The effects of smarter choice programmes in the sustainable travel towns: research report
The effects of smarter choice programmes in the sustainable travel towns: research report
复制标题
可持续旅游城镇中更明智的选择计划的影响：研究报告
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. Goodwin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Sloman;S. Cairns;C. Newson;J. Anable;A. Pridmore;P. Goodwin
达林顿、彼得伯勒和伍斯特都是中等规模、相对独立的城镇，位于英格兰北部和中部。在一次竞赛之后，它们被指定为“可持续旅游城镇”，在2004年至2009年期间实施一项旨在减少汽车使用的措施方案。他们总共花费了1500万英镑，其中1000万英镑是由运输部提供的特别政府资金。2004年在每个城镇进行的基线调查显示，交通增长是公众关注的一个重要问题，80%至94%的受访者认为这是一个问题。这些调查显示，公众强烈支持在交通政策中优先考虑更可持续的交通方式（公共汽车、步行和骑自行车）。当地的情况和问题有一些差异，每个城镇都对一系列不同措施中的每一项花费多少做出了自己的选择。他们在个人旅行计划上的支出最多（从三分之一到近一半的收入支出），其次是旅游宣传活动，促进步行和骑自行车，以及公共交通营销。用于工作场所和学校旅行计划的资金较少。这些方案由每个城镇6-10名工作人员组成的小组执行。影响评估的主要时期是2004年至2008年，尽可能注意避免与2008年底衰退的第一次影响混淆。把这三个城镇加在一起，居民人均出行总次数略有减少。人均汽车出行减少，更可持续的出行方式增加。人均公交出行量大幅增长，增幅为10- 22%，而全国其他中等城市的人均公交出行量则下降了0.5%。这三个城镇的人均自行车出行次数大幅增长，增幅为26- 30%。与全国类似城镇的下降相比，人均步行旅行的数量大幅增长了10- 13%。有迹象表明，乘客行为发生了复杂的变化，包括不同交通方式之间的换乘、目的地的改变和出行次数的改变，但并非所有这些都能用现有数据进行充分分析。汽车驾驶距离的最大减少来自休闲旅行的变化，然后是购物和与工作相关的业务。在保守的假设下，在这三个城镇实现的结果的隐含效益成本比，只考虑拥挤的影响，是在4.5的顺序。根据运输部最近的模型，包括环境、消费者利益和健康影响，可能会使仅排放的数字大致翻一番。该报告提出了建议，以协助地方当局规划和实施一个成功的大规模“明智选择方案”。本文件可从以下网址下载：http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/smarterchoices/programmes/
Darlington, Peterborough and Worcester are all medium-sized, relatively free-standing towns, located in the north and middle of England. Following a competition, they were designated ‘Sustainable Travel Towns’, implementing a programme of measures from 2004 to 2009, intended to reduce car use. Taken together they spent £15 million, of which £10 million was special Government funding provided by the Department for Transport. Baseline surveys in each town in 2004 showed that traffic growth was a significant issue of public concern, with between 80% and 94% of respondents considering it to be a problem. The same surveys showed strong public support to give more sustainable transport modes (buses, walking and cycling) a priority in transport policy. There were some differences in local conditions and problems, and each town made its own choice on how much to spend on each of a range of different measures. They all spent most on personal travel planning (from a third to nearly half of revenue spending), followed by travel awareness campaigns, promoting walking and cycling, and public transport marketing. Smaller amounts were spent on workplace and school travel plans. The programmes were implemented by teams of 6-10 staff in each town. The main period for assessment of impacts was 2004 to 2008, taking care, as far as possible, to avoid confusion with the first impacts of recession at the end of 2008. Taking all three towns together, the total number of trips per head made by residents reduced slightly. Car trips per person reduced and trips by more sustainable modes increased. Bus trips per person grew substantially, by 10-22%, compared with a national decrease of 0.5% in other medium-sized towns. The number of cycle trips per head grew substantially in all three towns, by 26-30%. The number of walking trips per head grew substantially, by 10-13%, compared to a national decline in similar towns. There were indications of complex behaviour change, involving transfers between modes, changes of destinations and changes in trip numbers, not all of which can be fully analysed with the available data. The biggest reduction in car driver distance came from changes to leisure trips, then shopping and work-related business. On conservative assumptions, the implied benefit-cost ratio of the achieved outcome in the three towns, allowing only for congestion effects, is in the order of 4.5. Including environmental, consumer-benefit and health effects on the basis of recent Department for Transport modelling could broadly double the congestion-only figure. The report makes recommendations to assist local authorities in planning and delivering a successful large-scale Smarter Choice Programme. This document may be downloaded at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/smarterchoices/programmes/