Institute for Climate Change and Sustainable Development, University of Malta
Transport and Climate Change in London
Dr Robin Hickman
Bartlett School of Planning
r.hickman@ucl.ac.uk
Key Issues and Questions
•
•
•
•
•
•
How do we respond to the climate change problem?
Application in transport: what low carbon transport futures are
possible for cities?
Use of scenario analysis and backcasting?
What policy interventions are available? How can these be
effectively packaged?
Developing narratives and quantifying likely impacts – does
this help?
What are the optimal policy trajectories – can we achieve
deep reductions in transport CO2 emissions?
CASE STUDIES: London, Oxfordshire, Delhi, Jinan, Auckland –
what are the optimal policy trajectories – how much does context
matter?
The Context
•
•
•
•
•
Cities have become the centres of humanity.
Over the last 10 years, much concern over
sustainability footprint – particularly the
environmental (CO2) footprint.
Huge difficulties in reducing CO2 emissions from
transport in all contexts – in absolute terms in the
‘developed’ world, and against BAU projection in the
emerging cities.
A small group of pioneering city leaders are signing
up to progressive targets – leaving the international
negotiations behind.
Some progressive policy measures and packages
are being implemented – but all, as yet, ad-hoc in
nature – little understanding of how approaches
should differ by context, how ‘best practice’ might
transfer.
Main Arguments
•
•
•
A large gap between the policy makers and the carowning public (or those aspiring to car use).
Almost a hyperreality in transport: the advertising of
the car as a sought after product and the aspiration to
own and use a car v. the reality of the impacts in
environmental, safety, urban fabric and even economic
terms – a mass communication, consumption and
materialisation: a heavily-mediated ‘real’ (Baudrillard,
1981).
We draw on scenario analysis and futures thinking
(from Thomas More’s Utopia onwards, to Herman
Kahn, Pierre Wack and Peter Schwartz ..) to consider
alternative possibilities at the city scale.
World Bank data, 2010, MtCO2
Scenario Analysis
Helping to: make
effective strategic
choices in view of
uncertain trends,
and understand the
potential for
achieving a break
against dominant
trends.
Uncertainty
Uncertainty: the driver for analysis
• Lack of ‘sure knowledge’ of past, present, future or hypothetical
events (Downs, 1957)
• Difference between the amount of information required to
perform a task and the information possessed (Galbraith, 1977).
Courtney (2001) ‘residual’ uncertainty:
Leaving the Opera in the Year 2000, Albert Robida (1848-1926)
Backcasting
• Baseline and
projection
• Alternative
scenario(s) of
the future
• Policy measures
and packages
available
• Appraisal,
costing,
optimum
pathways
Backcasting
The major distinguishing characteristic is:
“A concern, not with what futures are likely
to happen, but with how desirable futures
can be attained. It is thus explicitly
normative, involving working backwards
from a particular desirable end-point to the
present in order to determine the physical
suitability of that future and what policy
measures would be required to reach that
point.”
Robinson, J.B. (1990) Futures under glass: A recipe for
people who hate to predict. Futures, 22(8): 820-842.
[The Difficulty with Futures Analysis]
"If there is such a thing as growing human
knowledge, then we cannot anticipate
today what we shall know only tomorrow …
no scientific predictor - whether a human
scientist or a calculating machine - can
possibly predict, by scientific methods, its
own future results."
Popper, K.R. (1957) The Poverty of Historicism,
Routledge and Kegan Paul: London.
VIBAT LONDON
Visioning and Backcasting for London (UrbanBuzz, TfL, 2007-09)
VIBAT London
Objective: a 60% reduction in CO2
emissions in the transport sector in
London by 2025 and 80% by 2050
•
A range of policy packages
•
Level of application
•
Target achieved/ achievable?
London: The Baseline (Transport Only)
TC-SIM London
Local Version 03
tcsim.html
Web Version 03
www.vibat.org/vibat_ldn/tcsim3/tcsim.html
tcsim
topgear
Discuss and ‘Optimise’ the Strategy
Discuss and ‘Optimise’ the Strategy
Progressive Transport Planning Practice in London?
CENTRAL LONDON
THE COMPACT CENTRAL AREA – 150 years of investment in
public transport and an effective growth boundary
Alexandra Gomes
CONGESTION CHARGING
BEST PRACTICE IN PUBLIC
TRANSPORT DESIGN, e.g. King’s
Cross St Pancras and Western
Concourse
OYSTER CARD: Some progressive and
innovative projects are developed – to be copied
around the world (and now contactless)
INNOVATIONS IN STREETSCAPE
DESIGN, e.g. High Street Kensington
EXHIBITION ROAD
PUBLIC REALM AND PEDESTRIAN
ENVIRONMENT, e.g. Hungerford
Bridge, South Bank, Millenium Bridge
CANARY WHARF: INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORT
But – the development type is not always well
steered? Who gains from the public investment in
transport?
THE CYCLING ENVIRONMENT?
We can do much better
LOW EMISSION VEHICLES?
There is no effective roll out to the
mass market – and no mechanism
to do this
EAST LONDON?
Emerging Findings
Like Truman Burbank: “We accept the
reality of the world with which we are
presented?”
The Truman Show, 1998, Peter Weir
Emerging Findings
www.vibat.org
•
Ambitious strategic policy ambitions (CO2) not likely to be
delivered (on current progress) – lots of conjecture, little
change of spending profiles?
•
Emerging set of useful methodologies – scenario analysis,
backcasting, MCA – might help progress the debate.
•
Wide range of policy packages available – many, if not all,
require successful application to achieve ambitious CO2
reduction targets.
•
Appraisal - not just CO2; wider MCA quality of life aspects.
•
Moving beyond the scenarios: we need to understand potential
for changed behaviours (adaptive capacity), and to invest very
differently in transport infrastructure, vehicle emission
technologies and behavioural change initiatives.
•
Participatory elements critical – people need to be able to
choose their future travel lifestyles, ideally consistent with
policy goals.
Key Reading
Åkerman, J. and Höjer, M. (2006) How much transport can the climate stand? Sweden on a sustainable path
in 2050. Energy Policy, 34: 1944-1957.
Banister, D., Stead, D., Steen, P. Åkerman, J., Dreborg, K., Nijkamp, P.and Schleicher-Tappeser, R. (2000)
European Transport Policy and Sustainable Mobility. London: Spon.
Banister, D. (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2): 73-80.
Bows, A. and Anderson, K. L. (2007) Policy clash: Can projected aviation growth be reconciled with the UK
Government's 60% carbon reduction policy? Transport Policy, 14(2): 103-110.
Dreborg, K. H. (1996) Essence of backcasting. Futures, 28: 813-828.
Gilbert, R. and Perl, A. (2010) Transport Revolutions: Moving People and Freight without Oil. London:
Earthscan.
Hickman, R. and Banister, D. (2014) Transport, Climate Change and the City. Abingdon, Routledge.
Hickman, R. and Banister, D. (2010) Transport and climate change: simulating the options for carbon
reduction in London. Transport Policy, 17(2): 110-125.
Newman, P. and Kenworthy, J. R. (1999) Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2000) EST! Environmentally Sustainable
Transport. Futures, Strategies and Best Practice. Synthesis Report. Paris: OECD.
Popper, K.R. (1957) The Poverty of Historicism, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London.
Robinson, J.B. (1990) Futures under glass: A recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures, 22(8): 820-842.
Schwartz, P. (1996) The Art of the Long View: Paths to Strategic Insight for Yourself and Your Company. New
York: Doubleday.
Sperling, D. and Gordon, D. (2009) Two Billion Cars. Driving Towards Sustainability. Oxford University Press.
Stern, N. (2009) A Blueprint for a Safer Planet. London: Random House.