Mo she gu hjhh hhjk - Transport Studies Unit

Workshop Programme
8:45 – 9:00 Tea and Coffee (served in seminar room 9)
9:00 – 10:00 Overview and progress to date (Moshe Givoni and
Yoram Shiftan)
10:00 – 12:00 Workshop discussion and exercises
12:00 – 13:00 Lunch and discussion (served in seminar room 9)
1
Britain-Israel Research and Academic Exchange
Partnership (BIRAX) project:
The use of state-of-the-art models by policy
makers to address global energy and
environment challenges:
The case of transport policy
Knowledge Utilisation and the use of
models in policymaking
2nd Workshop,
27 October 2011, St. Anne's College, Oxford, UK
2
Project overview
Research team:
University of Oxford: Moshe Givoni and Eda Beyazit
Technion: Yoram Shiftan, Robert Ishaq and Omer Tzur
Duration: 12 months
Budget: £30,000
Funder: The British-Council
3
Objectives
Formal:
To investigate the contribution of quantitative analysis to the
formulation of policies to address energy and environment
challenges, focusing on the transport sector, and to explore
ways to increase such contribution.
Practical:
To understand the nature of and reasons for the gap in (transport)
policy making between the „knowledge‟ state-of-the-art modelling
techniques can provide policy makers with and the „knowledge‟ on
which they base their decisions on.
4
Context and assumptions
“For political reasons, it might be that policy makers ignore the
modelling results, or try to only use the modelling process to support
pre-decided policies („solutions looking for problems‟ as coined by
Kingdon, 1984)”.
Project report
•
•
•
5
While an important and unavoidable part of policy making, it is
outside the scope of this research
We focus on „objective‟ use of models and analysis to inform
policy making
Does not mean „value-free‟, „fully rational‟ use of models
Methodology
Emphasis on travel demand modelling
The most important information needed to assess various policy
actions and their impacts
General approach:
The (general) policy process
State-of-the-art model development
The models used in the policy process
The role of model results in the decision making
UK
Israel
6
Policy process
√
√
(given)
Models
√
√
(what can we do?)
Model development
Three broad categories of travel demand modelling developments:
•Sketch Planning Model
•Four step model
•Activity based model
More on this in the next presentation...
7
Use of models in the policy process
Main issues:
Are the right tools used?
It is important to use the appropriate model for particular problems
making sure that the models meet the needs of the planning process.
Furthermore, models need to be designed to help the users of the
models, and the users need to be able to adjust the model to answer
specific questions
(Jonsson et al., 2011, our emphasis).
Is the right knowledge produced?
Are „models‟ or modellers ready for changes on the context side and
in the policy agendas? Are transport modellers well equipped to
detect and respond to those changes?
(Gudmundsson, 2011, our emphasis).
8
Use of models in the policy process (cont.)
Is the knowledge communicated effectively?
Communication between modellers and practitioners is crucial in
order for transport planners to understand how the new approaches
can better address their planning needs (Davidson et al., 2007)
Lack of communication can create barriers for planning and decision
making in transport. From a practical standpoint, relationships seem
to thrive best in environments where there is more communication,
flexibility, and focus on meeting business needs of the transportation
agency (Schofer, 2007, our emphasis)
There is a need for models to support the learning process of
different interest groups as well as the need for those groups to
understand the basic philosophy and assumptions of models. There
is a need for developing a common language between transport
modellers and “people that are not insiders in the domain of
modelling” (Brömmelstroet and Bertollini, 2011, our emphasis).
9
Evidence from the UK
Focus on one county and on the LTP3 process
•Longer planning time horizon (suggested by the county)
•Objectives set locally and in consultation (but broadly rely on and
follow DfT objectives)
The use of models:
The DfT strongly advises local authorities to consider different
methods for making their decisions and suggests that it is sensible to
consider whether a model is necessary or not for local transport
plans as the creation of a transport model is costly and time
consuming.
However, the DfT presents an extensive section on WebTAG about
general principles of transport modelling, choice of modelling
approach, transport-land use interaction models, data sources and
the level of detail of the models.
10
Evidence from the UK (cont.)
Models:
SATURN - Traffic Model
Emme 2 - Traffic Software
Accession - Accessibility model for public transport
VISSIM - Microsimulation Model for small scale projects
Intra-SIM - a transport policy simulation tool for decision makers
“The general view I think would be the models give too much detail...
We [need] to take the results of that and simplify it, simplify and
simplify just coming down to [an understandable level] ... that gives
you the information at a sort of level that the councillors can deal
within their constraints of time”. (Policy analyst)
“„X‟ model goes only so far in detail. It doesn‟t go to the very fine
detail. It has just the key routes in „Y city‟ models. (...) [Models] helps
us to understand the strategic impacts [of a development]”. (Planner)
11
Evidence from Israel
Focus on „mega-projects‟ of mass transit systems in Tel- Aviv,
Jerusalem and Haifa
Policy process, context
Very centralised decision making. Done mainly at the Ministry of
Transportation and Road Safety (MOT) in coordination with the
Ministry of Finance (MOF)
Local authorities have some say (participate in infrastructure budget
usually up to 30%, in public transportation about 15%)
MOT operates through various sub-companies who are either own by
the MOT or co-owned by the MOT and a local authority.
Lack of local Transportation Planning Authorities complicate the
decision process and put a heavy load on the MOT
12
Evidence from Israel (cont.)
Models:
• The Tel-Aviv metropolitan area - completed and starting to use a
new activity based model which represents the state of the art in
travel demand models today
• The Jerusalem metropolitan area - in the process of developing
such a model.
• The Haifa and Beer Sheva metropolitan areas - regional models,
which are traditional trip based, but of good quality
Use of models
The companies will either develop the models (own manpower) or bid
and contract the model development to private consultants.
Senior people in these companies act as a very important actor in the
decision making process between the modellers (often work the
company) and the policy maker level of the MOT and MOF.
They are the „professional officials‟ (sometime the general managers
of the companies).
13
Evidence from Israel (cont.)
“The transportation models are very significant and have great effect
on the planning process… I think their effect is excessive…
There are many problems in models and they need further
development… The problems [in the models] may be ignored due to
„addiction to numbers‟ in the [decision making] process”.
(Policy analyst)
“The models are "black box" for some of the officials involved in
decision making… [Because of] their complexity, and the need of
professional knowledge in their operation, they are not accessible to
external intervention of policy makers and other unprofessional
officials” (Policy analyst)
“Most decision makers who use a model are not familiar with the
model‟s properties such as the model structure, model assumptions,
explanatory variables etc.…” (Policy maker)
14
The models‟ paradox
• (In Israel) The professional level believes that advanced models are
really needed.
• It is not clear how much this motivation is supported by the policy
makers, and whether they also believed so or they felt they need
the best state of the art models to support their decisions
The key people in the supply-chain of models‟ knowledge see the
models as a black box, and one that „surly‟ know the answers
=> Development in state of the art models seems to mainly serve to
increase the size of the black box, resulting in increasing the gap
between state of the art and state of the practice
Tow options to move forward:
• Develop „simple‟ state-of-the-art models
• Communicate the knowledge produce by (and the limitations
of) current state-of-the-art models
15
The Role of Travel Demand
Models in Policy Making
Yoram Shiftan
Stages in Externalities‟ Evaluation
Land use
Socio economic
Demographic
Transportation
system
Travel Demand Model
Traffic Data: Speeds and Volumes
Travel time
Accessibility
emissions
noise
accidents
Pollution
Concentrations
exposure
Casualties/damage
Monetary value
Brief History of Travel Demand Models
generation
distribution
assignment
Mode
choice
Activities
Need of Behavioral Models
Aggregate
problems
Individual
Behavior
Policy
Representing Activity/Travel
Behavior
Tours
Schedule
Space
Trips
Space
H
Space
H
H
W
W
W
S
H
H
H
D
H
Time
S
H
H: Home
W: Work
H
H
H
D
Time
Time
S: Shop
W
S
D: Dinner out
S
D
D
Complex Responses to Policies
(e.g.,
peak-period
toll)
Potential Responses
to Toll
Pre-Toll
Schedule
(a) Change
(b) Change
Mode & Pattern Time & Pattern
Space
(Home)
Space
(c) Work at
Home
Space
Space
Car
Car
Bus
Work
Work
Work
Car
Shop
Time
Car Shop
Time
= Peak Period
Shop
Time
Time
Shop
The use of Activity Based Models
for Policy Analysis
• Secondary effects - adjustment to the
activity pattern that have to be made in
response to the primary effect
• Can better capture “induced demand”
• Can provide better input requires for
externalities evaluation
• Can provide detailed travel data by
various variable for equity issues and
other purposes
D
ay
an
Sa
M
pi
en
a c Kor r
he es
m h
Be
Ba gi n
tY
Ka
f T H am
et a'a
N
ov m a
em l
Yo b er
se
ft
Ba al
rI
la
Ba n
Ja l fou
bo
r
t
R in sk
ot
h y
H ssh
a'
at i ld
z
M ma
ac
u
hr t
oz
H et
ab
as
h
Is t
ak
ov
Er
li c
Be h
n
Z
Sa vi
la
m
El e
ife
l
Al et
le
n
b
C
ar y
li b
ac
Sh
a u Yeh h
l H ud
am it
Ar e le
lo ch
so
Ab rof
ba f
H
il e
l
Be Bi a
n
li k
Ah Gu
a r rio
on n
ov
Sh i tz
en
sh ka
ac r
h
be a m
i li n
s
D on
an
kn
er
O
Pe
rl o
ta
ch Pi n v
Ti sk
kv er
a
C
BS
M
os
he
Tel-Aviv Red Light Rail Line Demand Estimates
2030 passengers per morning peak hour
northbound
Neta Model
New Activity Based Model
10000
9000
NTA Northbound
8000
#371276
TAM Northbound
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
‫‪Red Line Demand Estimates‬‬
‫‪2020 and 2030 Morning Peak Hour Boarding‬‬
‫סה"כ עולים לקו האדום‬
‫‪50,000‬‬
‫‪45,900 47300‬‬
‫‪45,000‬‬
‫‪40,000‬‬
‫‪35,600‬‬
‫‪35,000‬‬
‫‪30,000‬‬
‫‪23,300‬‬
‫‪25,000‬‬
‫‪24,800‬‬
‫‪20,000‬‬
‫‪15,000‬‬
‫‪12,900‬‬
‫‪10,600‬‬
‫‪10,000‬‬
‫‪5,000‬‬
‫‪-‬‬
‫מודל ת"א גרסה ‪ 2.2‬מודל ת"א גרסה ‪2.1‬‬
‫שנת ‪2030‬‬
‫מודל נת"ע‬
‫זכיין‬
‫שנת ‪2020‬‬
Role of Travel Demands
• Compare alternative investments
alternatives
• Justify a large project/investment
• Details analysis of projects (route
alignment station location)
• Policy implementation
• There is no one suit that fit them all
Questions about the Models
• How accurate they are? The role of
uncertainty.
• Are they biased?
• The role of various assumptions, and input
into the model.
• What projects/policies are they capable to
analyze?
• Is their output sufficient for the evaluation of
externalities?
• How well they deal with induced demand?
• How all these factors affect project ranking?
Advantages of Advanced
Models
• Provide better understanding of travel
behavior
• Provide more and better information
(enable better equity analysis)
• But is it really more accurate???
• Provide policy makers the “best”
tools/support
• The “ideal” trade-off between complexity
and simplicity is context specific
Questions for Discussions
• Are we using the “right” models? Should we
invest less or more in model development?
• How much do the models really affect policy
makers? and at what level of decisions?
• The role of assumptions/input vs. the model
itself.
• How and what output/results should be
presented to policy makers?
• The use of models by policy makers
Behavioral Realism and Computational Complexity
Behavioral
Realism
Computational
complexity
Benefits
from
Behavioural
Computational Simplicity
?
Behavioral
Realism
Realism
and
Total Model
Benefits
Computational
Simplicity
THE USE OF ACTIVITY BASED
MODEL FOR PROJECT
APPRAISAL
Yoram Shiftan
Stages in Externalities‟ Evaluation
Land use
Socio economic
Demographic
Transportation
system
Travel Demand Model
Traffic Data: Speeds and Volumes
Travel time
Accessibility
emissions
noise
accidents
Pollution
Concentrations
exposure
Monetary value
Casualties/damage
The Added Value of ABM
Output
• Can get detailed travel data:
– By socio-economic
– By auto ownership
– By type of tours
– By type of trips (cold/hot starts)
• Ability to deal with Induced demand
Induced Demand -The Assumption of Fix
Demand Supply Projects
• Highway Project
– travel time savings
per vehicle will be
less than estimated
– vehicle kilometers of
travel will be more
than estimated
– emissions and other
externalities will be
higher than estimated
– Benefits for new
riders are ignored
• Transit Project
– fewer passengers will
enjoy the improved
service and
accessibility.
– revenue will be lower
than estimated.
The Assumption of Fix Demand on Users’ Benefits
D
S1
a
e
S2
b
h
g
f
c
Bias from the Assumption of Fix Demand
Fixed Demand Bias by V/C and Demand Elasticity
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
V/C
E=(-0.25)
E=(-0.5)
E=(-0.75)
1.50
Air Quality
• Important variables for air quality analysis
– VMT
– Travel by Mode and by Occupancy Rates for Auto Modes
– Fraction of Cold/Hot Starts
– Speed/Acceleration/Driving Profile.
– Travel by Time of Day and Time/Location of Starts
– Travel by Vehicle Class and Model
Equity
• Ability to analyze data by various
categories:
– Income level
– Auto ownership
– Residential lcoation
The use of Activity Based Models
for Policy Analysis
• Secondary effects - adjustment to the
activity pattern that have to be made in
response to the primary effect
• Can better capture “induced demand”
• Ideally can provide all the input requires
for policy analysis and externalities
evaluation
• Equity issues
Nohal Perat
• A single projects vs. a system wide project
• Highway projects vs. public transport
projects
• For a single project use the default OD trip
table provided by the model team
(assume no induce demand)
• For system wide projects need to run the
full model without and with the project.
System Wide Projects
• Major public transport projects
• Large highway project (over 250 Million
NIS)
• The induced demand would be evaluated
by the Rule of the Half
Need to do a Test Case
•
•
•
•
Netania BRT
Small highway project
Large highway project
Existing highway project
‫פרויקט ‪ BRT‬נתניה – מאפיינים נבחרים – הפרש בין‬
‫מצב "עם פרויקט" למצב "ללא פרויקט"‬
‫אמצעי‬
‫אוטובוס‬
‫ת"צ רבת קיבולת‬
‫רכבת‬
‫רכב פרטי‬
‫מאפיין‬
‫סה"כ ק"מ‪-‬נוסע‬
‫סה"כ שעות נוסע‬
‫סה"כ עליות‬
‫סה"כ ק"מ‪-‬נוסע‬
‫סה"כ שעות נוסע‬
‫סה"כ עליות‬
‫סה"כ ק"מ‪-‬נוסע‬
‫סה"כ שעות נוסע‬
‫סה"כ עליות‬
‫סה"כ ק"מ‪-‬רכב‬
‫סה"כ שעות‪-‬רכב‬
‫סה"כ נוסעים‬
‫שלב א'‬
‫‪24,962‬‬
‫‪784‬‬
‫‪1,273‬‬
‫‪15,151‬‬
‫‪769‬‬
‫‪3,007‬‬
‫‪7,348‬‬
‫‪109‬‬
‫‪224‬‬
‫‪-5,558‬‬
‫‪-411‬‬
‫‪-319‬‬
‫שלב ב'‬
‫‪14,877‬‬
‫‪126‬‬
‫‪210‬‬
‫‪26,227‬‬
‫‪1,394‬‬
‫‪5,292‬‬
‫‪1,120‬‬
‫‪24‬‬
‫‪100‬‬
‫‪-18,051‬‬
‫‪-416‬‬
‫‪-1350‬‬
‫‪48‬‬
Second and Third Phase
• Study the use of the variance from the
various runs (minimum and maximum)
• This should not be instead of sensitivity
analysis currently recommended in Nohal
Perat.
• Improve air quality output
• Use for equity analysis
Britain-Israel Research and Academic Exchange
Partnership (BIRAX) project:
The use of state-of-the-art models by policy
makers to address global energy and
environment challenges:
The case of transport policy
Discussion
2nd Workshop, 27 October 2011, St. Anne's College
Oxford, UK
50
Consider the last time you were involved with (witness to) use of
models in planning / policy making.
How will you rate the models used?
100
Model benefits
(for decision making)
1
Behavioural
realism
Computational
Simplicity
1
100
51
100
1
Assuming “model benefits” were less than 100.
What will be your recommendation to increase „Model benefits‟?
100
Model benefits
(for decision making)
1
Behavioural
realism
Computational
Simplicity
1
100
52
100
1
Which line of action you feel should get more attention?
•Develop „simple‟ state-of-the-art models
•Communicate the knowledge produce by
(and the limitations of) current state-of-theart models
53
STAGES
Q I: The weakest link
Q 2: The weight of each stage
Input Data and
Assumptions
Model
Structure
Model Output
Modellers‟
Presentation
Policy
Implications
Decision
Q I: Which stage is the weakest link in the supply chain of information/knowledge for decision making?
Q 2: What is the weight of each stage in producing information?
54
What could be the next steps in the on the advancing the
useful use of models in the policy making / planning
process?
What forms of research design can usefully involve both
the policy and the modelling „camps‟?
55
Thank you!
56