Transcript DECOUPLING PROJECT - Plan Estratégico de Infraestructuras y

SECRETARÍA DE ESTADO DE INFRAESTRUCTURAS Y PLANIFICACIÓN
MINISTERIO
DE FOMENTO
DIRECCIÓN GENERAL
DE PLANIFICACIÓN Y
COORDINACIÓN TERRITORIAL
CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS
Y EXPERIMENTACIÓN
DE OBRAS PÚBLICAS
Encuentro:
“Economía y transporte”
Nadia Caïd
OECD Environment Directorate
Madrid, 7 de octubre de 2004
DECOUPLING PROJECT
OECD PROJECT ON DECOUPLING TRANSPORT
IMPACTS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
ANALYSIS OF THE LINKS BETWEEN
TRANSPORT
AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
Nadia Caïd
OECD Environment Directorate
Economy and Transport Meeting
Madrid - 7 October 2004
DECOUPLING PROJECT
OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
IIX.
Objectives of the project
Market failures
Transport elasticities
Trends in the EU, US and Japan
National accounts and transport demand
Transport infrastructure and economic growth
Major findings
Further work
DECOUPLING PROJECT
WHY DECOUPLING
INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES
 The 1997 UNECE Ministerial Declaration
 The Communiqué of the Heads of State of the
European Union in Gothenburg in June 2001
 The OECD Environmental Ministerial meeting in
May 2001: the Environmental Strategy
DECOUPLING PROJECT
WHY IS DECOUPLING NEEDED
Total impacts of transport on human health and
the environment continue to increase with total
external costs of transport
 VOC, NOx and CO emissions are decreasing
 CO2 and other GHG emissions will increase by
some 30% by 2010
 Noise, land take, congestion and resource use
DECOUPLING PROJECT
TRANSPORT TRENDS
 While GDP in OECD countries has grown by 46%
from 1980 to 1995
 Number of motor vehicles has increased by 55%
 Vehicle kilometres travelled have increased by 59%
These results show that transport is strongly
correlated to economic growth
At the same time, total impacts of transport and
externalities on the environment continue to increase
DECOUPLING PROJECT
I. OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT
 Understanding the relationship and synergy
between transport activity and the economy
 Identification of effective instruments that target
reducing total impacts from transport and
externalities
 Evaluation of a package of instruments and
efficient approaches for decoupling
 Develop policy recommendations for decoupling
DECOUPLING PROJECT
STAGES OF THE PROJECT
Stage one: Review of the main economic, social
and other factors responsible for transport
growth
Stage two: Analysis of decoupling measures and
instruments based on country case studies
Stage three: Identification of policy options
focusing on economic instruments and policy
recommendations for decoupling
DECOUPLING PROJECT
METHODOLOGY OF THE FIRST STAGE
 Analysis of:
- The relevant literature in the area of
transport and economy
- Historic transport trends in relation to GDP
in the US, the EU and Japan
- Statistics and analytical tools such as
transportation satellite accounts
 Results from the application of these tools
DECOUPLING PROJECT
II. MARKET FAILURES
 Transport cause large adverse impacts on
environment and human health: accidents, air
pollution and climate change, noise, land use,
upstream processes and congestion
 External costs of transport are estimated around
8% of the GDP (excluding congestion) in Europe and
are projected to increase
 Non-internalisation leads to inefficient use of
transport services and infrastructures
DECOUPLING PROJECT
II. MARKET FAILURES
(cont’d)
 Tax or charges could encourage modal shifts and
generate revenue for developing more
environmentally friendly modes
 Combining appropriate policy mixes and regulations
helps to include external costs into transport prices
Market failures can be corrected by proper pricing
DECOUPLING PROJECT
III. TRANSPORT ELASTICITY TO PRICES
 Income is the main factor driving vehicle
ownership (with an elasticity of 1)
 This driving factor is much more important than
fuel price, vehicle price, infrastructure or population
density
Relationship of vehicle ownership to income tended
to be non-linear indicating saturation effects
DECOUPLING PROJECT
III. TRANSPORT ELASTICITY TO PRICES
(cont’d)
 10% increase in fuel prices leads to a:
- 1% decrease of car ownership
- 7% decrease of car fuel demand
 Performance of different policies have different
effects on old vehicles versus new vehicles, the level
of vehicle use, etc.
 Transport elasticity tends to increase over time as
consumers can take prices into account when
making long-term decisions
More detailed models are needed to examine in details
these effects
DECOUPLING PROJECT
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Growth in World Trade and GDP
300
250
250
200
200
150
100
150
50
0
50
100
0
1982 1985 1988 1991
1994 1997 2000
Road freight
Rail freight
Air cargo
1980
Global Trade
World GDP
DECOUPLING PROJECT
Ocean freight
1990
Inland
waterways
2000
Pipeline
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Modal Split of Passenger and freight transport
The EU, the US and Japan in 2002
Freight Transport
Passenger transport
100%
100%
80%
Air
80%
Short-sea
Waterborne
60%
Tram, metro
Railways
40%
Oil pipeline
60%
Inland navigation
40%
Rail
20%
Road
Bus/coach
20%
Passenger car
0%
0%
EU-15
USA
Japan
DECOUPLING PROJECT
EU-15
USA
Japan
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
(activity in pkm, tkm per gdp)
Motorization Level and Wealth in OECD Regions
1970-2000
Cars per 1000 inhabitants
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
10000
15000
20000
30000
25000
GDP per capita (in 1995 US$ PPP)
USA
DECOUPLING PROJECT
EU-15
Japan
35000
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Road Freight Intensity and Wealth
1970 to 2000
7000
tkm per capita
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
GDP per capita
(in 1995 US$ PPP)
US road freight
DECOUPLING PROJECT
EU road freight
Japan road freight
35000
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Passenger Transport Trends by Modes
U.S
JAPAN
8000
900
3500
7000
800
3000
6000
700
2500
2000
1500
Billion passenger km
4000
billion pkm
billion pkm
EUROPE
5000
4000
3000
600
500
400
300
1000
2000
200
500
1000
100
0
1970
1975
EU Rail
1980
1985
EU Pass.cars
1990
EU Bus
1995
2000
EU Aviation
DECOUPLING PROJECT
0
1970
1975
1980
US Pass.cars
1985
US Aviation
1990
Bus
1995
2000
Railw ay
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
Private cars
Railway
1990
Buses
1995
Aviation
2000
MAIN DRIVERS OF TRANSPORT DEMAND
Passenger Transport
 Income levels drive motorisation
 Relative prices (boost or constrain demand)
 Speed (due to vehicle technology and infrastructure)
 Separation of home and workplace
 More leisure time spent on travel and tourism
 Family structure (single households)
DECOUPLING PROJECT
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Freight Transport Trends By Modes
EUROPE
U.S
1600
JAPAN
2500
350
1400
billion tkm
1000
800
600
400
Billion tonne km
1200
Billion tkm
300
2000
1500
1000
250
200
150
100
500
200
50
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
EU Road
EU Short-sea
EU Inland waters
EUPipelines
1990
1995
2000
EU Rail
DECOUPLING PROJECT
0
1970
Rail freight
1975
1980
Intercity truck
1985
Oil pipeline
1990
Inland waterways
1995
2000
Short-sea
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
Road
Short-sea
1990
Railway
1995
2000
MAIN DRIVERS OF TRANSPORT DEMAND
Freight Transport
 Production increases
 Increase in the average length of hauls
 Globalisation, outsourcing of manufacturing
 Market integration (EU, NAFTA, APEC)
 Changes of consumer preferences
 Efficiency improvements (load factor, vehicle size)
 Transport infrastructure investment
DECOUPLING PROJECT
IV. TRENDS IN THE EU, US AND JAPAN
Trends of GDP and Transport Activity
(in terms of tkm,pkm)
EUROPE
U.S
JAPAN
250
300
300
200
250
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
150
100
50
0
1970
0
1975
EU GDP
1980
1985
1990
Total Passenger
1995
2000
Total Freight
DECOUPLING PROJECT
1970
1975
US GDP
1980
1985
1990
Total Passenger
1995
2000
Total Freight
0
1970
1975
1980
Passenger
1985
1990
Freight
1995
2000
GDP
V. NATIONAL ACCOUNTS AND TRANSPORT DEMAND
 Transportation-related goods and services
contributed 12% to US GDP in 2000
 Value of transportation used by each sector is
about 3% of the sector’s output and slightly
declined between 1992 and 1996
 Agriculture, forestry, fisheries and construction:
largest users of transport
DECOUPLING PROJECT
V. NATIONAL ACCOUNTS AND TRANSPORT DEMAND
(cont’d)
 Sectors with a larger contribution to GDP
have a relatively smaller transport demand
(manufactured goods)
 Sectors with a lower contribution to GDP
have large transport demands (e.g. agriculture)
The increase in the share of the service sector could
help to decouple transport impacts from economic
growth
DECOUPLING PROJECT
VI. TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
Public infrastructure investments has smaller
effects on productivity growth
Certain types of infrastructure have greater
economic effects than others (e.g. highways)
The economic effects of transport infrastructure
investment depend on the existing level and quality
of the network
Some issues to be examined are whether
additional infrastructure will lead to net economic
benefit, taking into account externalities
DECOUPLING PROJECT
VI. TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
(cont’d)
 New infrastructure of transport will always
be needed but capacity expansion cannot continue
indefinitely
 Transport policies need to focus on :
- generators of demand
- maintenance and upgrade of the existing
infrastructure
If transport infrastructure demand is not well managed,
the benefits of new investments are small or could
even lead to a waste of money
DECOUPLING PROJECT
VII. MAJOR FINDINGS
 The analysis of historic trends shows that road
transport is the driving factor of transport demand
(for passenger and freight) from 1970 to 2000 in the
EU, Japan and the U.S
 External costs of transport are high and mainly
caused by road transport
Policy for decoupling has to focus on instruments
addressing impacts from road transport
DECOUPLING PROJECT
VII. MAJOR FINDINGS
(cont’d)
 Taxes based on distance driven and the
environmental performance of vehicles can
encourage important modal shifts
 They generate revenue for developing more
environmentally friendly modes
 Combining taxes and regulations ensures
economic performance of transport while reducing
harmful emissions
DECOUPLING PROJECT
VII. MAJOR FINDINGS
(cont’d)
 The internalisation of external costs of transport
leads to a decrease of transport activities and to a
further reduction of externalities
 Policies for decoupling need to combine a package
of instruments including economic instruments and
regulations
They also have to take into accounts relationships
with policy areas like trade, industry, energy,
environment and land use
DECOUPLING PROJECT
IIX. FURTHER WORK
Analysing the impacts on transport demand of :
 Economic instruments
 Modal shift from road to rail
 Improvements in the transport organisation
 Dematerialisation trends
 Trends of territorialisation of production and
consumption
DECOUPLING PROJECT
CASE STUDIES
1) Austria: Analysis of decoupling potential of,
dematerialisation, changes in spatial structure of
production and consumption, optimisation of
transport organisation
2) Italy: Behavioural study on personal mobility
3) Japan: National and regional analyses
4) Spain: Optimizing the transport demand from
the agricultural sector in the Mediterranean
5) Sweden: A closer look at freight transport growth
6) Switzerland: To be specified
7) U.S: Smart Growth
DECOUPLING PROJECT