            enhance bus management 	 plan for new bus services in the Purple
                                            and operational capacity.     	 Line MRT corridor by the start of the
                                                                          	12th Plan to coincide with the opening
                                            Key agencies: MOT/ OTP, 	 of the Purple Line during the Plan
                                            MOF-SEPO                      	period.


         Introduce BRT            XX        Identify potential role of    •	MOT/OTP in consultation with BMA
                                            bus rapid transport in         	 consolidate current BRT, LRT and
                                            serving moderate demand       	 monorail lines into a single plan and
                                            corridors in Bangkok &        	 map the degree of integration with
                                            potential for integration     	 each other, other bus and MRT
                                            with urban rail and other
                                            bus                            •	MOT/OTP to prioritize lines based on
                                                                           	 likely demand, cost and economic
                                            Government role: (i) de-       	 benefits and review the type of
                                            velop a single Rapid Transit 	 technology proposed for continued
                                            Infrastructure and Services 	relevance
                                            Plan covering rail, BRT,
                                            monorail & LRT modes           •	MOT/ OTP to prepare more detailed
                                            irrespective of agency         	 feasibility studies including business
                                            ownership; (ii) identify key   	 case to be performed of priority lines
                                            priorities based on a full     	 under the 12th Plan (US$ 500,000)
                                            assessment of all costs
                                            and benefits; and (iii) imple-
                                            ment according to priorities
                                            and affordability.

                                            Key agencies: MOT/ OTP
                                            & BMA



54   The World Bank Group
	           Options	       Priority	       Future Direction	         Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


    Integrate MRT/Bus/       XX        Improve accessibility to      •	MOT/OTP with BMA to identify priority
    Walking                            urban rail stations and       	 stations and terminals for walk-in and
                                       terminals for pedestrians     	 bus feeder access. And develop plans
                                       and other modes               	 to improve walk-in and bus access and
                                                                     	 associated urban design by start of
                                       Government role: (i) plan     	12th Plan
                                       and implement revised
                                       pedestrian and bus access     •	BMA & rail operators MRTA, SRT and
                                       at existing MRT; and (ii)     	 BTS to oversee implementation under
                                       develop station               	the12 th Plan to coincide with
                                       accessibility plans with      	 commencement of operations of the
                                       investment budgets for        	 new rail lines.
                                       urban rail under
                                       construction.

                                       Key agencies: MOT/ OTP,
                                       SRT, MRTA and BMA


    Use CNG in bus fleet     XX        Maintain ‘status quo’         •	DLT to review and upgrade standards
                                                                     	 for CNG installations in new and in - use
                                       Market-determined:            	 vehicles and monitor compliance
                                       Permit BMTA and private
                                       operators to choose CNG
                                       motive option based on a
                                       proper assessment of all
                                       costs and benefits.

                                       Government role: to
                                       regulate standards of
                                       operation

                                       Key agencies: EPPO,
                                       MOT/ DLT, BMTA




                                                               Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions          55
     	            Options	          Priority	       Future Direction	         Next Steps by 12th National Development Plan


         Fuel efficiency improve-     XX        Introduce new urban           •	MOF/SEPO with OTP to update the
         ment in diesel buses                   buses with good fuel          	 current phased bus procurement plan
         due to engine and tech-                economy and meeting           	 for Bangkok linked to policies to
         nology upgrades                        Euro IV emission              	 modernize the bus regulatory system
                                                standards                     	 and the performance of BMTA by start
                                                                              	 of 12th Plan (budget $200,000)
                                                Government role: (i) set
                                                standards; and (ii) arrange   •	New bus contracting & potential bus
                                                appropriate bus route         	 investment arrangements to be
                                                contracting and               	 prepared and implemented under 12th
                                                procurement                   	 Plan as part of implementation of
                                                arrangements.                 	 Improve bus industry efficiency (refer
                                                                              	 to page 54).
                                                Key agencies: MOT/OTP,
                                                MOF/SEPO, BMTA, private
                                                firms


     Source: World Bank (2009a).




56   The World Bank Group
                                                                          References
                                                                                     7
Asian Development Bank, Japan Bank of International Cooperation and the World Bank (2005),
“Connecting East Asia: A New Framework for Infrastructure.�


Asian Development Bank (2006), “Urbanization and Sustainability in Asia� Thailand.


Asian Development Bank (2009), “Rethinking Transport and Climate Change.� ADB Sustainable
Development Working Paper Series. No. 10, December.


Asian Development Bank Institute (2012), “Development Trajectory, Emission Profile, and Policy
Actions: Thailand.� ADBI Working Paper Series. No. 352, April.


Burapatana T and W. Ross (2011), “Improving the Quality of Life in Bangkok via Change in City
Planning.� Journal of Population and Social Studies, Volume 20 Number 1, July 2011: 25-42.


Cervero R (1998), “The Transit Metropolis; A Global Enquiry.� Published by Island Press. USA.
Department of Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency Promotion (2011), “Energy Efficiency
Development Plan.�


GTZ (2004), “Land Use Planning and Urban Transport�. Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for
Policy-makers in Developing Countries, Module 2A.


GTZ (2007), “Transport and Climate Change�, GTZ Sourcebook Module 5e written by Holger
Dalkmann and Charlotte Branninga.


International Energy Agency (2011), “World Energy Outlook 2011.�


JETRO (2003), “Study of Thailand’s Logistics Systems.�


Kmonwatananisa N (2008), “Thailand’s Management of Regional and Spatial Development�.
Prepared for NESDB.


Ministry of Energy (2010), “Energy Conservation Plan 2011-2030�.


                                                     Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   57
     MVA Consultants et al (1996) “Urban Transport Database and Model Development Project (UTDM)�,
     with Comsis and Asian Engineering Consultants Corp Ltd, for OCMLT, completed March.


     National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) and World Bank (2008), “2008
     Infrastructure Annual Report, Thailand.�


     Parry, I., M. Walls, and W.Harrington (2009), “Automobile Externalities and Policies.� Journal of
     Economic Literature, 65, pp. 373-399


     PCI et al (2001) “Urban Rail Master Plan – Final Report�, prepared for OCMLT, Thailand.


     PCI et al (2005) “The Intermodal Services Integration for the improvement of Mobility, Accessibility,
     Sustainability and Livelihood for Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR) and Surrounding Area Project
     (IMAC) - Final Report�, prepared for OTP, Thailand.


     PCBK et al (2010), “The Study of Railway and High Speed Rail Master Plans.� Prepared for OTP.


     Rat H. (2001), “Urban Growth Versus Sustainable Mobility�. UITP Statement, FIDC 2001 Annual
     Conference


     Schipper L and Marie-Lilliu C (1999), “Transportation and CO2 Emissions: Flexing the Link – A
     Path for the World Bank�.


     Thomson JM (1974), “Modern Transport Economics.� Published by Penguin Books, UK.


     Thomson JM (1977), “Great Cities in their Traffic.� Published by Peregrine Books, UK.


     World Bank (2007), “Strategic Urban Transport Policy Directions for Bangkok,� June. [siteresources.
     worldbank.org/.../2007june_bkk-urban-transport-directions.pdf]


     World Bank (2009a), “Making Transport More Energy-Efficient: Thailand,� Final Report prepared on
     behalf of Country Development Partnership for Infrastructure. March. [http://www-wds.worldbank.
     org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/08/25/000333037_20090825003702/
     Rendered/PDF/500340WP0p10951y0Updater01310812009.pdf]




58   The World Bank Group
World Bank (2009b), “Developing Integrated Emissions Strategies for Existing Land-transport
(DIESEL) for Bangkok, Thailand (Draft Final Report).�


World Bank (2009c), “Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from On-Road Trans-
port in Cities in the East Asian Pacific Region: Results, Methodology and Documentation of Data.
Draft Background Paper for EAP Energy Flagship Report, June.


World Bank (2010), “Winds of Change: East Asia’s Sustainable Energy Future,� [http://siteresources.
worldbank.org/INTEASTASIAPACIFIC/Resources/226262-1271320774648/windsofchange_full-
report.pdf]


World Bank (2011a), “Thailand: Clean Energy for Green Low-Carbon Growth,� Final Report pre-
pared on behalf of Country Development Partnership. [http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/
default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/01/04/000333037_20120104230930/Rendered/PD
F/662200WP0p12440e0Clean0Energy0all07.pdf]


World Bank (2011b), “Thai Flood 2011: Rapid Assessment for Resilient Recovery and Reconstruc-
tion Planning.�


World Bank (2012), “Energizing Green Cities in Southeast Asia – Three City Synthesis Report.�
Forthcoming.




                                                        Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions   59
     The World Bank

     ©2013 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank
     1818 H Street NW
     Washington DC 20433
     Telephone: 202-473-1000
     Internet: www.worldbank.org
     E-mail: feedback@worldbank.org

     All rights reserved
     This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-
     opment / The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this
     volume do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or
     the governments they represent. The World Bank 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 The World Bank concerning the
     legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

     Rights and Permissions
     The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of
     this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for
     Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 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
     the Copyright Clearance Center Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; telephone:
     978-750-8400; fax: 978-750-4470; Internet: www.copyright.com. All other queries on rights
     and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher,
     The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2422;
     e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org.



     The World Bank Country Office Reports disseminate the findings of work in progress to
     encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues, especially in national languages.



                     ..................................................................................................




60   The World Bank Group
Thailand: Green Transport Policy Directions