1. 8 May 2014 Sustainability effects of the Dutch “Programme Beter Utilization” ECOMM 2014, Innovations for institutional frameworks (1) Jorrit Nijhuis Rick Lindeman Klaartje Arntzen Kees van der Reijden RWS WVL (Water, Transport & Environment)

2. Rijkswaterstaat 2 Policy background 8 May 2014 In 2006, mobility policy was based on 3 “pillars” –2006-2012 large-scale infrastructure construction By 2011: –no (political) consensus on road pricing –No financial means for new infrastructure –Utilization main pillar

3. Rijkswaterstaat 3 8 May 2014 Better Utilization Public-private partnership –12 urban regions –€ 1.1 billion (co-)finance –Over 350 measures Goal: 20% reduction of travel time loss (by 2014)

4. Rijkswaterstaat 4 Measures Rush hour avoidance Employers approach Cycling Public transport / P+R Heavy goods transport ITS / TDM InfrastructureMobility Management

5. Rijkswaterstaat 5 Monitoring & Evaluation of the Programme 8 May 2014 Minister: “I value a thorough evaluation of this approach. During the implementation of the measures we will already evaluate the success them. Based on this evaluation we will decide whether or not this approach will get be continued or scaled up”

6. Rijkswaterstaat 6 Monitoring & Evaluation of the Programme What is measured? –Process –Throughput –Output –Outcome: what are the effects of the measures? Travel times Behavioural change User satisfaction Sustainability effects 8 May 2014

7. Rijkswaterstaat 7 8 May 2014 Sustainability analysis Primary aim of Programma Better Utilization is reduction of travel time loss –Sustainability effects are seen as “secondary catch” by Ministry So, why focus on sustainability effects? –Ministry is searching for win-win situations –Local governments have ambitions & goals (climate/air quality) though these are not always known by transport policy employees

8. Rijkswaterstaat 8 8 May 2014 Assumptions and principles Tool with effects based on –Ex ante estimations of number of rush hour avoidances for mobility management measures –Increase in capacity for ITS/TDM and infrastructure measures –Average trip/route length –Behavioural effect (travel alternatives) –Emission factors Latent demand not included

9. Rijkswaterstaat 9 8 May 2014 National results On average 1% reduction of emissions (compared with the total traffic-induced emissions). Maximum regional contribution is 3%-4% All measures combined lead to a reduction of: –70.000 ton of CO 2 /year –200 ton of NOx/year –12 ton of PM10/year

10. Rijkswaterstaat 10 Rush hour avoidance Employers approach Cycling Public transport / P+R Heavy goods transport ITS / TDM Infrastructure 8 May 2014 Results in share per type of measure CO 2 NO x PM10

11. Rijkswaterstaat 11 8 May 2014 Cost-effectiveness of measures 95% of the costs of the measures is known Mobility management measures score highly (especially rush hour avoidance and employers approach) Heavy goods transport measures score high on NOx Costs for new infrastructure are often high which make them score low in terms of cost-effectiveness Cycling & public transport projects have relatively low cost- effectiveness, partly due to high costs of cycling/PT infrastructure

12. Rijkswaterstaat 12 Infrastructure 8 May 2014 Reduced emissions (tons) per invested million euro, per category of measure PM10 Rush hour avoidance Employers approach Cycling Public transport / P+R Heavy goods transport ITS / TDM Infrastructure ITS / TDM Rush hour avoidance Cycling Employers approach Heavy goods transport Infrastructure Public transport / P+R NO x CO 2

13. Rijkswaterstaat 13 8 May 2014 Overall sustainability score per category of measures Overall score from 1-5 on cost effectiveness Weighing (60% CO 2, 20% NOx en 20% PM10) ITS / TDM Rush hour avoidance Cycling Employers approach Heavy goods transport Infrastructure Public transport / P+R Average

14. Rijkswaterstaat 14 Conclusions 8 May 2014 Mobility management measures score high on sustainability effects when compared to ITS/TDM and road infrastructure -55% in No of measures, 80-85% interms of effects Tool makes sustainability effects (fast and easily) available Provides insight into relation between Better Utilization and sustainability -Connection between experts on environment and transport experts

15. Rijkswaterstaat 15 Brief view into the future Programme Better Utilization focused on period 2011-2014 Currently, follow-up is developed for period 2015-2017 –€600 million (co-financed PPP) –Focus even stronger on mobility management and ITS Role of sustainability in Follow-up –Submitted action plans will be assessed on accessbility effects and cost-effectiveness –Then action plans will be ranked on sustainability efects 8 May 2014

16. Rijkswaterstaat 16 Questions and Discussion Proposition 1: For local government and companies sustainability is more important than accessibility. 8 May 2014

17. Rijkswaterstaat 17 Questions and Discussion Proposition 2: Their should be more integration between transport and environment in (local) governance. 8 May 2014

18. Rijkswaterstaat 18 More information? Jorrit Nijhuis, PhD Ministry of Infrastructure & Environment RWS, WVL jorrit.nijhuis@rws.nl jorrit.nijhuis@rws.nl 0031 631011501 Rick Lindeman (Rick.Lindeman@rws.nl)Rick.Lindeman@rws.nl Klaartje Arntzen (Klaartje.arntzen@rws.nl)Klaartje.arntzen@rws.nl Kees van der Reijden (Kees.vander.reijden@rws.nl)Kees.vander.reijden@rws.nl 8 May 2014