Advertisement

Measure Selection for Urban Transport Policy

  • Anthony D. MayEmail author
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the selection of urban transport measures as a central element in the development of transport plans. Measure selection is a challenge because of the growing number of policy measures available and the lack of evidence on the performance of many of them. The chapter draws on recent European guidance designed to help cities to select suitable measures and package them more effectively to achieve a wide range of objectives or overcome identified transport-related problems. In doing so, it considers the range of measures and the evidence on them; the design of packages; the development of strategies; and the constraints on implementing specific measures and ways of overcoming them. It then introduces a knowledgebase, KonSULT, whose Measure Option Generator and Policy Guidebook are designed to assist cities with this crucial task. Subsequently it considers the contribution of the range of available policy measures to the specific objective of enhanced public health. It concludes with a series of recommendations for good practice in measure selection generally, and more specifically for the selection of policy measures to enhance public health.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Cerema. (2015). Le versement transport: une contribution essentielle au financement des transports urbains, Collection Essentiel, “Le point sur” – Mobilité et transports. Cerema: Lyon.Google Scholar
  2. CiViTAS. (2016). Retrieved from www.civitas.eu.
  3. Eddington, R. (2006). The Eddington Transport Study. Main report: Transport’s role in sustaining the UK’s productivity and competitiveness. London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  4. ELTIS. (2015). Retrieved from www.eltis.org.
  5. Evidence. (2016). Retrieved from www.evidence-project.eu.
  6. Goodwin, P. B. (2010). Transport and the economy: Evidence to the House of Commons Transport Committee. Memorandum TE4. London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  7. Holman, C., Harrison, R., & Querol, X. (2015). Review of the efficacy of low emission zones to improve urban air quality in European cities. Atmospheric Environment, 111, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ji, S., Cherry, C. R., Bechle, M., Wu, Y., & Marshall, J. D. (2012). Electric vehicles in China: Emissions and health impacts. Environmental Science & Technology, 46, 2018–2024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Khreis, H., May, A. D., & Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J. (2017). Health impacts of urban transport policy measures: A guidance note for practice. Journal of Transport & Health, 6, 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lautso, K., et al. (2004). Planning and research of policies for land use and transport for increasing urban sustainability (PROPOLIS). Final report. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  11. May, A. D., & Matthews, B. (2007). Decision making processes. In S. Marshall & D. Banister (Eds.), Land use and transport planning: European perspectives on integrated policies. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  12. May, A. D., Kelly, C., Shepherd, S., & Jopson, A. (2012). An option generation tool for potential urban transport policy packages. Transport Policy, 20, 162–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. May, A. D., Khreis, H., & Mullen, C. A. (2016). Option generation for policy measures and packages: the role of the KonSULT knowledgebase. Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Transport Research. Shanghai, July 2016. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  14. May, A. D., (2016). Measure selection: selecting the most effective packages of measures for sustainable urban mobility plans. Retrieved from www.eltis.eu and www.sump-challenges.eu/kits.Google Scholar
  15. Morfeld, P., Groneberg, D. A., & Spallek, M. F. (2014). Effectiveness of low emission zones: Large scale analysis of changes in environmental NO 2, NO and NO x concentrations in 17 German cities. PLoS ONE, 9, e102999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Paulley, N., et al. (2006). The demand for public transport. Crowthorne: TRL.Google Scholar
  17. Timmers, V. R., & Achten, P. A. (2016). Non-exhaust PM emissions from electric vehicles. Atmospheric Environment, 134, 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Transport for London. (2007). Central London Congestion Charging: impacts monitoring; fifth annual report. London: TfL.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options