thinking highways na sep 08

8/14/2019 Thinking Highways NA Sep 08

1/68

Volume 3 Issue 3 September/October 2008

THINKING

HIGHWAYSNORTH AMERICAN EDITION

Advanced transportation management

policy strategy technology

finance innovation implementation

integration interoperability

he

INTELLIGENTchoice

IT ALL STARTED HEREPaul Najarian looks back at the roots ofITS: the Electronic Route Guidance System

TEAM SPIRITPhil Tarnoff on why the public,private and academic sectors

should work together

GREAT MINDS...Gethin Perrry, Ian Catling and

Andrew Pickford consulton international consulting

UPWARDLY MOBILEMike McGurrins ITS vision

of the near future


2/68

OSI LASERSCAN.

WE FIT INTO ANY ENVIRONMENT.

A dynamic industry requires dynamic solutionsextremely flexible options that can change when

your needs change, quickly and efficiently. Options that are precise, upgradable, and able to work with legacy

elements and emerging technologies. By deploying theAutoSenseTM or Idris products either individually

or in tandem, youll soon realize lower life cycle costs, increased accuracy and increased reliability.

To see how well we can fit into your environment, contact Eric Carr, [email protected] today.

AutoSenseis a product line of OSI LaserScan focused on the development and deployment

of sensor and system solutions for the toll and traffic management markets worldwide.

Idris is a registered trademark of Diamond Consulting Services Ltd.

www.osi-laserscan.com

Vehicle Separation

Axle Counting

Vehicle Classification

Vehicle EnforcementSecurity Camera Trigger

Data Collection andTransmission


3/68

When we set up H3B Media

two and a bit years ago we

did so with one thing inmind: to give people what

they want, within reason.

What you, the readers

wanted, was something

different from what is already,

probably, on your desks and

shelves. There was absolutely

no point in spending all that

time talking to the industry

about what they would most

like from a new magazine and

then completely ignoring theirwishes and producing a me-

too publication.

Hence, Thinking Highwaysis

split into two regional editions,

North America and Europe/

Rest of the World. You receive

the one that is relevant to your

part of the world and you can

either pay US$60 to have the

other one shipped to you or of

course you can read the

electronic version on our

website, which is soon to be

relaunched with a stunning

new look, I might add.

Editor-in-ChiefKevin Borras ([email protected])

Sales and MarketingLuis Hill ([email protected])Tim Guest ([email protected])

Design and LayoutPhoebe Bentley, Kevin Borras

Associate EditorsRichard Bishop ([email protected])Amy Zuckerman ([email protected])

Contributing EditorsBruce Abernethy, Lee J Nelson, AndrewPickford, Phil Tarnoff, Harold Worrall

Contributors to this issueBruce Abernethy, Donna Blake,Nicki Bradley. Dan Brand, Bob Byerly,Ian Catling, Jodie Graham, AllisonGriffiths,Mark Johnson, Bob Kelly, FrankLong, Mike McGurrin, Paul Najarian,Gethin Perry, Andrew Pickford, StephenSlater, Phil Tarnoff, Amy Zuckerman

Thinking Highways is published by H3B Media Ltd.

ISSN 1753-43Z1

Thinking Highways is published quarterly in two editions North America andEurope/Rest of the World - and is available on subscription at 30/40 (Europe/RoW) andUS$60 (North America). Distributed in the USA by DSW 75 Aberdeen Road, Emigsville,PA 17318-0437 USA. Periodicals postage paid at Emigsville, PA. POSTMASTER: send addresschanges to Thinking Highways, 13705 North Ivy lake Road, Chillicothe, Illinois 61523, USA.

Although due care has been taken to ensure that the content of this publication is accurateand up-to-date, the publisher can accept no liability for errors and omissions. Unless otherwisestated, this publication has not tested products or services that are described herein, andtheir inclusion does not imply any form of endorsement. By accepting advertisements in thispublication, the publisher does not warrant their accuracy, nor accept responsibility for their

contents. The publisher welcomes unsolicited manuscripts and illustrations but can accept noliability for their safe return.

2008 H3B Media Ltd. All rights reserved.

The views and opinions of the authors are not necessarily those of H3B Media Ltd.Reproduction (in whole or in part) of any text, photograph or illustration contained in thispublication without the written permission of the publisher is strictly prohibited.

Printed in the UK by The Manson Group

This is what you

want, this iswhat you getA North American transportation magazine,

published in the UK, with a feature on the Singapore

Formula 1 Grand Prix. Well, you did ask...

1Thinking Highways Vol 3 No 3www.thinkinghighways.com

Foreword Thinking

CEO & Co-FounderLuis Hill

Vice-President, Publishing

& Co-FounderKevin Borras

www.thinkinghighways.com

Kevin Borras is

co-founder and

vice-president,

publishing of H3B

Media and editor-in-chief of Thinking

Highways North

American Edition.

how Singapores traffic

management system is

planning to cope with theforthcoming (at the time of

writing) Formula 1 Grand Prix.

Street circuit motor racing

usually makes for a more

exciting spectacle (anyone

who has seen a race at Long

Beach, Houston or Belle Isle

may well agree), but theres

more to F1 than ridiculously

fast cars as Stephens article is

testimony to.

Our cover feature, PaulNajarians look at what was

essentially the forerunner of

VII, is certainly timely. It may

look like an old, yellow

computer cabinet from the

1960s (well, it is) but this is

where ITS started. However,

shortly after these photos were

taken, the cabinet vanished.

The majority of people who

have driven past it over the last

40 years had no idea of or

interest in its significance... but

clearly someone did. This is

our history, after all.TH

Sub-Editor and ProofreaderMaria Vasconcelos

AdministrationJodie Graham ([email protected])

Subscriptions and CirculationPilarin Harvey-Granell

VisualisationTom Waldschmidt ([email protected])

Conferences and EventsOdile Pignier (odile@h3bmedia.,com)

WebsiteThe Mind Corporation

Financial Director

Martin Brookstein

EDITORIAL AND ADVERTISINGH3B Media Ltd, 15 Onslow Gardens,Wallington, Surrey SM6 9QL, UKTel +44 (0)208 254 9406Fax +44 (0)208 647 0045Email [email protected]

All this is a precursor to

telling you that, due to popular

demand, weve included acouple of the more interesting

articles from the Europe/Rest

of the World edition in this

issue. We listened to what you

wanted from the outset and

have continued to do so.

The articles in question

should provide a fascinating

insight into what is happening

on the other side of the world,

literally in a couple of cases.

Pages 23-29 are taken upwith a fascinating look at how

consultants in Australia,

Europe and South Africa work.

What unique difficulties to do

they face? How much

commonality is there between

consulting for local authorities

in Cape Town and Sydney?

How different are their

experiences from those

working in North America?

Another out-of-bounds

piece that we thought would

make for interesting reading is

Stephen Slaters account of


4/68


5/68


6/68

In the June/July issue of

Thinking Highways, Bruce

Abernethy and Harold

Keeler (A Different Kind of

Car Crash Altogether)posed the question of what

could happen if the

operating systems in a car

hangs up when the car is

moving at 65 mph?

Although likening such a

situation to when a PC or

laptop freezes up, or is

infected by a virus, Abernethy

and Keeler noted that real-

time management and control

of a vehicle is much differentthan executing office software

in a general purpose

computer.

A software error or virus

could have catastrophic results

for a vehicle and its occupants.

The final question the authors

pose is who would be legally

responsible if a software

problem causes a vehicle

accident. This article looks at

the possible liable parties and

the relevant legal theories.

Get on the busA first area of examination is

the relationships among the

vehicle manufacturers and

their suppliers, including

software companies that

design and install vehicle

operating systems.

Vehicle manufacturers have

been reluctant to have

consumer accessible softwaresystems, such as telematics

and the like, connect to the

vehicle bus that supports the

operations of the engine,

Hanging

tough?So just who is responsible if vehicle software causes

an accident?

4 Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways www.thinkinghighways.com

Robert Kelly and Mark Johnsons Legal Brief

A software erroror virus could

have catastrophicresults for a

vehicle and itsoccupants

braking and the transmission.

However, as Abernethy and

Keeler point out, the risk of

software error or the possible

introduction of a virusbecomes greater as these and

other vehicle software systems

connect to the Internet and VII

and vehicle-to-vehicle

communications are deployed.

Such problems may put the

operational safety of the

vehicle at risk.

guesswork involved in

assigning fault if a vehicle

accident occurs rather than try

to resolve this question

through litigation.

Compromising situationThe more interesting

relationship is between the

vehicle manufacturers and the

purchaser and ultimate user of

the vehicle. In the majority of

instances, the purchaser and

user of a vehicle equipped

with telematics or other similar

systems is not going to be

aware of how these systemswork or the risk of a possible

software error or virus that

could compromise their

operation.

In some instances, the

vehicle purchaser will be

buying a service either from

the vehicle manufacturer or a

third-party provider, who may

or may not have a direct

relationship with the vehicle

manufacturer.

It is common for suchcontracts to include provisions

(disclaimers, limitations of

remedies, limited warranties,

and the like) that seek to

minimize the seller/service

providers potential liability if

the purchase claims breach of

contract because the product

or service fails to perform as

expected.

Vehicle manufacturers may

also seek in its own contractwith a software provider, as

well as in any contract with the

vehicle purchaser, to limit its

exposure by trying to assign

Protect and surviveGiven these developments, it

is likely that the vehicle

manufacturers will seek from

their suppliers, both of the

physical components and the

associated software systems,contractual guarantees of

performance and service

levels.

Vehicle manufacturers will

also likely seek specific

contractual protections in the

form of indemnification and

other provisions from their

suppliers for a vehicle

accident that is attributable to

a software failure.

These same contracts mayalso seek to identify specific

types of software failures that

are attributable to the supplier

so as to minimize the

Robert Kelly is a

partner with the

Washington, DCbased law firm

Squire, Sanders,

Dempsey

Mark Johnson is an

attorney at law with

Squire, Sanders,

Dempsey based in

Buenos Aires,

Argentina


7/68

Xxxxx


8/68

Robert Kelly and Mark Johnsons Legal Brief

6 Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways www.thinkinghighways.com

any liability to the service

provider and limit the ability of

the purchaser to seek

compensation from the vehicle

manufacturer.

Devil in the detailAny contractual provisions that

limit and/or assign liability

warrant closer scrutiny. In

many purchase/sale scenarios,

especially between corporate

entities and individuals, there

really is no opportunity for

meaningful negotiation. But it

is not in the interest of both

parties that there be.

These so-called contracts ofadhesion enable the efficient

buying and selling of products

and services: A corporation

selling a popular product to

potentially millions of persons

does not have the resources to

negotiate a separate contract

with each. Shrink-wrap

contracts for the purchase of

software is a common example

in which the purchaser must

accept all the terms of the end-user agreement on their face

in order to access and use the

software.

Courts will not normally

upset the terms of such

contracts unless there is

imbalanced bargaining power

in favor of one party over

another such that the contract

does not appear to have been

freely bargained and the

questionable term shocks the

court to be deemed

unconscionable and, thus,

unenforceable.

The purchase contract for a

vehicle as well as the service

contract for telematics are

contracts of adhesion but, even

so, are not necessarily suspect

on face value. In the case of a

standard software package, oreven where an individual

purchasers a telematics

package for his or her vehicle

that involves only information

services, it is unlikely that a

court would find provisions

limiting potential liability as

shocking and, therefore,

unenforceable.

Where, however, the liability

limitations significantly effect

the ability of an individual to

seek compensation forpersonal and/or property

damages, a court may be more

likely to find the terms suspect

in a contract of adhesion that

involves uneven bargaining

power. In other words, a

vehicle manufacturer and/or

software provider may find it

more difficult to limit and/or

assign liability where a

software error or virus in a

vehicle is found to havecaused an accident, especially

an accident involving bodily

injury or death. The courts will

want to find a way to

compensate the victim.

Separate from a lawsuit

claiming breach of contract, an

injured party may seek

compensation based on tort

theories of negligence and/or

product liability. Under

negligence, a plaintiff would

need to provide that the

vehicle manufacturer and/ or

software provider failed to

take reasonable steps to

prevent a foreseeable software

error or introduction of a virus.

Negligence, however, in the

manufacturing or design

process can be difficult to

prove. Recognizing this

possibility, courts have

developed the theory ofproduct liability, sometimes

called strict liability, wherein

the plaintiff need only show

that the product was defective,

even if there was no

negligence by the

manufacturer, in order to

recover damages.

Detective, defectiveThere is not a uniform opinion

among courts that software is aproduct but rather a service

and, therefore, not necessarily

subject to product liability

claims.

Where, however, software is

integrated into a vehicle and

its failure could have

catastrophic results, a plaintiff

would be in a stronger position

to argue that the software was

defective and, consequently,

created an unreasonably

dangerous situation involvingphysical harm, making the

software error or virus subject

to a product liability claim.

Negligence and product

liability claims can exist

notwithstanding contractual

provisions that attempt to are

not limited or extinguished by

provisions in the contract that

attempt to limit potential

liability of the vehicle

manufacturer or softwareprovider.

ITS systems on vehicles, and

the software that runs them, are

becoming more sophisticated

and prevalent, which brings

with it a greater chance of an

error or virus that could

compromise the operational

safety of the vehicle. If an

accident results, Abernethy

and Keeler may be right that

trial lawyers will be lining up

to seek compensation for their

clients from the vehicle

manufacturer, the software

provider, the ITS service

provider, or others. TH

PhotobyKevinBorras


9/68

Xxxxx

Motorists in the metropolitan Washington D.C.

region experience Americas second longest

delay in traffic congestion.

Thats a ranking the region doesnt want,

so Transurban is working with the Virginia

Department of Transportation to do something

about it.

Were doing this by adding two High Occupancy

Toll (HOT) lanes in each direction to a 14-mile

section of the Capital Beltway.

HOT lanes will provide congestion relief while

minimizing the impact on the local environment,

and will improve public transport opportunities

in the region.

Visit www.virginiahotlanes.com to find out

more about the benefits HOT lanes will bring to

commutersincluding carpoolers, bus riders and

the Northern Virginia community as a whole.

www.transurban.com

TUCM1475


10/68

Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways

Paul NajarianPaul Najarians Connected World

marketplace and innovation?

The case for GSMIn 1984, the European

Commission endorsed the

Groupe Speciale Mobile

(GSM). This project was

formed earlier in 1982 by the

Confederation of European

Posts and Telecommunications

(CEPT), the telecom-

munications regulatory body

of the European Commission.

Clearly, the goal of the

European Commissions GSM

mandate was to ensure

interoperability by developing

and deploying a single,

common standard across

European countries that were

signatory of a GSM

Memorandum of

Understanding (MoU).

In 1988, CEPT created the

European Telecommunications

Standards Institute (ETSI), andtransferred all its telecom-

munication standardization

efforts, including the transfer

of GSM in 1989.

By 1990, the GSM adaptation

work started for the 1800 MHz

band; and commercial service

started in Europe by mid-1991.

In 1993, 32 GSM networks

were available in 18 countries.

By 1996, 200 networks were

deployed in nearly 100countries worldwide,

representing more than 50m

subscribers. By 1998,

worldwide subscribers

program, including the

complex relationship among

its regulatory aspects, the

development of the

technology and the progresson associated standards, the

current lack of a nationwide

and interoperable network,

and the identification of DSRC-

enabled VII applications.

So far, none of the articles

either stated or answered the

question of whether standards,

and more importantly,

mandated standards, ensure

interoperability. Would such a

mandated standard beaccepted by the DSRC

deployers? Would a mandated

standard encourage or thwart

competition in the

This article completes the

theme presented in Autopsy

or resuscitation (Thinking

Highways, Vol. 2, No. 3,

pp. 14-16), regarding the

development and deploy-

ment of Dedicated Short

Range Com-munications

(DSRC) and its linkage to the

Vehicle Infrastructure

Integration (VII) program.

In this third and final

installment, the role of

standards is examined. In

particular, the article focuses

on the role of mandating a

standard in order to ensure

interoperability, deployment

or other requirements.

The second article in this

series (Autopsy or

resuscitation (part 2),

Thinking Highways, Vol. 3,

No. 1, pp.12-15 ) analyzed

potential deployment modelswhile using the much

anticipated Public-Private

partnership of the Federal

Communications Com-

missions (FCC) D-block

auction in the 700 MHz band as

an analogy. As was discussed,

that segment of the auction

failed to attract any bidders.

Very interesting idea

That article also coined a newterm for the VII program as the

Vehicle Information

Interstate, and suggested that

any possibility for the

deployment of this new

interstate is through a strong

Federal commitment, similar to

the buildout of the Interstate

Highway System.

The kick-off article in this

series provided a historical

overview of the DSRC

The goal of theGSM mandatewas to ensure

interoperabilityby developing asingle common

standard

Autopsy or

resuscitation:part threePAUL NAJARIAN completes his DSRC trilogy by

assessing the merits of the ASTM standard

Paul Najarian was

director of telecoms

at ITS America from1996-2006. He can be

contacted via email:

[email protected]

8 www.thinkinghighways.com


11/68

surpassed the 100m mark.

In 1997, GSM finally made its

entry into the US, with 15

networks operating in 1900

MHz band. This introduction

into the US was mainly due to

the relaxation of certain

regulatory rules by the 1996Telecommunications Act.

Contrast and compareNow, lets compare the

European approach for the

delivery cellular services in

the 900 MHz and 1800 MHz

bands using the GSM standard

as a mandate, with the US

market-oriented approach.

In contrast to the European

approach, the US had at leasttwo or three carriers per

market area using a variety of

wireless standards in the 850

to 890 MHz band. These

standards included Advanced

Mobile Phone System (AMPS),

Time Division Multiple Access

(TDMA), Code Division

Multiple Access (CDMA), and

Motorolas integrated Digital

Enhanced Network (iDEN)

standard used by Nextel.

In the late 1980s, the FCC

had required that carriers use

the analog AMPS standard in

addition to the normal

transmission mode (TDMA or

CDMA). The purpose of this

requirement was to ensure

interoperability among the

carriers, and to allow for

roaming across networks. The

requirement for carriers to

provide analog AMPS

networks was sunsetted by theFCC on 18 February 2008.As

mentioned earlier, GSM was

introduced in the US through

the PCS auctions in 1997.

So, the period 1991-1997 can

be summarized as follows:

Europe with a mandated

approach for GSM in the 900

and 1800 MHz bands, while the

US stays true to its technology

neutral policy with at least four

standards operating in the 850and 1900 MHz bands.

One could also argue that

the implementation of AMPS in

the US for interoperability

purposes constituted a

standards mandate; however, it

was not limited to a single

standard and technology (as in

Europe), as three other

standards and associated

technologies were also

available. During this period,travelers across the trans-

Atlantic were clearly

inconvenienced. US travelers

to Europe lacked any

connectivity, unless they had

purchased or rented bulky

World Phones.

These travelers were also

amazed at their European

counterparts, who could hop

from one country to another

within Europe and many partsof the world while still

maintaining connectivity. Even

travelers from developing

countries in Africa, the Middle

East and Asia often appeared

to be more advanced than

those from the US.

To date, all of these

standards (in Europe and the

US) have not only survived, but

have also contributed to a

variety of convergence efforts

in the deployment of 3rd

Generation wireless networks,

and future Advance WirelessServices (AWS).

The case for DVB-HRecently, in March 2008, the

European Commission used a

similar approach as GSM

regarding the deployment of

Digital Video Broadcast

Handheld (DVB-H) standard

and associated technologies.

The European Commission

adopted ETSIs DVB-Hspecification, EN 302 304, as

the preferred technology for

terrestrial mobile

broadcasting across the

European Union, and required

member countries to

encourage the use of this

technology.

Essentially, the European

Commission backed Nokias

DVB-H as Europes technology

for mobile TV broadcasting,

while declining other

technologies such as

Qualcomms MediaFLO, and

Digital Multimedia

Broadcasting (DMB), which

was favored by China and

South Korea.

Despite objections by

certain countries (such as

Germany, the Netherlands and

the United Kingdom) to setting

a single standard, the

European Commissionsdecision is tantamount to an

implicit mandate.

Not here or nowWhile some may question the

ramifications of the European

Commissions decision,

including its impact on

international trade and legal

concerns, it is not the intent of

this article to address such

issues.These issues are not only

beyond its scope, they should

also be addressed by legal

experts.

Tri, tri and tri againThis inconvenience lasted

about six to seven years until

tri-band phones (900,

1800/1900 MHz) initially

became available in Europe.

This allowed Europeantravelers to have connectivity

in the US. This was shortly

followed by a wide-array of

quad-band phones. Despite

this temporary inconvenience,

the European mandated

approach or the US market

oriented approach had no

impact on the deployment of

different wireless networks,

primarily because the

competition was (and still is) atthe application and quality of

services level, and the

ubiquitous delivery of such

services.

The EC backedNokias DVB-H as

Europestechnology formobile TV

broadcasting



12/68


The Commission, however,

justified its decision citing the

need to establish regional

interoperability. But more

importantly, the Commission

firmly believed that such a

decision is absolutely

necessary to launch the digitalvideo broadcasting

marketplace.

The end is not nightDoes the European

Commissions decision sound

the death knell for MediaFLO

and DMB? Absolutely not. To

date, MediaFLO already has an

estimated subscriber base of

more than 100,000. All of these

technologies can havesuccessful implementations

pending the availability and

competitiveness of the

applications and associated

quality of services.

As in the case of GSM, these

technologies will not remain

static through their life-cycle.

They will evolve into next

generations. The marketplace

will also dictate whether these

technologies need to

converge.

The European

Commissions decision is

clearly wise in terms of

launching the market place.

However, it is also a time-

limited decision. After the

initial stages of the market, the

impact of the Commissions

implicit mandate will be

minimal at best.

The case for DSRCOn 3 August 2004, at the

request of US Department of

Transportation, the FCC

mandated the American

Society for Testing and

Materials (ASTM) E2213-03,

Standard Specification for

Telecommunications and

Information Exchange

Between Roadside and Vehicle

Systems 5 GHz BandDedicated Short Range

Communications (DSRC)

Medium Access Control

(MAC) and Physical Layer

(PHY) Specifications.

According to this mandate,

described in Section 379 of

Part 90 of the FCC Rules (Title

47 of the Code of Federal

Regulations), roadside units

operating in the 5850 to 5925

MHz band shall comply with

the technical specifications

described in ASTMs DSRCstandard.

From a regulatory context,

the use of the term shall

implies a mandatory in-

corporation by reference.

The lack of interoperability

among toll operators in the

902-928 MHz band, especially

during the early years of the

tolling industry, was the

primary catalyst for US DOTs

insistence on a standardsmandate that would ensure

nationwide interoperability

consistent with the US National

Architecture.

Paul Najarians Connected World

One voice, one standardIn addition to interoperability,

public safety concerns were

also main drivers. The critical

need for a single, national

standard for VIIs Public Safety-

related applications further

justified US DOTs requirementfor a mandated standard.

Unfortunately, the ASTM

standard never came to a

complete fruition in terms of

products or deployments.

Instead, this activity has been

transferred to the Institute of

Electrical and Electronics

Engineers (IEEE) for the

eventual completion of the

IEEE 802.11p air interface

standard.Some engineers may argue

that the IEEE 802.11p standard

would be backward

compatible with ASTM, since

the ASTM standard was used

as the baseline. In such cases,

others may extend this

argument by stating that

compliance with the IEEE

standard would also ensure

compliance with the ASTM

standard.

More than five years have

passed since the publication of

the ASTM standard, and yet not

a single full-scale deployment

could point to the use or

usefulness of this mandated

standard. Since the ASTM

standard is also mandated in

the 5.9 GHz band, no other

technologies were or could be

considered, encouraged,

developed or contemplated in

this band.In the case of DSRC, as the

window of opportunity for an

initial commercial launch has

long disappeared, the

standards mandate has

thwarted innovation, and

stifled consideration for

competing standards and

technologies that are readily

available in the commercial

world.

In other words, the standardsmandate evolved into a

deployment barrier with

limited hope of providing a

platform ensuring nationwide

As in the case ofGSM, these

technologies willnot remain static

through theirlife-cycle

Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways10


13/68

Paul Najarians Connected World

interoperability, especially for

public safety-related VII

applications. Also, since

interoperability is a multi-

dimensional problem, a

standards mandate does not

necessarily resolve

interoperability issues.

The end is nighAs the IEEE 802.11p standard

nears completion, the ITS

community is at a crossroads.

Will it accept that the

commercial viability of DSRC

requires no mandated

standard, or will it ask the

FCC to substitute in Section

379 of Part 90 of the FCC rules

for the moribund mandate ofits ASTM standard an IEEE

standard that would raise

similar variables to

deployment.

The ITS community would be

best served by removing an

artificial standards mandate to

allow for the competitive

marketplace to achieve

commercially viable solutions.

As DSRC deployments have

been extensively delayed

since the publication of the

ASTM standard, the ITS

community will also have an

The ITScommunity will

also have anextremely

difficult timeconvincing theFCC that suchmandates are

necessaryextremely difficult time in

convincing the FCC that such

mandates are still necessary

today.

As evident by the European

model for GSM and DVB-H,

standards mandate can be

effective at the initial launch of

a market, though that

usefulness lasts only a short

time. Yet, the ASTM standard

was not successful even for an

initial launch. It is now more

than five years old, and the

market should have been

launched immediately afterthe publication of the standard

for the mandate to be effective,

even if such effectiveness were

only temporary.

Spot the differenceOver the last five years, the

standards mandate blocked

the introduction of other

emerging technologies, and

no deployment alternatives

were permitted. With thefailure to protect the launch of

a market, the ASTM standard

has shown it should be taken

off the road.

There is no reason to believe

that the IEEE standard as a

mandated replacement to the

ASTM standard would achieve

different results.TH


14/68

Thinking Highways financial analyst MARGARET

PETTIT looks at the European Territorial

Cooperation Programme and finds that like with

any other major programme, its a matter ofpriorities

Stunted

growth

ITS

Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways12 www.thinkinghighways.com

2020vision

MIKE McGURRIN presents Mobility 2020: Towards a

New Vision for Intelligent Transportation Systems


15/68

Climate Change


ITS

The roots of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)

go back for several decades prior to the Intelligent

Vehicle Highway Systems Act of 19911.

The 1960s brought an increased interest in the use of

electronics to aid highway transportation and the U.S.

Bureau of Public Roads prototyped many concepts,including the Electronic Route Guidance System (see

pages 12-15) and the Urban Traffic Con-

trol System.

However, funding and interest faded,

and the current program owes its roots

to a resurgence of interest in the 1980s

and an ad hoc group of individuals from

the private sector, public sector and

academia who called themselves

Mobility 2000.2

Mobility 2000s members developed the original stra-

tegic vision for ITS and then turned that vision into astrategic plan. As the name of the group implies, the

primary focus was on mobility, with a high level of

importance also placed on safety. Productivity, energy

and the environment were included as secondary goals.

Mobility 2000 defined the ITS program in terms of four

broad, interrelated areas: advanced traffic management

systems, advanced driver information systems, com-

mercial vehicle operations, and advanced vehicle con-

trol systems.3 These four areas, with some modification,

have continued to provide the structure of the ITS pro-gram ever since4.

The importance of integrating across

these areas was recognized from the

start and the Mobility 2000 report stated

that A systems engineering prospec-

tive is key to the successful evolution of

IVHS.

New light through old windowsThe Mobility 2000 vision has served the nation well for

over 20 years. However, while many of the same prob-

lems of highway safety and congestion remain, newproblems have emerged, including global warming, the

need to find new transportation funding mechanisms,

and an aging driver population. At the same time, new

technologies hardly envisioned in 1990 have now come

Productivity,energy and the

environment wereincluded as

secondary goals


16/68

into widespread use. It is time for a new round of strate-

gic thinking, building upon whats been learned, to

develop a new vision for ITS, and a new plan to carry the

program forward.

Scenario planning approach

In moving forward with a new vision for ITS, it is impor-tant to take a fresh look, rather than simply extrapolating

from the framework laid out over 20 years ago. Specifi-

cally, we recommend starting with strategic thinking

utilizing a scenarioplanningapproach5, prior to jump-

ing into strategic planning. This approach starts with an

external focus, looking at the major issues affecting and

affected by transportation.

The urgent tasks of the day often preclude spending

the time to think strategically. Strategic thinking requires

not just a dedicated block of time, but the ability to step

back from the immediate concerns and address high

level issues and ask questions that challenge fundamen-

tal assumptions. However, without this step, strategic

plans are often developed with blinders, either simply

examining possible next steps for existing programs, or

assuming a linear extrapolation of the current environ-

ment - ie, the if this goes on approach. An example

from the past would be a 1907 urban plan focusing on

improved equine waste management, totally missing

next years introduction of the Model T Ford.

FutureproofAnother approach does recognize that the future will be

different, and spends time thinking about it. However,

considerable time and energy are spent determiningthe single most likely future environment, and then

developing plans that are optimized to that future. The

problem is that such plans, developed at considerable

expense, lack resiliency and are useless when the future

inevitably turns out to be different than the one pre-

dicted.

A solution is scenario planning. Rather than trying to

predict the future, one determines the key driving forces

or events that are likely, and then develops divergent

scenarios based on the directions those forces might

take. When possible, one then develops plans that are

resilient across the uncertain future landscape.Of course, sometimes the appropriate actions cannot

be independent of a particular scenario. In these cases,

one must begin taking action along the most expected

future path, but consider contingencies and identify the

leading indicators might be to indicate that the future

environment is deviating from that path, and that it is

time to consider the contingencies. The result is that

even a scenario-specific strategy is implemented in a

way that makes it more resilient in the face of uncertainty

and change.

For ITS, a small number (say, two to four) of alternate

scenarios would be developed, based on key exter-

nal trends or events that may shape both the require-ments and the opportunities for transportation. These

scenarios are described in the form of stories, similar to

the way a Concept of Operations provides an easy to

read, non-technical description of a system.

ITS


This approach makes the initial focus the external

transportation environment, rather than simply project-

ing forward from the current program and near-term

trends. Strategic forces that might be considered for

inclusion in the scenarios include a strong push for a gas

tax replacement within the next eight years, the aging

driver population, gas prices going to and remaining

above US$6 per gallon and climate change.One might examine climate change and ask how

would the requirements for transportation systems

change if severe weather events and natural disasters

become much more frequent over the next several dec-

ades. From the many possible combinations of forces

and events, two to four feasible combinations would be

selected, and developed into scenarios. These scenar-

ios will cover a broad range of likely futures, and pro-

mote a more flexible and resilient approach to planning.

From these scenarios, one next looks at how ITS would

be impacted by, and how ITS can contribute to, resolving

the issues identified.

Program scopeITS is often been defined as the application of sensing,

communications, and information processing technolo-

gies to improve surface transportation. This continues


How would therequirements for

ITS change if severeweather events

become much morefrequent over the

next few decades?


17/6815Thinking Highways Vol 3 No 3www.thinkinghighways.com

ITS

Internally focused

extrapolation (Blinders)

Single future

forecast

Craft diverging scenarios based on key but uncertain

driving forces and events (Scenario planning)

Extrapolation from current

situation (if this goes on)

I

T

SGlobal

Environment

Approaches to Long-Range Planning

to provide a good starting point. However, while com-

munications and information technology can improve

the movement of people or goods, the movement of

information can sometimes serve as a substitute to the

movement of people or goods.

As we consider problems such as congestion, high-

way-related injuries, and carbon emissions, we can lookat many ways of improving transportation systems, such

as adding capacity, making travel safer, or improving

the availability of information on alternative modes.

However, we can also consider solutions that provide an

alternative to transportation that still satisfy the original

need. As the program moves forward, it is appropriate

to consider this latter role within the scope of ITS.

Thus, ITS in the 21st century is the application of sens-

ing, communications, and information processing tech-

nologies to either improve or substitute for surface

transportation.

Goal areasOnce the program vision has been defined, it is impor-

tant to set realistic, quantifiable goals for the programs,

and to identify what will be required to meet these goals.

These should be determined once the overall vision is

defined, but one can offer initial thoughts on areas to

consider.

In developing the goal areas, it is useful to look at the

current program as a starting point, but it is also useful to

take a broader view, and consider what might be miss-

ing, or what hidden assumptions should actually be

open to question. For example, is it time to consider


18/68


more aggressive use of ITS technologies for enforce-

ment? Should the ITS program address how technology

can improve driver training, for both new and aging

drivers? How will global warming affect transportation

systems, and how can ITS technologies help mitigate the

effects?The future goals for ITS can be categorized into eight

areas:

Primary Goal Areas

1 Safety

2 Mobility and System Efficiency

3 Productivity

4 Efficiency

5 Energy and environment

6 Customer and societal satisfaction

Supporting Goal Areas

7 Systems engineering and integration

8 Institutional issues, innovations and

partnershipsThe primary goal areas are those where ITS can pro-

vide benefits, whether to individual users, to transporta-

tion operators, and to society as a whole. The systems

engineering and integration area is included because,

as was pointed out by the Mobility 2000 group, it is

important to integrate across the areas that comprise

ITS, and without specific goals and metrics, it is too easy

to develop stovepipe approaches.

RolesSaxtons paper on the roots of IVHS3 cites a number of

reasons why the ITS program took root from Mobility2000, and why it did not take off immediately from the

research done in the 60s. One of the reasons cited for

Mobility 2000s success is the true partnership that was

formed between the public sector, the private sector,

and the academic community. Saxton writes, todays

[ITS] program evolved from a newly found partnership

between industry, universities, and state, local and fed-

eral governments In contrast, the earlier [1960s] pro-

gram in BPR was a standard federally run research

program A lack of true partnership with industry andother government almost guaranteed no buy-in or com-

mitment to take these systems to production and

operation.

This coming together into a true consensus-based

partnership is as important to the ITS program in the

21st century as it was when the IVHS act was signed in

1991. ..TH

[email protected]

References1 H.R. 2950, Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

1991, Title 1, Part C - Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems

Act.2 Lyle Saxton, Mobility 2000 and the Roots of IVHS,

www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/JPODOCS/BRIEFING/9003.

pdf.

3 Mobility 2000 Presents Intelligent Vehicles and High-

way Systems: 1990 Summary, ntl.bts.gov/lib/16000/

16400/16494/PB2000104082.pdf, page 1.

4 Advanced Driver Information Systems was soon broad-

ened to Advanced Traveler Information Systems, in order

to include transit users, and Advanced Public Transit

Applications and Emergency Transportation Operations

were later added as additional categories, as the scope of

the program broadened from the original private vehicleperspective.

5 Jay Ogilvy and Peter Schwartz, Plotting Your Scenarios,

Global Business Network, www.gbn.com/ArticleDisplay-

Servlet.srv?aid=34550.

Movement of People

and GoodsMovement of

InformationITSITS Today:

Movement of Information

to improve transportation

Mobility 2020:

Movement of People

and GoodsMovement of

InformationITS

Movement of Information to

improve transportation or as asubstitute for the movement of

people or goods

ITS

Program scope


19/68

Roads Scholar

Highways are getting smarter. They look the same,

black asphalt and white lines but look a little closer.

Small weigh and speed detectors right in the asphalt,

overhead cameras and sensors to

record every move. Other more obvious

additions are there too, like message

signs that change for every vehicle!

With IRD technology, our roads can monitor, record and

communicate thousands of pieces of data every second

over wired and wireless networks. Data that you can use

to make roads stronger, faster, and safer.

Talk to the smart people at IRD,

theyve been leading the way in ITS

for over 25 years.

i rd inc.com

INTERNATIONAL

ROAD DYNAMICS INC.


20/68




any other major programme, its a matter of

priorities

Stunted

growth

The Thinker


The strangecase of the

three-leggedstool

The public sector, the private sector and the

universities are the triumverate of essential but

often disparate ingredients in the transport

community mix - but isnt it time that we all just

got along? PHIL TARNOFF thinks it is


21/68

Climate Change

When DAVID SCHONBRUNN

read the April/May issue of

Thinking Highways he felt

compelled to write an article

offering his own views on

transportations impacts

onm and solutions for,

climate change


The Thinker

Public employees are lazy and unimaginative. Pri-

vate sector employees actions are based exclusively

on the almighty dollar and university faculties

ignore project objectives and schedules when con-

ducting research.

These insulting perceptions are neither accurate nor

fair. But they are repeated here as an indication of thedegree of misunderstanding that exists among the three

major sectors of the transportation community; public,

private and university.

These statements ignore the fact that the great major-

ity of employees within all sectors of the transportation

industry work hard to achieve their common goal of

improving the system within the constraints of their cho-

sen area of employment. It is unfortunate that these

opinions exist when there has never been a greater

need for cooperation and collaboration within an indus-

try that is undergoing major changes that include:

Privatization: The public sector is relying on the

private sector to an increasing extent for provision of

services including design, construction, operations and

management. Without an appreciation of both the capa-

bilities and limitations of the private sector, the move

toward privatization will not succeed. In addition, the

public sector must also develop an

appreciation of the ways in which its pro-

curement practices influence private

sector performance.

Workforce development: There

is a shortage of professionals trained to

meet the needs of the public and private

sectors. The university community whichis the obvious source of supply falls short

of providing both the quantity and qual-

ity of needed graduates. An understanding of the moti-

vations and priorities of this sector of the transportation

industry is important if the shortage is to be corrected.

Technology: Technology is rapidly advancing,

which creates challenges for all sectors of the transpor-

tation community, all of whom would benefit from its

application. An understanding of their mutual capabili-

ties and motivations is needed to ensure that the indus-

try takes advantage of new technologies as they become

available.

A little bit of backstoryFor these reasons, it is important to improve the relation-

ships among the various sectors of the transportation

community. The manner in which this might be accom-

plished requires an intimate knowledge of their charac-

teristics and capabilities.

Viewing my transportation career of nearly 40 years,

one would conclude that I have been unable to hold a

job; having been a public sector employee while work-

ing for the Federal Highway Administration, a private

sector employee while working for Alan M. Voorhees

and Associates as well as PB Farradyne, and mostrecently a university employee while working for the

University of Maryland.

While at the University of Maryland, I have also enjoyed

a close working relationship with the Maryland Depart-

ment of Transportation. This breadth of experience

qualifies me (or at least I think it does) to reflect on the

relative strengths and weaknesses of each of the three

sectors of the transportation community, including their

cultures and their assets and to suggest ways in which

these characteristics can be leveraged in a way that

strengthens the overall industry.

Sector characteristicsFew, if any, individuals enter the transportation engi-

neering field with the objective of becoming multi-

millionaires. Instead, like most technical professions,

newcomers enter the field with the vague notion of a

career that offers a reliable (comfortable) income, work-

ing on interesting projects that might produce societal

benefits. Although the balance of monetary rewards,

interesting work and societal benefits shifts somewhat

among possible transportation career paths, most of its

participants are motivated by some combination of the

three.

It should be noted that the following discussion of

industry sectors emphasizes organizations responsible

for infrastructure development and operation. Many

major sectors such as vehicle manufacturers, transit

operators and commercial vehicle

operators have been excluded to pro-

vide focus for the following discussion.

Public sectorThe public sector includes many types

of organizations; the Federal Govern-

ment, state and local agencies, metro-politan planning organizations, etc. In

spite of their differences, they share a

number of attributes, including job security, good fringe

benefits and reasonable (although deteriorating) retire-

ment benefits.

Public sector salaries are generally lower than those

of either the private or university sectors. With some

notable exceptions, the pressures of public sector

employment are relatively modest, due at least in part to

the job security it offers. Public sector employment fos-

ters an environment in which the penalties for failure

exceed the rewards for success, with the result thatmany, (certainly not all) public sector employees have a

low tolerance for the risks associated with creativity.

The common denominator among the majority of

public sector employees is the feeling that they are the

keepers of the public good. In other words, since they

are not influenced by the profit motive, their actions are

oriented toward public service rather than avarice or

personal advancement. Many have indicated that they

selected the public sector career path out of a desire to

contribute to the publics welfare, and because of the

ability to establish public policy an opportunity that is

not available to those in other sectors.

Advancement in the public sector is based on keep-ing the ship of state sailing in untroubled waters.

Rewards accrue to those who effectively perform the

duties they are assigned without creating problems for

their superiors.

Few entertransportation

engineering withthe objective of

becoming multi-millionaires


22/68www.thinkinghighways.com

Private sectorPrivate sector employment can be characterized by

relatively low job security, modest fringe benefits, and

long working hours. Offsetting benefits include higher

salaries, and perhaps most important, the ability to cre-

ate (software, reports, ideas, products, infrastructure)

rather than to oversee its creation. Thus the greatest dif-ference between public and private sectors is the pub-

lic sectors responsibility for establishing policies and

programs versus the private sectors responsibility for

implementing programs and systems.

The private sector is far from homogenous. The pri-

vate sector includes consultants, manufacturers, and

contractors, each of which offers a unique set of charac-

teristics. To a certain degree, the cultures of these three

constituents have been influenced by public sector pol-

icies. One of the most obvious areas in which this has

occurred is the bid and proposal process by which firms

are selected to perform work.

Consultants are typically chosen using a best valueprocess in which their selection is based on the quality

of their proposals and the experience of their staff with-

out evaluation of price. Contractors and

suppliers are selected purely on a low-

bid basis, in which a bid price is offered

based on a set of technical specifica-

tions developed by the public agency.

Thus, consultants tend to emphasize

project delivery in a manner that meets

or exceeds clients requirements, while

contractors and suppliers tend to

emphasize economic delivery ofprojects that meet but do not exceed the

specifications.

A common trait of the private sector

contractors and consultants is their total

reliance on their project managers. Within these organ-

izations, the project manager is king, having been

assigned responsibility for managing all aspects of a

project including technical quality, client satisfaction,

budget and schedule.

The health of the parent organization depends com-

pletely upon the effectiveness of its project managers.

Unfortunately, most project management experience is

derived from on-the-job-training as opposed to formal

education (although this is changing). Advancement in

the private sector depends on successful project or

product delivery. It is readily evaluated using financial

measures profit, growth, sales, etc.

University communityThe transportation community requires a steady infu-

sion of educated and trained (the two are different) per-

sonnel. Education is generally considered a formal

long-term instruction related to the fundamentals of a

technology. Education is provided by vocational schools

and universities. Training is considered the delivery ofshort-term instruction related to a specific job require-

ment. Training may be provided by vocational schools,

but is also available from sources such as the Federal

Highway Administrations National Highway Institute,

The Thinker


the on-line courses from the Consortium for ITS Training

and Education (CITE), and the University of Marylands

Operations Academy.

The university system is the primary source of the

needed education, and in turn a major supplier of entry

level employees for the transportation industry. In this

role, the educational system should, ideally be one thatis agile (instruction is adjusted to changing environ-

ment, technologies and priorities) and responsive (rec-

ognizing the needs of the customer). The system should

also be one in which education is given a higher priority

than research. Unfortunately few, if any, US universities

exhibit these characteristics.

Organizationally, the university management struc-

ture is the flattest of the three sectors being discussed.

The system provides tenured faculty with a high degree

of independence to pursue the research and interact

with students in the manner of their choosing. Faculty

evaluations assign priority to the number of refereed

research papers that have been published rather thantheir success at educating students.

To a significant degree, departmental performance is

evaluated based on the number of doc-

toral graduates that have received

teaching positions at other prestigious

universities. As a result, tenured mem-

bers of the faculty tend to prioritize

research over education and produc-

tion of PhD candidates over those with

undergraduate or masters degrees.

The ability of the university system to

respond to the needs of the transporta-tion profession is further hampered by

cumbersome requirements for curric-

ulum changes.

The introduction of new courses is

typically a time-consuming process requiring review

and approval by multiple levels of university adminis-

tration. Faculty members who might already be reluc-

tant to propose the addition of new courses to a

curriculum due to the effort associated with their devel-

opment, are further discouraged by these bureaucratic

processes. However, this does not preclude the inclu-

sion of new or updated subject matter in existing

courses, which is a decision that can be made by indi-

vidual faculty members.

As a result, the educational process has become one

in which the universities teach the unchanging underly-

ing fundamentals of the profession. In the case of trans-

portation, these might include courses such as traffic

flow theory, governmental structure, operations

research, simulation techniques etc. Providing more

specialized aspects of the education is a responsibility

that has been assumed by organizations involved in

training.

Inter-sector perceptionsSo how can the transportation field be improved by

developing constructive relationships that will leverage

the capabilities of its participants? The following five

point program is suggested:

The educationalprocess has become

one in which theuniversities teachthe unchanging

underlyingfundamentals ofthe profession


23/68

1) Develop the equivalent of a one year sabbatical

program in which employees from one sector work as

employees of another sector. Think of the benefits to the

university system from the participation of individuals

from either the public or private sectors who, as adjunct

professors, student advisors and researchers, work on

material that is relevant to the needs of their respectivesectors. Think of the benefits to the public sector from

the participation of private sector individuals who can

provide useful financial and technical insights into the

project planning process.

2) With the assistance of trade associations such as

AASHTO and ITE, define workforce skills needed by the

public and private sectors. Work with academia to adopt

their education toward the needs that have been identi-

fied. Support the development of transition training

that builds on the basics offered in the current

curricula.

3) Address the current misunderstanding of private

and public sector finances by offering shortcourses topublic sector employees. The need for such training

was highlighted in a recent exchange with a public sec-

tor manager who was planning a public-private part-

nership. The manager indicated that he did not

understand or care about how the private sector made

money, but was defining the project requirements in a

manner that met the needs of his agency. The result of

this activity was a multi-million dollar project that failed

financially in less than five years.

4) Include private sector and university personnel in

The Thinker

public sector planning initiatives. Planning at all levels

(strategic, operational, project, etc.) is currently a

responsibility of the public sector. The planning proc-

ess would benefit from the insights of the private and

university sectors, which may include a broader knowl-

edge of similar developments throughout the US (or the

world), as well as their ability to provide more accuratecost and schedule estimates of the activities being

planned. Broader representation in the planning proc-

ess might also increase the success rate of public-

private partnerships.

5) Critically review the procurement process as it is

applied to projects and programs. There is a tendency

within public agencies to take the path of least resist-

ance i.e. do things the way in which theyve been done

in the past. Examination of procurement alternatives

from the perspective of ensuring desirable perform-

ance on the part of the proposers (or bidders) can often

produce beneficial results. Procurement alternatives

exist in most agencies. For example; design-build versus low bid, systems manager versus consultant,

public-private partnership versus contractor, etc.

Summing up succinctlyThese five points offer the potential to minimize friction

among the various sectors of the transportation

industry, leading to a healthy and efficient industry

capable of responding effectively to future demands for

service. TH

[email protected]

www.tamron-europe.com [email protected]


24/68

XxxxxXxxxx

I T S C O N N E C T I O N S : SAV ING T IME . SAV ING L I VES .

United States, Canada, South America and Latin America

Tel: +1.202.721.4223Fax: +1.202.484.3483

E-mail: [email protected]

Europe

Tel: +32.2.626.11.32Fax: +32.2.626.11.31


Asia-Pacific

Tel: +81.3.5777.1013Fax: +81.3.3434.1755


E X P E R I E N C E T H E U LT I M AT E I T S E V E N T

WWW.ITSWORLDCONGRESS.ORG

MAKE PLANS TO ATTEND THE

15TH WORLD CONGRESS ON ITS!

transportation management system


25/68

Climate Change

When DAVID SCHONBRUNN

read the April/May issue of

Thinking Highways he felt

compelled to write an article

offering his own views on

transportations impacts

onm and solutions for,

climate change

Consultants


Greatminds...THINKING HIGHWAYS presents a comprehensive guide tointernational transport consulting. Over the next seven pages

three consultants discuss how to deal with authorities on

local, national and international levels in Asia-Pacific,

South Africa and Europe

First, GETHIN PERRY,

Principal ITS Consultant at

Maunsell AECOM in Sydney,

Australia looks at consulting

in the Asia-Pacific region

Being part of a global organisation of over 40,000

professionals and growing provides us at AECOM

with an interesting insight in to the maturity of the

advanced transportation management and ITS

sector around the world.

Our regular global co-ordination sessions help us to

understand the different position, needs of each market

and to develop strategies that support the varying needs

of our clients. A recent discussion on moving away from

the term ITS to emphasising the goals and objectives ofadvanced transportation and network operations man-

agement was supported by Europe and Australia but

was judged inappropriate for North America.

For us this reflects the relative maturity of the industry


26/68


Consultants


in each market, and the position of each in the policy-

strategy-research-deploy-operate life cycle.

Across AECOM we share a common vision of improv-

ing the operation and management of our transport

networks through the application of advanced transpor-

tation management techniques, but our approach and

skills offered in each market responds to the demands

and maturity of that market.

In the mature North America our focus is on the deploy-

ment and implementation of systems; in an arguably

less mature European market our focus is on develop-

ing operational and business solutions; whilst in the

immature Australian market we are providing thought

leadership and long-term vision whilst moving towards

developing operational and business solutions.

Far and wideThis is not to suggest that each market operates solely in

one area, North America is investing huge sums in

research and Europe has a large base of installed sys-tems and comprehensive deployment programme with

advances of global significance. Whilst in Australia there

is a gap between legacy investments in urban traffic

control systems (SCATS, etc) and traffic management

centres in the capital cities and an immature policy envi-

ronment that is not setting the agenda for the applica-

tion and exploitation of advanced transportation

management techniques.

The personal and organisation knowledge that exists

within the Australian states roads authorities is exten-

sive. Consequently they have the skills required to

deploy traffic management systems, even to the extentthat they have the resources to design, develop, manu-

facture and install their own hardware.

This can often put them in the interesting position of

competing against the private sector for their own con-

tracts. However, what the authorities themselves and the

transport ministries to which they report are telling us is

that they lack a comprehensive understanding of the

advanced transportation management options availa-

ble to them, the benefits that they could realise, and the

strategy to bring them forward.

Consequently, the approach that we are adopting in

Australia is two fold and focuses on providing thought

leadership derived from the international experienceof our local team and international colleagues: top down

promotion and agenda setting with transport ministers;

and bottom up development of strategies and visions

with the leaders of the transport authorities.

The first challenge is to get advanced transportation

management techniques on to the agenda of govern-

ment and decision makers. In recent years Australia has

been in period of infrastructure expansion, building the

motorways (usually tolled PPP) and expressways

needed to support a sustained economic expansion.

However, there is a growing realisation that physical

infrastructure is not the only solution and may not be theoptimal solution.

Continued congestion, particularly in CBDs, increas-

ing fuel prices and a growing concern about the envi-

ronment are changing the political landscape.

MultilinguisticsThrough an ability to speak the same language as the

decision makers we have begun to set the scene for the

development of the policies and strategies that can

be delivered through advanced transportation

management.

In particular Philip Davies, our Director of Transport

Planning and Advisory (Australia, New Zealand, and

Asia) and formerly Director of Traffic Operations at

Transport for London, has the crucial background of

developing and implementing similar strategies in one

of the most challenging political and urban environ-

ments in the world.

The position of our clients and markets presents inter-

esting challenges and frequently requires us to work

across borders to; identify best practice; learn lessons;

outline benefits; and adapt ideas to local requirements

rather than simply transplant them.

Some examples of where we have done this include:

Council of Australian Governments, StandingCommittee of Transport, Urban Congestion Manage-

ment Working Group developed an evaluation frame-

work in order to identify successful, applicable and

cost-effective new technologies and road management

practices that address congestion on urban arterials;

Victorian Department of Infrastructure identi-

fied and investigated policy options to change transport

usage and behaviour and reduce transport energy use;

VicRoads identifying how existing operational

initiatives contribute to high level government conges-

tion and traffic management strategies and develop a

vision and framework for aligning traffic operations withthe strategies.

Mix and matchOn these and other projects where we are working at a

more operational level to plan, procure and implement

systems we seamlessly blend the right mix of skills and

experience from: local professionals with an in-depth

appreciation of our clients business; locally based pro-

fessionals with international experience of planning

and implementing advanced transportation manage-

ment; and the international pool of experts from our

European and American businesses. In developing our

approach to the challenges we aim to do the following: Demonstrate a detailed understanding of our

clients business;

Clearly and accurately define the issues that

our client faces;

Identify solutions to those issues;

Adapt international experience to the local

environment; and

Develop an implementation framework.

We perceive that the field of advanced transportation

management is at the threshold of significant expansion

in Australia and New Zealand. The work that we are

doing now is assisting our clients to set the scene for thatexpansion, and positioning them to make the most

appropriate and efficient investments to intelligently

deliver the improvements to transport that support pub-

lic mobility and the economy.TH


27/68

25www.thinkinghighways.com

Consultants

Thinking Highways Vol 3 No 3


28/68www.thinkinghighways.com

Consultants



29/6827Thinking Highways Vol 3 No 3www.thinkinghighways.com

Consultants

ANDREW PICKFORD works all over the world and

has consulted for multinational organisations.

Here though, he focuses on his work in South Africa

In the run-up to the FIFA World Cup 2010, South

Africa is now in the transport limelight.

It has the challenge of developing its attractiveness as

a safe haven for foreign direct investment whilst devel-

oping its own regionally and internationally competi-

tive industries and empowering home grown engineers

and managers to fill the skills shortage that the country

currently faces. International rates are not affordable by

most government institutions and procurement rules

make it difficult to justify employing international exper-

tise. This balancing act is reflected in the procurement

practises for professional engineers and management

consultants to work client side in large integrated pub-

lic works programmes on roads, rail, ports and airports

infrastructure.

South Africa has shown its ability to innovate through

design in many engineering sectors, in particular the

emerging ITS industry has benefited from technologies

that had their roots in the countrys defence industry.

Amongst many examples, pioneering location-based

applications are underpinned by best-in-class GIS sys-

tems and comprehensive digital mapping. The wireless

communications industry is competitive and in many

parts of SA provides essential services where it wouldtake too long to install fixed lines. South Africa is also

undergoing EMV migration that will enable e-payment

on many transport modes.

Transition and learningIn this transition phase, the norm is to employ small

teams within government that selectively procure local

and international consultants to bootstrap large pro-

curements for services, for example infrastructure

development and downstream ITS application. The

responsibility for programme management is devolved

to a greater degree than in developed countries such asthe UK. Consequently, the selection of competent con-

tractors to operate its airports or roads (for example) is

critical and the use of Service Level Agreements that

describe KPIs are then equally important to ensure that

delivery quality targets are met throughout the contract

duration to preserve risk allocations. Long-term strate-

gic planning to ensure best value has never been more

important to a country that is often regarded as setting

the standard for other developing nations in Africa

where, for cultural reasons, planning horizons have

been much shorter.

Each of these ambitious projects (there are many

more) places an additional burden on national and

regional government transportation authorities. This

pressure can help drive up the efficiency by which

national and local government agencies can meet dead-

linesbut which could also increase the risk of pro-

gramme delays and adversely impact the quality of

programme management.

South Africa has a strategic need to nurture, upgrade

and retain its own competences in systems design and

programme management these soft assets are often

forgotten when we look at ITS success stories world-

wide. Having a high quality fleet of buses does not make

a bus service and having high quality roads does not

make a transportation system - as many developing

countries have found to their cost. Furthermore, the clas-

sical model of upgrading a nations infrastructure sug-

gests that local innovation is best. Simply buying

ready-made solutions as templates from other countries

or cities will not work. Johannesburg is not London and

Cape Town is not Bogot. Consultants take note.

Early signs, mostly goodThe momentum behind the preparations for 2010 has

generated many news stories that show that the country

can specify, procure and manage many large scale,

competitively tendered projects that meet local needs,

in many cases funded and operated by the private sec-

tor with accompanying levels of risk as part of in return

for operating concessions.Not all news has been good though the bold attempts

to recapitalise (upgrade) the nations fleet of informal

taxi services at a cost of R7m (0.8m) has met resistance

although by 2010 should result in about 80 per cent of

the fleet being replaced with newer and safer vehicles.

In May 2008 the Department of Transport, through the

South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

awarded the final contract of its R11.9 billion for the ini-

tial construction phase of the Gauteng Freeway Improve-

ment Project (GFIP) to upgrade and extend the Gauteng

highway network all funded through the issue of gov-

ernment-backed bonds. SANRAL intends to procure arelated MLFF ETC system with a national back office

and operating concession by early 2009.

The implementation of Bus Rapid Transit in Johannes-

burg, the rapidly developing Gautrain link to the OR

Tambo International Airport and a new airport link pro-

posed for Cape Town are all helping to fuel market inter-

est that is expected to drive growth in South African

professional consulting companies, initially enabled

through a mix of local and imported skills.

Facing the long termSo, the current stock of high profile ITS projects provides

South Africa with a good opportunity to show that design

and programme delivery competence can compete

internationally. When the final whistle has blown on the

next World Cup the long-term challenge will be to main-

tain and develop this further.TH


30/68


Consultants


My company, the Ian Catling Consultancy (ICC) has

just celebrated 25 years of working in ITS.

I gave up my post at SIA in July 1983 to work on the first

Hong Kong Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) Pilot Project,

and effectively established the Ian Catling Consultancy

then. At the time I was assured that I could return to my

proper job at the end of the Hong Kong project, but in

the end I decided that the new area of what was then

called Road Transport Informatics (RTI which is actu-

ally the rti in the European ITS coordination organisa-

tion ERTICO) offered exciting and challenging

opportunities for an independent consultancy.At its peak, ICC employed about 10 people, but I have

preferred to work with an even smaller core team and

use a network of other independent expert consultants

who can be available often at short notice and who are

prepared to work hard (as well as being, hopefully, quite

bright, hard work is, I think, one of the key requirements

for anyone considering setting up on their own).

For many years my right-hand man was Richard Har-

ris, well-known to many readers as a leading light in ITS

at WSP, and Overseas Director for ITS UK (not to mention

a fairly regular contributor to Thinking

Highways).

Something to get our teeth intoAt the end of the 1980s the European

Commission was putting together the

DRIVE research programme: ICC

helped to develop the programme, and

during the 1990s we led and coordi-

nated some of the key projects which

sowed the seeds for what are now (at

last!) real products and services.

Navigation is perhaps the most obvi-

ous of these in the mass market, but the

other main area in which ICC has remained involved iselectronic charging, where there is arguably a glimmer

of light for the achievement of what the interoperability

directive calls the European Electronic Toll Service

(EETS).

Working with the Commission is rather more con-

strained these days than it was then. Despite the Com-

missions well-stated aims to encourage SMEs (Small

and Medium-sized Enterprises) to participate in Euro-

pean projects, I find it now almost impossible for a small

company like ICC to put together the type of consortium

which will win through what are usually very competi-

tive bidding processes.This is partly because most of the big consultancy

companies now have their own ITS expertise and teams,

but also because the funding process is much more dif-

ficult now. One of our main projects over the last couple

of years has been RCI (Road Charging Interoperability),

in which ICC is a partner.

While the Commission still retains the concept of an

advance payment (it always was conceptual rather

than actual, because it usually arrived when you were

about six months into the project), you now are required

to provide a bank guarantee which, for a small firm like

ours, effectively means that in order to receive the

advance payment you must tie up that amount of money

in hock to the bank, so theres really no point in having

it.

Given the long lead times for these projects, we hadactually been working for nearly three years before we

received a single penny (or euro-cent). Of course we

dont work in these projects just for the money but it

would help if it wasnt quite so difficult to get!

An uneven playing field?Lots of our work has also been with the UK Government,

especially with the Department of Transport (or any of

the five or six other names that its had in the last couple

of decades). I think the Government has always played

strictly by the rules but, as with the

Commission, its become both morecompetitive and harder to get con-

tracts as a small firm.

In fact the way in is often to be part-

nered with one or more of the larger

firms who are able to bid for frame-

work contracts. But just being part of

a successful framework team doesnt

actually guarantee you any work!

When ITS was finding its feet at the

end of the 1980s and start of the 1990s,

there was a small number of specialist

consultancies who were able to offer

relatively rare expertise and experience in ITS. Now ITSis a much bigger area and includes many multi-million

dollar enterprises.

There is still a role for the small specialist consultancy,

but we are now much smaller fishes in a much bigger

ocean.TH

Gethin Perry is Principal ITS Consultant at Maunsell

AECOM in Sydney, Australia and can be contacted at

[email protected]

Ian Catling is Principal of Ian Catling Consultancy in

Chipstead, UK and can be contacted at [email protected]

Andrew Pickford is Principal of Transport Technology

Consultants based in Cambridge, UK and can be

contacted at [email protected]

In order to receivethe advance

payment you musttie up that amountof money in hock tothe bank, so theresreally no point in

having it

IAN CATLING explains the benefits and potential

pitfalls of working for the European Commission

(and in the UK) as a small consultancy


31/68


Consultants


32/68




any other major programme, its a matter ofpriorities

Stunted

growth

Cover Feature: ERGS

Vol 3 No 3Thinking Highways www.thinkinghighways.com

Roots and

branches30


33/68

Climate Change

The inspiration for this article arose during a recent

visit by to Washington, DC,

thinking highways na sep 08

Documents