eco mobility factsheet

8/14/2019 Eco Mobility Factsheet

1/14

Featured in this Fact sheet:1) What is EcoMobility?

EcoMobility is environmentally sustainable mobility. It guarantees accessibility and allows people tomove around without relying on private motor vehicles. It includes non-motorized transport, suchas walking and cycling, public transport, and other new modes of transport that will help us moveaway from relying on fossil fuel and private motor vehicles.

2) Why EcoMobility?

Modern life requires us to be mobile, but our present behavior and the complex nature of mobilitytoday impacts on the environment, health and infrastructures, counteracng the benefits it shouldbring. When considering these cross-sectoral impacts and economic cost of transport we need toprovide for comprehensive soluons. EcoMobility offers as a soluon combinaons of differenttransport modes to reduce dependency on private motorized vehicles and the negave environmentaland social costs. EcoMobility also brings accessibility and easy commute to all. This will increasetransport sustainability in terms of: climate impact, health problems, urban development, reducedme wasted and economic cost savings.

3) Examples and good pracces.

More than 50% of urban trips are under 5km and could easily be changed to more sustainable modes.Therefore, local government authories must lead the charge on transport policies, in close cooperaonwith other local organizaons and instuons represenng different stakeholders. The concept ofEcoMobility can be easily implemented in relavely smaller cies (see for instance Stockholm) but itis not limited to smaller communies. Large cies are now showing significant results from adopngcomprehensive policies and integrated acons. New York and London are two examples.

4) What are the main conclusions?

It is clear that we need to change our mobility behavior, shi to more sustainable modes and improveenergy efficiency.Scaered transport iniaves, single transport mode focus and haphazard fundingover the past 30 years have limited results and are way below what we need to do to keep our levelof mobility in a carbon restricted world. This can only be achieved with less convenonal means.Integrated, rather than modal based, strategies, incorporang a wide variety of modes, will providemuch more effecve soluons to our transport problems.

Some key data:

l 20Gt: the increase of global CO2

emissbetween 1900 and 2000 (Source: WorResources Instute)

l 6.45 Gt (23% of the total): the amountemissions from transport in 2006 (SouIEA)

l 3,644,732.33Gg CO2equivalent: the

amount of CO2

emissions from transpo2006 in the 40 most developed count85% of this was produced by roadtransport. (Source: UNFCCC).

l 13%: the percentage of total GHGsemissions deriving from transport in 2(IPCC).

l 4.3 Gt: the amount of CO2

emissions frroad transport per year in 2004 (IPCC)

l Between $1,000 and $200: the annuaof traffic jam (in wasted me and fuel)driver in the United States: (Source: TTransport Instute).

l1% of EU GDP: the cost of traffic congewithin the European Union

l Less than 5km: the length of 50% of thtotal number of daily trips. 65% of thetrips are made my car (Source: Eurosta

l 80%: the percentage of all GHGs emisproduced in cies. These figures will roin the next 20 years.

l 5 billion: the number of people who wbe living in cies by 2030 (i.e. 60.5% oftotal world populaon)(Source: UN).

l Parcular aenon should be paid to

developing countries: between 2000 a2030, Asias urban populaon will incrfrom 1.36 billion to 2.64 billion, Africafrom 294 million to 742 million and thLan America and the Caribbean frommillion to 609 million (State of the WoCies Report, UNDFP)

l 3.1 million: the number of motor vehiin Beijing. China is now the largest emof GHGs. About 1,000 to 1,200 vehicleadded to the Chinese cies congestedroads every day.

1 2 3 4

1) What is EcoMobility?

EcoMobility:

a) integrates all environmentallysustainable forms of mobility

b) combines non-motorized transport,public transport, car sharing andother forms of energy efficienttransport

c) allows everybody to have beerchoices of how to move around, inparcular in the local environment

d) reduces the use of privately ownedmotorized vehicles.

NoteNon-motorized means of transportinclude:

l walking - cycling - wheeling: walking,using the bicycles, tricycle, velo-mobile,wheelchairs, mobility scooter, walking

aids, scooters, skates, push scooters,trailer, hand carts, shopping carts/trolleys, carrying aids and the abovevehicles with supporng electrical drive(preferably powered by renewableenergy sources);

The use of public transport is referredto as passengering and includes:

l the use of buses, trams, subways, lightrail, trains, ferries, collecve taxis and

taxis (if low-emission)

Fact sheet1.1 - What isEcoMobility?


2/14

l The direct and indirect costs of inefficientroad transport are highest in theurban environment. It is also here thatthe negave effects of transport areborne mainly by those not inside themotor vehicles. In both developed anddeveloping countries the highest levels of

air polluon are registered and it is mainlytraffic related. Traffic is responsible forroad congeson, delays and associatedcosts. According to Forbes Magazine, carspeed in the 20 most congested cies inEurope range from 19km/h in Berlin andLondon to 46km/h in Vienna, with anoverall average of 30.5 km/h. The averagecommercial speed in most cies hashardly changed since the me of the horseand carriage as there are few cies (over500,000 populaon) that are not sufferingfrom congeson.

l The EU has esmated that the cost ofcongeson in Europe amounts to 1% ofEU GDP per year (European Commission,COM(2007) 551).

l The correlaon between traffic densityand greenhouse gases emissions fromurban areas is clear.

l In order to make urban road trafficmore sustainable, we need to developstrategies that focus not only on thedevelopment of fuel-efficient cars butalso on more effecve uses of alternavetransport and mobility soluons. Ifvehicle numbers do not decrease,many congeson-related problems willremain. Implemenng a comprehensivechange towards EcoMobility requires theadopon of a new culture in land use andurban transport planning altogether.

l An urban-focused starng point makessense. According to UN esmates, by2030 about 5 billion people out of 8billion will be living in cies and privatemotorized transport will increaseaccordingly. A Eurostat study shows

that in most European countries eachpassenger undertakes, on average, 3trips per day. Most of these (between20 and 50%, depending on the countconsidered) are work or school relateand 50% of the total trips are shorterthan 5 km. For these journeys, the cais the most popular means of transpoaccounng for 66% of them. More ecfriendly transport modes could easilybecome an alternave, provided thatthey offer similar levels of flexibility areliability.

l A fundamental prerequisite for succeis the ability to reduce the number ofmotorized trips without sacrificing thability of people to move quickly andconveniently within their local areas.EcoMobility also has a challenge todevelop special service soluons forcertain groups like the elderly andhandicapped to provide them with btravel opons.

l Every city has different characteriscand needs. Local authories/governments are the key playersin cultural change through moreenvironmentally friendly transportsystems. Other stakeholders have to included in the reform process as wenamely policy makers, members of thtransport business sector, technicalexperse, and users. EcoMobilityrequires the coordinaon and

cooperaon between all these groupbecome truly effecve.l EcoMobility can act as a catalyst in

building cooperaon among differenstakeholder groups. It promotes theimplementaon of a new mobilityculture through its integrated andcomprehensive approach to transpoThe result - harmony amongst variomobility sectors and communitysegments.

Map of global air polluon. The map clearly shows a high concentraon of air polluin the most densely populated areas (Source: European Space Agency)

1 2 3 4

2) Why EcoMobility?

l Current road transport level increasesare unsustainable. The percentage ofCO

2emissions from transport is steadily

rising. In 2006 global CO2

emissions were28 billion tons. Of this, the transportsector was responsible for 23%, or 6.45billion tons. Moreover, according to IEAesmates, worldwide transport CO

2emissions will increase by almost 1.5mes to 9 billion tons by 2030.

Worlds CO2Emissions by Sector in 2006*1 *2

Trends in Transport CO2Emissions: 1980-

2030*1 *2


3/141 2 3 4

CITY NEW YORK LONDONCHARACTERISTICSOF THE CITY

It is the most densely populated major city in the UnitedStates, with an esmated 8,274,527 people, occupying justunder 790 km2. The populaon of greater metropolitan NewYork is also the naons highest, esmated at 18,815,988

people occupying over 17,400 km2

.

London is the 3rd most densely populated capital in Europe.Its metropolitan area counts 7,556,900 people distributed on1.577 km2. A density of 4,792 inhabitants per km2.

DATA ONTRANSPORT ANDMODAL SPLIT

Of all people who commute to work in New York City:

32% use the subway 25% drive alone 14% take the bus 8% travel by commuter rail 8% walk to work 6% carpool 1% use a taxi 0.4% ride bicycles to work 0.4% travel by ferry.

54% of households in New York City do not own a car, andrely on public transportaon.

London has a large and complicated transport system. InGreater London there are 13,600km of roads, 3,730km ofbus routes, 329km of metro lines, 28km of new tramwaysand 788km of naonal rail lines. Every day 23.8 millionjourneys are made on this transport network.Of all the journeys made within London:

During 2006/07 public transport accounted for 36% 18% were by bus, which equated to approximately

6 million journeys made every weekday, and thisfigure is growing

10% were by London Underground in 2006, totaling4 million journeys per weekday or 1 billion trips peyear

Rail and DLR journey stages increased by 6% each;

Over 480,000 are made by bicycle every day. Since2000, the number of recorded cycle journeys hasincreased by 83%.

38% of London households do not own a car, compared toonly 23% of households across Great Britain as a whole.

MAIN ACTIONS The city is implemenng PlaNYC 2030, a comprehensive long-term sustainability vision.

Public transport: A select bus service was implemented. New York has

now one of the largest fleets world wide of hybridbuses. The majority of other buses use natural gas

From 1995 to 2005, ridership on city buses andsubways grew by 36%, compared with a populaongain in the city of 7%. In the suburbs a

14% increase in ridership on Metro-North and the LongIsland Rail Road outpaced a suburban populaon gainof 6%. With dramac increases in fuel prices in 2008,as well as increased tourism and residenal growth,ridership on New York buses and subways grew 3.1%up to a 2.37 trips a year compared to 2007. This is thehighest since 1965

A new central terminal, PATH World Trade Centerstaon, is under construcon. It will allow easytransfer between the PATH system, several subwaylines and proposed new projects. It is expected toserve 250,000 travelers daily.

On November 2008 the Mayor of Londons transport strategy,Way to go!, was released. This document assesses pastachievements and envisages a long-term plan to develop Londontransport system. The strategy addresses different issues.Public transport:

Major investments are going to be made for thedevelopment of the railroad and undergroundnetworks. (Crossrail, 30% increase in the capacity ofthe tube)

Implemenng of improved bus services and increasein coverage

Introducon of Oystercards, adopon of further security measures, adopon

of strict bus lane enforcement measures.

3) Examples and good pracces

a) Examples


4/141 2 3 4

3 Examples and good pracces

CITY NEW YORK LONDONMAIN ACTIONS(connued)

Cycling: As of February 2009, about 170 miles (260 km) of

painted lanes run in streets, and the network is growing 49 acres of roads and parking spots have been

converted to bike lanes, pedestrian areas, and public

plazas since PlaNYC 2030 has been enacted Bike riding has increased by 35 percent over the past

year

Walking Over 98,000 trees have been planted Car free Sundays introduced As part of its standard operaons, the citys

Department of Transportaon also recycles 40 percentof its asphalt.

Cycling: Creaon of the London Cycle Network. Over 550km of

the 900km network completed to date. Communicaon and informave campaigns put in place

in order to incenvize the use of bicycles and more

responsible behaviors Installaon of 10,000 cycle parking spaces at schools

and colleges, 40,000 spaces on Londons streets, and afurther 1,600 at staons across the capital

Set up of the Cycling Centre of Excellence in 2001 toguide the development of cycling iniaves in London.

Walking: Ongoing programme to improve pedestrian

crossings across London; Different iniaves for the promoon of

walking and walking paths in London (e.g. SixStrategic Walking Routes and Walkfinder)

These achievements were spurred by the introducon of thecongeson charge, a fee applied to access the city center. Thecongeson charge led to:

- reducon of traffic entering the original charging (21 per centlower than pre-charge levels, 70,000 fewer cars a day);- there has been a six per cent increase in bus passengers duringcharging hours;- there has been a 12 per cent increase in cycle journeys;- 137m being raised, in the financial year 2007/08, to invest backinto improving transport in London.

STAKEHOLDERSINVOLVEMENT

PlaNYC is supported by Campaign for New Yorks Future, a coalionof civic, business, environmental, labor, community and publichealth organizaons.

One of the most relevant developments is Crossrail, a new railwaycrossing London and connecng the area West of London with thaton the East. This project is brought about with the support of theCrossrail Railway Stakeholders Forum.

Three years of discussions with the different stakeholder bodieswas undertaken before the inial congeson charging schemewas introduced. Parcular efforts were made to get the businesscommunity on board.

ACHIEVEMENTS - New York is amongst the least pollung cies in the US (takinginto account its populaon) and its CO

2emissions amount to 1/3 of

the US average.- New York CO

2emissions over the last year have remained stable,

in spite of the increase in populaon and traffic.- 2009: New York is the first American city to win the ITDPSustainable Transport Award

- London has experienced a 16.4% reducon in CO2emissions ove

the last three years, despite the overall increase in traffic flowswithin the city.- London transport plan has the ambious objecve of cung CO

2

emissions by 60% by 2030- 2008: London wins the Instute for Transportaon andDevelopment Policy (ITDP) Sustainable Transport Award
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_New_York's_Futurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_New_York's_Future


5/14

Bike Sharing

Bike sharing schemes such as Vellib in Parisor Bici in Barcelona are run along similarlines but without prior booking required.In some schemes the first half hour is freeor membership is somemes bundled withother services such as a public transportseason cket and carsharing membership, asin Brussels or Hannover.

4) Summary and conclusions

l EcoMobility proposes an innovaveapproach to urban mobility to helpcreate a more sustainable environmentand posive effects on climate change,cizens health, me consumpon andtransport costs.

l This new concept is based on thegreat potenal that environmentallysustainable transports have to befurther developed and to substutemotorized transports, when

adequate technological, logiscaland infrastructural arrangements areprovided.

l Local authories and policy makers playa strategic and crucial role in spurringnew strategies and in transformingideas and projects into feasible andconcrete acons.

l However, in order to be effecve,EcoMobility must take place on a muchlarger scale: all sectors (businesses,users, experts, apart from policymakers) and segments must beinvolved in the decision-making processas much as in the implementaonphase.

l A change in mobility behavior is onlypossible if people are offered aracvealternaves. In the majority of cases,the most sustainable opon will bepreferred if adequately presented.

l An effort is required to imagine livesand cies less dependent on cars, butif such a path is undertaken, thereis room not just for improvement,but also for a deep change in habitsand trends. Some cies have startedadopng an EcoMobility approach andare already experiencing significantimprovements.

5) References

For further informaon on

EcoMobility:Global Alliance for EcoMobility,www.ecomobility.org;Wikipedia, Global Alliance forEcoMobility, hp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Alliance_for_EcoMobility;For further insights and data on CO2

emissions:l CAIT, hp://cait.wri.org/figures

phpl EEA, hp://www.eea.europa.

eu/l IEA, hp://www.iea.org;lMEET Conference webpage,

hp://www.mlit.go.jp/kokusai/MEET/data_en.html;

l OECD, www.oecd.org;l UNFCCC, hp://unfccc.

int/2860.phpl UNFCCC Greenhouse Gas

Inventory Data, hp://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.php;

For a more detailed presentaon of

New York City and the City of London

transport policies:

New York:l US Bureau of Transportaon

Stascshp://www.bts.gov/publicaons/highlights_of_the_2001_naonal_household_travel_survey/html/execuve_summary.htmll New York City, Department of

Transportaon: hp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtml;

lWikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportaon_in_New_York_City

London:l City of London, list of links

to transports related pages:hp://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporaon/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/ ;

lMayor of London TransportStrategy: hp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsp;

l Facts and figures: hp://

www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsp

l Congeson charge: hp://wwwlondon.gov.uk/mayor/congest/

For further general informaon, pleasecontact:

The Global Alliance for EcoMobility at:[email protected]

1 2 3 4

The two case studies illustrated aboveprensent the potenal of sustainableransport and mobility within two large

Western cies. However, traffic and mobilitymanagement is ranking high on the list ofpriories of smaller municipalies, too.Many European medium-sized cies are

lso engaging in plans to increase transportccessibility and sustainability. A parcularlyelevant example is the city of Stockholm,

weden.

n developing countries, big diffencesexist. While emerging countries (e.g. India

nd Brasil) show a significant degree ofommitment to greening transport and

promong more environmentally efficientransport, other developing countries do

not include at all this theme among theirpriories.

b) Good pracces

Car sharing

Car Sharing (somemes called Car Clubs) isll not widespread but it is rapidly gaining

ground with considerable growth in Europe,Canada and the USA. As one car, a sharedar replaces 8.3 vehicles (Communauto,

one of the fastest growing and mostuccessful schemes in Canada) or even 15ars in a dense city such as AmsterdamGreenwheels, a leader in carsharing in the

Netherlands). As a rule of thumb a sharedar replaces 4 to 12 private cars.

Car Sharing started in Switzerland in 1987nd now there are some 75,000 membersfrom a total Swiss populaon of 7.3 million)

with some 1,950 cars at 1,050 locaons inover 400 cies, making it one of the leadingCar Sharing enterprises with by far thehighest customer density in the world. Thishows that Car Sharing is not for those whoannot afford a car but rather forhose that choose not to. The Swiss are rather rich naon with a high naonalverage of car ownership per capital;

underlining that fact that Car Sharing reallyakes cars off the road as the purchase ofecond or third cars becomes less aracve

when compared to the flexible offer of car club.
http://www.ecomobility.org/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Alliance_for_EcoMobilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Alliance_for_EcoMobilityhttp://cait.wri.org/figures.phphttp://cait.wri.org/figures.phphttp://www.eea.europa.eu/http://www.eea.europa.eu/http://www.iea.org/http://www.mlit.go.jp/kokusai/MEET/data_en.htmlhttp://www.mlit.go.jp/kokusai/MEET/data_en.htmlhttp://www.oecd.org/http://unfccc.int/2860.phphttp://unfccc.int/2860.phphttp://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.phphttp://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.phphttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/mailto:[email protected]://www.ecomobility.org/http://www.ecomobility.org/mailto:[email protected]://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/transport/facts-and-figures.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/index.jsphttp://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Transport_and_streets/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_New_York_Cityhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/home/home.shtmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/html/executive_summary.htmlhttp://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.phphttp://unfccc.int/ghg_data/items/3800.phphttp://unfccc.int/2860.phphttp://unfccc.int/2860.phphttp://www.oecd.org/http://www.mlit.go.jp/kokusai/MEET/data_en.htmlhttp://www.mlit.go.jp/kokusai/MEET/data_en.htmlhttp://www.iea.org/http://www.eea.europa.eu/http://www.eea.europa.eu/http://cait.wri.org/figures.phphttp://cait.wri.org/figures.phphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Alliance_for_EcoMobilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Alliance_for_EcoMobilityhttp://www.ecomobility.org/


6/14

Featured in this Fact sheet:1) Who are the EcoMobility actors?

Mobility involves at least four major categories of stakeholders: policy makers (local, naonal, regional, global)and organizing authories, who are responsible for invesgang and defining the final content of transportpolicies and guaranteeing their implementaon; businesses and public or private operators, who providetransport and transport related services; experts and academics, bringing specialist insights within the transportsector that help idenfy needs, and define and evaluate policies; users, the ulmate actors affected by transportpolicies who provide feedback and input and, somemes, contribute to the development of mobility opons(including EcoMobility) by raising awareness on specific needs through their communies and organizaons. Therole of these users groups is strengthened by the efficiency of their reporng and monitoring of the outcomesof this process. Other stakeholders not analyzed here may also play a role (e.g. public and private operators who

may be under contract for the provision of transport and transport related services).

2)Why does EcoMobility require a cross-sectoral approach?

EcoMobility represents a new approach to mobility and accessibility. It envisages an integraon of differentenvironmentally sustainable means of transport as a substute to private motorized transport. For thistransport strategy to be effecve, a series of infrastructural, technological and service innovaons as well asother incenves must be simultaneously introduced to achieve eventual adopon by the populaon. Such acomprehensive change requires cooperaon among the different sectors responsible for implemenng each ofthese variaons. This includes an understanding, through dialog between actors, on behavioral change and howbest to affect it.

3) Case studies:

this secon analyses the experience of Nongham, in the UK, and of the IKEA Brussels test metro-bicyclecombinaon (Belgium) project. Through these examples, the importance of cooperaon between policy makers,businesses and users in the implementaon of a more sustainable transport policy, including a beer integraonamong different means of transport, is highlighted.

4) Summary and conclusions:

reforms within the transport sector require the inclusion of the different stakeholders in all phases, from earlyplanning to implementaon. This will guarantee beer cooperaon and usually not only helps achieve the overallgoals and objecve, but also is more likely to bring significant co-benefits.

1) Who are the EcoMobilityactors?

The main actors involved in the mobility andransport sector are:

1) Governmental organizaons and policalinstuons: they are responsible for

policy- and decision-making and have thepower to determine the direcon of privateand public actors choices creangincenve and opportunies.

2) Businesses and public or private operators:they are responsible for providingtechnological and praccal soluons tomobility needs. They are responsiblefor offering transport and transportservices, turning policy into reality. Theyare very recepve to peoples needs andcan influence the praccal feasibility ofcertain choices. This includes innovaonand investments in sustainable mobility,

1 2 3 4

Fact sheet 1.2 - Main Actors on

theEcoMobility Scene

incenves for employees and the designof the workplace to facilitate sustainablemobility.

3) Experts organizaons and academicinstuons: they contribute to highlighngspecific needs and problems. They can playan important role in raising the aenonof governmental organizaons, businesses,and civil society on crucial issues, indirectly

determining policy and innovaonoutcomes. They also advise governmentson best pracce for detailed and large scaledesign.

4) Users: they can be individuals or collecveorganizaons. This category includes theconsumers of mobility. Their role is crucial:on the one hand they can provide inputto the other stakeholders; on the otherhand they can determine the success orfailure of certain decisions, as they arethose who eventually choose how to move.They are also ideally placed to monitor theeffecveness of mobility programs.

2) Why does EcoMobilirequire a cross - sectoraapproach?

EcoMobility is based on the integraodifferent means of transport and is aiat providing everybody with the possof effectuang a journey, especiallywithin the urban environment, relyinintermodal transportaon only, withoneed to resort to cars.

lIn order to incenvize everyonfrom individuals to businesses,avoid the use of private motortransport, viable alternave opmust be available and easy to uThey range from the provision different transport modes, theaccompanying informaon andmobility aids, to infrastructure other supporng services (e.g.deducons, carbon credits, evefor the promoon of alternavforms of mobility. They may alsinclude systems for not movingat all telecommunicaons,tele-work, tele-shopping, tele-educaon...).

lRedirecng mobility choicesentails the re-think of mobilityopportunies and the creaonof new mobility strategies. Inturn, this development requirecooperaon among the differeactors concerned with the diffeaspects of transportaon,

from instuons and experts tbusinesses and users.

lThe EcoMobility Alliance fostecooperaon among thesestakeholders with the purposeguaranteeing harmonizaons oacon and a smooth integraothe different means. The ulmobjecve consists in facilitangtransion towards car-free mohabits and environments, creacies for people.


7/14

Implementaon

The city has already implemented severalacons as part of this policy:

Parking: in 1990, a parking strategy wasdeveloped. Regularly updated, it aims to limitstreet parking and control the increasingnumber of off-street parking spaces.

Park & Ride: in the early 1970s, the cityintroduced a strong policy to promote a Parkand Ride system. There are five park and ridecenters with 4 300 spaces linked to a bussystem on the edge of town. There are alsotwo other sites close to suburban railwaystaons.

Shopmobility: it is a service for thehandicapped. It allows them to borrowwheelchairs (convenonal or electric) orspecial two-wheeled vehicles to move aroundin shopping malls.

Travel to work: the Municipality has setup the Commuter Planners Club whichincludes the heads of 40 companies in theregion. It determines which iniaves aremost likely to succeed and which appear tobe the most effecve, in order to draw upbusiness travel plans.

Partnership and results

Nongham transport policy is parcularlyinnovave for its comprehensive approach.To draw up this integrated transport policy,the town council worked closely with

Nongham County Council, the regionalauthority and in parcular with regionalcompany heads on the Travel to workoperaon. An urban mobility counselor wasappointed to promote Green Travel Plansto help local authories and businessesto develop travel plans for commuters(home-work travel). For example, Boots,Nonghams biggest employer (6 000employees) had to draw up and implement acompany travel plan. This was a prerequisiteto obtain a building permit to extend thecompanys estates. The plan encouragescar pooling and improves the bus service

(including the bus traveling to and from theworkplace). Liming the number of parking

places available at the workplace is also aintegral part of the plan.

Example 2 - Brussels

In Belgium, the Brussels public transportcompany MIVB and cyclist organizaonProVelo started a new service to smulatthe employees of IKEA Anderlecht to go twork using the combinaon of metro and

bicycle. In the nearest metro staon, twoboxes are installed. The boxes contain 8bikes, reserved for the IKEA staff. The twopartners want to provide the 100 employthat go to work by public transport on dabasis with an easier means to cross thedistance from the metro staon to the stoIn addion, there is clear informaon anddirecons in the staon and in the shop ohow to access it by public transport (Metbus and tram connecons).

Implementaon

The iniators of the project installed twobicycle boxes in a metro staon locatedabout 600 meters from the IKEA store. Mchose the bicycle boxes and installed theEach of the boxes has a different look andcontain 4 bicycles provided by ProVelo, arented by IKEA. 8 staff members of IKEA ha key of the boxes and can do the distancthe store by bicycle. MIVB takes care of thmaintenance and surveillance of the boxeas well.

Results

The project is aimed at incenvize employto use public transport in their daily trips and from work. The cooperaon betweenthe Belgian public transport authority andthe private company IKEA made integratetransport possible, reducing employeesdependency on private motorized transpCreang the suitable infrastructure for usintegrated transport required an adaptaand cooperaon from both sides, thetransport agency MIVB and the businesscompany IKEA. Without a joint acon thecreaon of suitable condions for thepromoon of cycling would have cost

more efforts and would have been moredifficult to achieve.

1 2 3 4

3) Interacons among theEcoMobility actors. Casestudies and figures:

This secon presentstwo case studies ofnnovave acons in the transport sectorhat encourage the reducon of car use.

They demonstrate the importance of theparcipaon of different mobility actors for

ostering a less car-dependent behavior.

The first case study reports a projectmplemented in Nongham aimed ateducing the use of private motorizedransport. The successful implementaon

of the project relied on the inclusion andparcipaon of different governmentalnstuons and private actors, contribungo the realizaon of the acons.

The second case analyses the IKEA Brusselsest metro-bicycle combinaon (Belgium)

project financed by the EU. It shows how

he integrated acon between public andprivate actors can produce innovave and athe same me acceptable soluons to solvepecific problems that hinder the use of non-

motorized transport.

Example 1 - Nongham

Nongham is the regional capital of theEast Midlands and center of an urban areawith 500 000 inhabitants. Nongham hasdeveloped a travel policy for the region,which includes the city, its urban area andneighboring rural areas. The project reliedon the joint parcipaon of the City Council,he Nongham County Council and private

actors.

The following priories were defined:ldevelop a high quality integrated

transport policy: well served,good intermodality, access forthe handicapped and rural arearesidents;

lencourage economic acvity withinthe urban area;

linform the populaon;lintegrate this policy into local

planning documents;ldevelop sustainable districts.


8/14

and therefore eventual success. It isalso important to clearly documentthe results and to evaluate theprocess so that other cies canlearn from these examples.

lThe reform of the transport sectoris therefore mainly a mul-levelprocess. Local governments,experts and academics, civil societyorganizaons and businesses

are the principal actors in thepromoon of a new mobility cultureand policies.

lFrom the interacon andcooperaon among these foursectors more effecve soluonscan be envisaged and implementedand can produce a more significantimpact.

5) References:

For further informaon on actors andpartnerships within the transport sector

l Global Alliance for EcoMobility,www.ecomobility.org

l European Commission, DGTransport, www.ec.europa.eu

l UITP, hp://www.uitp.org

For further informaon on urbantransport policies, reforms and projects:

l European Commission, DGTransport, hp://ec.europa.eu/dgsenergy_transport/index_en.htm

l ELTIS, European Local TransportInformaon Service, www.els.org

l SMART, University of Michigan,hp://um-SMART.org

l Instute for Transportaon &Development Policy, hp://www.itdp.org

l Internaonal Transport Forum,

hp://www.internaonaltranspororum.org

l Victoria Transport Policy Instute,hp://www.vtpi.org

l Managenergy, hp://www.managenergy.net

For further general informaon, pleasecontact:

The Global Alliance for EcoMobility at:[email protected]

1 2 3 4

4) Summary and conclusions

lReducing the impact of motorized-transport requires the introduconof new urban and transport policies,physical, spaal and technologicalsoluons and a change in everydayhabits.

lSuch a shi implies a commitment

to a new approach to mobility fromdifferent sectors: policy-makers,businesses, experts and users;

lCooperaon among these actorsis crucial to raise awareness onproblems, needs and potenalsoluons, to define new and sharedpolicies, to promote beer servicesand technologies as well as toassure final acceptance by users
http://www.ecomobility.org/http://www.ec.europa.eu/http://www.uitp.org/http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/index_en.htmhttp://www.eltis.org/http://um-smart.org/http://www.itdp.org/http://www.itdp.org/http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/http://www.vtpi.org/http://www.managenergy.net/http://www.managenergy.net/mailto:[email protected]://www.ecomobility.org/http://www.ecomobility.org/mailto:[email protected]://www.managenergy.net/http://www.managenergy.net/http://www.vtpi.org/http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/http://www.itdp.org/http://www.itdp.org/http://um-smart.org/http://www.eltis.org/http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/index_en.htmhttp://www.uitp.org/http://www.ec.europa.eu/http://www.ecomobility.org/


9/14

Featured in this Fact sheet:1) What is the relaonship between transport, mobility and socio-economics?

The socio-economic condions of a region or a household are both the cause and the result ofcertain transport systems and mobility opons. The structure and nature of a transport systemdefined at naonal and local level has a direct socio-economic impact (i.e. it directly impacts theaffordability of transport for a country and for a family and its mobility capacity). At the sameme, the socio-economic characteriscs of a territory or household also influences transportchoices and mobility behavior. The main variables affecng mobility choices are gender, age,marital status and household composion, income and profession.

2) What is the relaonship between EcoMobility and socio-economics?The spread of the concept of EcoMobility is expected to affect the socio-economics of the area orhousehold. At the same me, EcoMobility should be available independently from specific socio-economic condions. By providing new transport opportunies and soluons, EcoMobility aimsat guaranteeing everybodys access to transport and sustainable mobil ity for the sake of beerenvironmental, urban and health condions, independently from socio-economic status. Socio-economic variables must be taken into account in order to amplify the success of EcoMobilityand the change in transport choices and mobility behavior. However, they should be a source ofopportunies rather than an obstacle.

3) Case study.

The case study analyses mobility behavior of higher income classes in Caracas. It shows howeconomic status can be a major determinant of mobility behavior and car-dependency. However,it also shows that such a behavior can be changed if adequate transport soluons are provided.

4) Summary and conclusions.

Transport is key to achieving both economic development and social inclusion.But in todayscontext it is more oen perceived as an obstacle to aaining these objecves, rather than asource of opportunies. EcoMobility provides an alternave to this situaon. By promong anintegrated system of sustainable transport opons, guaranteeing accessibility for all, itdecouples transport from specific socio-economic precondions and overcomes currentshortcomings in the system.

1) What is the relaonshipbetween transport, mobilityand socio-economics?

he transport sector is a crucial elementor economic development and impacts

he welfare of enre regions and singleouseholds. When transport systemsre efficient, they provide economicpportunies and social benefits withosive mulplying effects. When transportystems lack capacity or reliability i.e whenhey are inefficient, they can create anconomic cost. The use of transportarries also important social andnvironmental implicaons that couldause significant costs.

1 2 3

Fact sheet 1.3 - The Socio-Economics of

EcoMobility

At the same me, the socio-economiccondions of a region or householddetermine transport choices and mobilitybehavior and impact on the efficiency oftransport.

2.1) Transport Systems andEconomics

The economic impacts oftransportaon can be classified asdirect and indirect:

l Direct impacts related toaccessibility change wheretransport enables larger marketsand enables to save me andcosts.

l Indirect impacts related tothe economic mulplier effewhere the price of commodor services drop and/or theivariety increases.

The economic importance oftransportaon can also be assesfrom a macroeconomic andmicroeconomic perspecve.

At the macroeconomic level,

transportaon and mobilityare linked to: level of output,employment and income withinnaonal economy.

In many developed countrietransportaon accountsbetween 6% and 12% of theGDP.

In 2002, transportaon-related goods and servicesaccounted for more than10%over $1 trillionofU.S. Gross Domesc Produc

(hp://www.bts.gov/prografreight_transportaon/htmtransportaon.html)

Studies1 in Europe and the USA shothat around 30 jobs are created forevery 1 million invested in publictransport infrastructure and around

jobs for a similar investment in pubtransport operaons.

From a study of 13 public transportinvestments in Europe the regionaleconomic effects of public transpor

investments costs were found tohave a mulplier effect of 2 to 2.5. Switzerland a country renowned fofaith in public transport, the economas a whole benefits from added valof 4.60 for every 1 spent on pubtransport. (source UITP and UNEP/Ireport on Green Jobs)

1 TRANSECON; Urban Transport and Local Socio-Economic Development Final Report 2003 & Public Transport andthe Naons Economy A quantave analysis of public transportaons economic impact prepared by CambridgeSystemacs Inc. with Economic Development Research Group October 1999
http://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.htmlhttp://www.bts.gov/programs/freight_transportation/html/transportation.html


10/14

(but this figure varies greatlyaccording to sub sectors);

It accounts on average between10% and 15% of householdexpenditures.

Income levels are a main

determinant of individualsmobility. The higher the income,the higher the mobility, both interms of numbers of trips andkilometers traveled.

Income also affects modalchoices. High income householdsor countries register the higherrates of motorizaon and reliance

on private motorized vehicleswhile in poorer contexts peoprely more on public transportcycling or walking.

2.2) Transportaon and socialstatus

Transport and mobility behavior isalso related to the social aspect of acountry or a household. The followinggraph highlights the different use oftransport in Australia across differentgenders, age groups, professionalbackgrounds, household structuresand income levels:

1 2 3

The capacity of a transport system and higher mobility levels are posively correlated to economic growth and income, asthe two graphs below show:

The macroeconomic impact oftransport can be assessed also interms of lost producvity: theBrish Chambers of Commerce, forinstance, esmates that _15 billionannually is lost from the naonaleconomy due to traffic congeson. AtEU level, this figure is close to 1% GDPloss per year.

At microeconomic level transportaonis linked to producer, consumer andproducon costs.

Transportaon accounts foraround 4% of the costs of eachunit of output in manufacturing

In turn, higher GDP rates generate more demand for mobility, measured in terms of increased number of passengers:


11/14

lMore in details, data on modal split from the US and some European countries show clear differences in mobility choicesamong different age groups:

Source: dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/19716/1101/1/transitmodel.pdf

1 2 3
http://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/19716/1101/1/transitmodel.pdfhttp://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/19716/1101/1/transitmodel.pdfhttp://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/19716/1101/1/transitmodel.pdfhttp://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/19716/1101/1/transitmodel.pdf


12/14

lSeveral studies have revealed thedifferences in travel paerns betweenmen and women.

In terms of distance traveled, forinstance, in 2001 in the US mentraveled on average 45 miles perday against 35 of women.

p://nhts.ornl.gov/publicaons.shtml

Other characteriscs differenatewomen trips compared to

mens. Women travel features:more trips, but shorter averagedistance; more household andfamily support trips; women inmul-person households have anabove average of shopping trips;more trip chaining; higher use ofpublic transport, less car use; morepassenger trips.

0-11 12-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-74 75+Pedestrian 29% 18% 20% 19% 18% 17% 18% 25% 34%

Bicycle 29% 52% 23% 17% 20% 23% 22% 24% 17%

Moped/mofa 0% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1%Motorcycle/scooter 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Passenger car 40% 17% 37% 56% 56% 55% 54% 46% 38%Bus 1% 5% 8% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4%Tram/metro 0% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%Train 0% 2% 6% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1%Other 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 3%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table 1 Modal split by age group in the Netherlands. Source: Wegman & Aarts 2005

Access to transport is parcularlycomplicated in developingcountries, creang significantmobility gaps. Research by theTRB in Karachi, Pakistan, on thebarriers to women enjoying asimilar level of mobility to menshowed that lack of accessibilityand affordability of transportaon(21%), bus frequencies and lowlevel of services (17%), bus staffbehavior (17%), limited seats(22%), poorly planned publictransportaon infrastructure

(15%) as well as resistance by members of the house to trave(8%) - highlighted inefficienciethe transportaon system.

hp://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885

Travel behavior differs from counto country and is oen the resultofcultural differences. Even incountries with similar socio-econstructures, mobility behavior canpresent dissimilaries.

1 2 3
http://nhts.ornl.gov/publications.shtmlhttp://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=776885http://nhts.ornl.gov/publications.shtml


13/14

Mobility gaps = mobility is one of the fundamental components of transportaon. Whenransportaon is unevenly distributed and/or not available, certain groups can experienceack of mobility. The lack of mobility opportunies affecng a specific populaon group iseferred to as mobility gap. Lack of income, lack of me, lack of means, the lack of access,ge, gender, are some of the most relevant factors that can generate substanal mobility gapsetween different populaon groups. These mobility variaons are parcularly relevant ashey are likely to have substanal impacts on the socio-economic opportunies of individuals.

2) What is the relaonshipbetween EcoMobility andsocio-economics?

Economic impact of EcoMobility:

Macroeconomic level:

l create investment opportuniesthrough the construcon of innovaveand safe infrastructures to serve newneeds deriving from different mobilitybehavior;

l create employment opportuniesthrough the implementaon ofservices to support different mobilityneeds;

l reduce mobility gaps based on gender,race or culture and increasing socialinclusion their parcipaon in thelabor force;

l reduce dependency on fossil fuels andincrease security of resources;

l ulmately to help alleviate povertyand reduce social exclusion.

Microeconomic level:

l keep transport more affordablethrough less car-dependency andmore efficient use of economical,

sustainable transport such asbicycles, wheeled vehicles, and publictransport by:

l providing innovave soluons andservices;

l creang efficient public transportservices in all countries, includingdeveloping countries.

l Create equitable transport soluons thatallow everybody to move, independentof their economic situaon and avoidingthat mode choice is based on economiccapacity.

l Provide alternaves for the highincome classes to convince them toreduce their usage of personal car.

Social impacts of EcoMobility:

l Increase in both developing anddeveloped countries the ability

1 2 3

of everybody to move quicklyand efficiently, sustainably andindependently, irrespecve of thesocial status by:

l increasing sustainable mobilityopportunies in all age groups.In parcular, EcoMobility will provintegrated sustainable mobilitysoluons to reduce mobility gapsamongst children

and the elderly;l providing more adequate soluon

women which are beer adaptedtheir mobility needs, enabling theto increase of their independencereduce mobility gaps

l providing safer, affordable meansof transport in parcular in develocountries to allow everybodys acto educaon, employment and jomarkets, and other primary servic(e.g. hospitals)

l Increase the number of non car-dependent trips in parcular amo

men, encouraging theuse of alternave means of transpon shorter routes and trips to wo

3) Case studies and examp

Aracng higher income class to publictransport in socially clustered cies. Thecase of Caracas, Venezuela.

In Caracas, as in most socially clusteredcies, modal split is highly related to inc

High income populaon is mostly cardependent, while lower income people acapve to public transport.

This typical situaon is explained by thefact that new residenal areas for theupper social levels have been located inareas poorly served by public transport,automacally creang a dependency onprivate car.

World-wide social values and fashion are alpart of the explanaon (e.g. during the 197a high proporon of Caracass middle and h

income cizens were systemacally using tcar even in areas where there was a good oof public transport as owning and using a cwas a signal of social status).

However in 1983 when the metro systemwas inaugurated, a new paern of trave


14/14

ehavior started to emerge as the metromainly aracted high-income people.

Many metro riders are also regular car usersut choose to take the metro when it providesgood alternave. Currently, the transit system

n Caracas is comprised of four main modes:he metro; the por puesto, which are minibusehicles of 18 to 32 seats; the jeeps, which areual tracon vehicles of up to 12 seat (most ofhem serving hilly areas, which are also usuallyhe slum areas); and the bus system, consisngf metro-bus and private operators. CA Metroperates the metro and, since 1987, metro-busnes, which are bus feeder services extendinghe area covered into the outer city zones.

While the metro and metro-bus offer transitervices to middle and high income users, the

mini-buses and jeeps provide flexible transitervice to low income groups.

he metro and metro-bus services are moreeliable and offer higher quality than mini-uses and jeeps This higher quality service

s one of the main aributes to aract thewealthier people to metro and metro-bus

nd since the inauguraon of the metrotrong adversing has not only promoteds use but also created a different civicehavior of its users.

he analysis of the data collected by CAMetro on modal split by income shows thetrong correlaon between the quality ofublic transport and the income distribuonf users, which can not be explained byariffs only.

he data collected over the years allows anconometric analysis of the evoluon of therend. A series of interviews with metro and

metro-bus managers, as well as sociologistsand social psychologists have helpedidenfy the sociological variables with thehighest influence in the travel behavior ofhigh income populaon and those qualityaributes of metro and metro-bus withmost aracveness. The results could beindicave on how successful policies toinduce a change in modal choice fromcars to public transport could beimplemented even in cies where socialsegregaon is extreme.

This behaviour can also be seen in othercies. Zrich is one of the wealthiest ciesyet is has a high modal share of publictransport. Surprisingly it does not have ametro (as decided by its cizens in severalpublic referendums) but it offers a fullyintegrated system zurimobil around lightrail, tramways, buses and car sharing onone cket. Professional people feel quite athome using the system which is consideredto be quicker and easier than using a car inthe central city area. Curiba, Brazil. Curibahas a successful Bus Rapid Transit systemused by all levels of the populaon and itsalso own more cars than the average.

Vienna, the capital of Austria has just (2009)been voted one of the most live-able cies.Its cizens own a higher than averagenumber of cars per 1000 head populaonbut the modal split in Vienna is one of thehighest in Europe.The mobility opons in Vienna are basedon a quality of life approach, which allows

a high level of mobility without the need touse a car except for trips that are best servedby that mode. This approach has also beensuccessful in Freiburg, Germany.

4) Conclusions

l Mobility and accessibility showup deep differences in usageaccording to many variables;

l The main determinants oftransport choices: economiccondion and socialcharacteriscs, at individual a

country-level. i.e. GDP, incomegender, age, marital status andhousehold structure.

l Socio-economic condions catherefore lead to inequaliesand mobility gaps, that is lackof mobility opportuniesfor certain groups of lessadvantaged people;

l In parcular, the use of privatemotorized transport requiresa higher economic capacity,specific skills and evensocial status.

l For these reasons, privatemotorized transport tends towiden mobility gaps, slow doweconomic development andincrease exclusion;

l EcoMobility aims at providingadequate alternave transporsoluon and infrastructuresthat allow everybody tomove locally without relyingon private motorized transpor

l EcoMobility is expected tohave a socio-economic impacteliminang obstacles to

the mobility of certain groupstheir economic beerment ansocial inclusion.

eco mobility factsheet

Documents