Scribd Logo
Carica

Benvenuto in Scribd!

  • D4 Cowie 2010

    Caricato da

    VIVIANA
    30 visualizzazioni12 pagine
    TRANSPORT ECONOMICS COWIE

    Titolo originale

    D4_Cowie_2010

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formati disponibili

    PDF o leggi online da Scribd

    Hai trovato utile questo documento?

    Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

    Segnala questo documento
    TRANSPORT ECONOMICS COWIE

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    30 visualizzazioni12 pagine

    D4 Cowie 2010

    Caricato da

    VIVIANA
    TRANSPORT ECONOMICS COWIE

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Scarica in formato PDF o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    di 12
    ECASTING THE DEMAND FOR TRANSPORT 3) deni the factors tht you would want include in your made 3) Discuss the assocated data requirement and were such data might be found (or = cotanes) ©) Expl how a chole experiment might be used to assets the comparative pact of ‘the aie of he bus service ano bus rarity lanes "scssin genera how you might st about forecasting usage of the new tation 8) By those gong “ou from the city on mainine intercity services, 5) By thse usng tas park and vide facility going ito the ly ©) Telmgact of seak price suplemenis —————— 336 F Chapter 14 Transport appraisal Contributed by Tom Rye INTRODUCTION The topic of this chapter is apprasal —the way in which decstons on when and where to undertake public investment in anspor are made, The chapter some ways bulls upon Chapter 2 and fist explains the chery underlying spprasl by making direct laks tothe economic theory ctline elsewhere in the book, before comparing diferent types of appraisal. It then ges Into some deal about the use and draweacks of ene of the most common sppratal technique, soi covt- benefit analysis, an ustratee chose pots by reference to cate study of one ofthe first wee (of SCBA in UK transport appatal, the Vicerla tube line in London (Foter and Besley, 1963). Finally, it briefly compares appraisal techniques used inthe UK with those from oer European WHAT IS TRANSPORT APPRAISAL AND WHY DO WE DO IT? ‘Transport involves the expenditure of resources on 4 combination of investment in capital tems (eg mations, track, roads) and/or in operations (.g subsidy). Ax we sae athe very beginning of {his book, sotety in gener] and priate investor in particular have limited amounts of resources, Both therefore seek t> maximise the return that they obtain Grom the investment of thowe resources. The best way 0 do ths isto ensure that they choote to spend ther resources on ‘thore projects that marinise ther return. As we sew in Chapter 3 onthe market for transport services, this called maximising wl “Ta briefly recap, wut isthe weflness or enjoyment that individuals get fom expending 37m SPORT APPRAISAL, sre. For example for many people who like to drink, then the fet dik ofthe day lary ose or enjoyable. The next drink i perhaps a tle mote ora lil lex so; the rent Probably es x0 again. At some point the enjoyment or ueflnes that the person ges ot next dint worth les to them than the money that hey are using to buy ty ath pit, ‘nal perton would stop drinking: it the point at wich they have maximised Gi wy ‘a particular resource. The bss of economic rationality i therfore that individ wil ‘heamount of money tht they pend on diferent item sch that they could ot derive any tly from tht expenditure. An identi! argument can ako be aplied to organs, ‘ed tha public authori shou ac in a ile rane to maximise the uty rent tive of the whole of soctety ‘ga he same ku in amore informal way, you can magne that you yoursel may go 4 simarprocens when yng to dee on ge purchases, Think sbout the fllowing, for ‘he considering whether to nesta. purchase) anew vl, what are the adhaatages id dlsavantages of diferent models of ear? This information isan appraisal which il side your purchase dein, ‘7h Kimied bdget (al your own house or fat), you may not beable to immediately Ferdall che ome improvements you woud ike, You may thnk abou thxe which provide ‘¢ maximum return on your iovesment. However, this can become quite completed a ‘stare to think about long-term versus short-term benefits and things which edd weve to ‘house but alo ave benefits or costs which you cast puta money vale one therefore way of predicting how much uty we asa society wl derive fom the ‘we of esunes on one thing compared to ancter by predicting the Uli that walle how much uly would we get trom spending £20 millon on a ew mutorway ‘Ato anew rvay, for example? in theory we are aiming to expend our sca ecouens ‘ay ato maximise our uty ight acroas the whole society. Why this aries sbecsue of ‘et in transport market, which isan sme rt introduced n Chapter 6 te therefore fale be authorities to inves ia tansport faites as they ae the oly body in postion to sion maiming the bene to sacety as «whale fundamental to reaie that, inherent in appr, chere is some Kind of prediction or ng require Because we havent bulla project ye tare only comidrig whether or il be worthwhile, we ave toy to forse the Fatre ~ sometimes que a nt the ss we hve seen in he previous chapter, this avery uncertain proce, yt one tha >the rele ofthe appraisal. to transport, two main techniques cat be used to orc the fare project ‘king atte performance of sini, existing projects sng predictive model, ‘one fave major drawbacks — principally, dhe uncertainty tht surrounds thir resus ‘© smedels can ao be very costly to construct and so are ony realy justified forthe of ager projets—over £1 maliono ola spite of thes uncertain, spa i ven open eatey wpa lan nonin ate eri mnie ear ates a stam ie te eens acre Sin Solon Se ses apo aati eget inrerta tae on ea ayaa ter pan gcc cag ae pn eee tang geen at ee maim speariaep nan ipeeaira omen el fine pas re ay eat Reigate tinad aeeermaaaeenaetee ee oor Tyger tna carta eae tect nies ee re aes a a mono somata ey Tae oe ninth eg a ecertinhsirer ening serene Yetta ae a oe Sagan iene ‘TRANSPORT APPRAISAL THEORY AND PRACTICE, ry underyng appa! tas bees clined above ~ yon can rad mor soot tin any tir hs op og be They Gren bok ey, 27; on tlie at werei-eaary gonsk/dl/green ook complete). Hower, thre ae ens ‘hat you have proaiyaendy art to ev why the ther fap gh fret {rom th resi Fry, he hear of msg roses eone tht wo be very hao tint pace since we do not ane complete pret) wld fal the bees cot {hat coul cero rare of every singe posse projet Sctndy inthe public vetoes, Imoney 0 invest in profets tnt alate in hore perfct manner. Rae han al ‘jets fom new hil os now et ight being compre tng, none te ob onal by fret goverment department Appl sid ot within depres, ot toch es etme hem hough inthe UK lnge poets ae reviewed at gant ee I Figure 14.1 The appraisal proves 339 ORT APPRAISAL ‘th fm bl ef ea cons ty yb td [Faience altace ete vem ‘Thar ach nn le ern al npr le ean Scio conpr wh eri probe poe Fly ae ce “Shoprnlusn eon ison cha jest cnceie og ee ae ‘eles ay te nso fr enorme een oe "ny reo do wh hota A od eam e be sont London Under vchaudha case Stas es “rite erase ecco ey et ed athena peg terpowaldive bos Nwnniy be shone vest elton AFR ‘eet Nie Hoan we sop tpe anor tin ‘poe TREN G0 ed aap eer eGo Wears i pr a en el tn bee a enya Se ret be = a ot ae meg to tilt barter ocx ton pall cack rena soe peas yang see se “Seperate nent tanec ‘tit erp puso yes enn ‘Newpot presongprt whee ono Nerden hee ag ee ‘tho she ie of gover mn bk we Se rail may be critical to sucesfilly obtaining the money. . sion to this section cx reve the bi spraa i tpt th summa hy Weary oat in thary sd in pact, ied ome of ie problems at ple gcc ser Now weg ot comer eet er of appein e Set VOLUTION OF APPRAISAL FROM BEN THROUGH TO MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS. ST AP PRATSAL ‘ction sou section, we cnsdre the bal im of pas: ht, tobe able to compare ‘shone anther to decide which provides he nor rewnfr he mala esos mies ect ns son we goon lok prc pons lem amore deal aa way of explaing bow sd wy usp aprail pace ba ‘he pa few yer Asch, what ne wil be considering are the acl mehodeloger ployed in he wpa of transport projects ‘TRANSPORT APPRAISAL Cost-benefit analysis appraisal methodology (Come. Benefit Analysis (CBA) estimates and totals up the equialent money value ofthe benefits and ‘owt tothe community of projects to etblch whether chey are worthwhile. These projects may ‘be dams and highways or can be training programmes and healthcare aytems, in other words ‘aly any public project. Te rem of «cost-benefit nays isa amber this shows the ratio of ‘benefits to costs forthe echeme 1 Jas than 1 (.e, costs exceed benefit) shen the rational government or orgustion would be expected tobe unlikely to fund the scheme. On the other ffnd, values above | wou indicate thatthe scheme wil be of overall benefit to society and the Higher the rato the higher the net benefit ths the more key tht the scheme woald be funded in preference to other propose project. “The bass of com benefit aalys therefore that» monetary value needs to be allocated all ‘benefits ard cots ascited with a given project. Tis shen allows these tobe added togetber and the totl costs ubtractd fom the total benefits in order to obtain ane value upon which to advise ‘onthe final dectsion as to whether to investor not. In ety however the monetstion ofthese Conte and benets will fill into 2 numberof categories. Some costs and benefits can easly be ‘expresied in money terms, such a the price of tickets, the cost of bulling roads or operating ‘runs some that can probly be expressed in tome Kind of money terms (ep accents}; some that can be quintfed but are more dificult to monetise e.g note); and finaly seme that are txremely dificult to quantify at all (eg. change In the quality of the Indscape). This is « fandamentl ificuly with cost-benefit nase approaches with which economists have grappled since the appreach was frst developed inthe late 1950, For the private sector orguinion that is conducting a cost-benefit analysis, the problem is relatively sraighorwari: thee onganintons ae interested mainly inthe cots and benefits that ‘an be bought and sld in a musket ~ for example, fare revenue, maintenance oF cosirtion ‘ons, Since they canbe bought and sold, they have a direct monetary vale and are therefore easly ed up to drive the overall aio of benefit to cos fora project. This called franca cost- ‘benefit analy. Th he publi sector, however, cost-benefit analyse considers a wider range of costs and benefits ‘uly, shoud include them all~ since all are of importance to society In prt i doce not due t the dificaty and uncertainty of expressing ome cost and benefits in monetary terms. The ‘challenge for the appraiser i therefore to decde which costs and benefits to include and which to cexcude In UK transport practice, public sector cost-benefit nays in transport typically ncudes 1» Coss: capital and operating cots (eg, maintenance, electric for trams, bus drivers wees) fs Benefits: time savings, accident reduction, revenues and reductions in opcrating costs {eg decreed petrol cots for drivers who switch to «new tram), There an seresng tendency also to monetse reduction in nove ad certain ir pclvans, health benefits and greenhouse ga emissions (GHG). ‘Yu wll note from this list Ut Uhre ate some factors ~ particularly time and acient swings — shat you cannot buy onthe open markt. You cant go into shop anak ta buy an ours worth 3418 AT APPRAISAL. ‘an you py directly fora reduction in acient (risk), Nonetheless, public sector ost |yss normally includes time (indeed, a8 we will ce for many transport projects the sft is offen the time saving) Because this type of cort-benefit analy inladesfctors !ivect market value but with 2 social value, i soften known a socal ent-benelit "BA) an tis is the term tht wil be sed hte ‘0 fixed rule sto which acors should be menetsed and included in SCBA andl which In the UK, anti recently, changes al ality or noise were not inched in SCBA, snany other northern Eaopean countries thar factor ane inched fa reacnable that, whichever factors are included in a monetised cost benefit any, there will ome tat are let out Yet there are strong arguments for inckdng them al, somehow, tal of your projets). The main question i: how to do ti? There isa sbsiay ioe, ethos: actors that ae lf out ofthe cost-benfic analy may el be viewed a being ant than those that ae included. A the EU EVATREN project (2008) noted in its se ste of transport SCBA from arose the FU, moet environmental factors were rated and therefore there was no consideration given to the possibilty of finds anging the schemes evaluated, or abandoning them, even if environmental costs Were age. This i because somehow they st ‘outsde' the SCBA, which was ate ax the main “hether or not to proceed withthe scheme. ‘cules could be solved, at lean theory, by monetising all mpacte and incorpor- all into a SCBA. Even if this were posse, however, more fundamental fase would that the result of the SCBA shows only how the scheme performs interme of the sed inthe analysis — but nat necessrly how it performs relation to the objectives scheme. ‘ofa direct clear relationship in SCBA between outputs ad objectives i praps the shy transport appraisal in che UK has changed recently, fom ane dominated by SCBA. ‘considers transport schemes in relation to transport ple abjctves, This i called vase appraal although its very sinlr to another technique called multi-criteria Is change i summarised in Figure 142. >jectives based appraisal nee clear objectives. These should be speci, measurable, lic and time-dependent, otherwise known as SMART objectives. Iti sometimes lusty objectives according to their level. For example, the Treasiry Green Book ‘between uimate,itermedate and immediate objective, but itis pariculrly wef Ah between shims and immediate ones, objectives are usally famed in terms of strategic ot higher-level variables, suc a the smomic growth, social eshesion or sstainable development. These abjetves may be ‘ite Papers or in Departmental or Agency plan on anual reports, ite objectives are shoe which can be diecly linked with the ouputs of a particular -amme, or project. Consideration of «proposed option needs to concentrate on those ich contribute othe immediate nd hence to the ume, objectives. UK, central Governments have chosen five key objectives again which to west rojecs, These ars ‘omy TRANSPORT APPRAISAL conta nae nto ipa Asma 69 CHES cota ‘Sutera acento anos, Sinepegeers comes || ve ser, eo common swe ree NEN ‘up ng cept pt ‘Beutel paar Teewoncrioes ‘reused nr art io ia weg gn ah Oe I Figure 14.2 Comparison of appraisal methodologies: a summary Safety ft Integration 1 Acesaility and socal Inclusion. “ie hie of sje nt nets el nd he x me oe ons Tec ey fs kot lewofcrly apa proc ln Oe ‘San coung tenis nce ty me eee ist arr ej TS my espa sin lent shee wader ene fe peal roca nab wor roneneray ee pron op ny npr ply objet erica boromefomene ces, or cape yore pn Ses ome Spry vm jes romp nal wl oyu kit eer yar jee a tlle be lel of dgece atc we arte xing faeries fr tener proc, T lene f ll cnt Seer ee MES ca eed ling rly on publ ober re vroglte boi SCBA apres i he tog ie me pine» Troe tappntin be pnd re, wero itt ay ge gaa oe Satyr cl pcan jee witch ou do nt er Quantification or not? rs eat the Iter wl “The dilference between sbjecives-bsed apprasal and multi-criteria analyss normaly atach numerical weightings tothe achievement of objecives, allowing a score for eck ‘heme to be derived and compared with other schemes, Objectivesbascd sppra doesnot the Schicrement ofeach objective maybe aseaed in money terms, quantitative terms or ualitatvely, ‘making it impose to ‘score’ the scheme or investment overall 343 ISPORT APPRAISAL s Price Reheat Warming Adjustable Evenness of Number of seting rack slot wioth fasting grawbucke elie ed TT350 27 Spencer 223 £25 yRlchards Cooityle £22 Osea? a2 a TTe25 So ick'n’Thin7@0 £20 Indicates the presence ofa feature ‘ ‘ y SKS tetgese | ch, Noe 1999, ced in Dadar Spatkman Pearman and Pips 1999) p14 txample below i taken from Dodgson, Spackman, Pearman and Philip (1999) dali. Anal A Manual (ll eatin given in references section), atbough they based ton on | Wek? magacine. As you wil sc, ic has nothing to do with transport! Nonetheles, the conforms tothe bac principles of objecives-baed appratal the objectives are bed the top and the schemes’ or options listed down the left hand se ay and gain some appreciation ofthe problems sirounding the use of objcives-based ‘n tranportimestment spprate, consider the matin in Table 14.1 and, onthe bos a the son presented, try to decide which taster you would buy. Does this case any ificalin? ee more dificult i there were more objectives and they were more diferent from one ? What we are actly working with here is very crude form of objecives baa sh and ence te problems encountered will only be atiped a more complex ‘uch a any pical transport project pra /howeverisnotthe only problem with objectivs-basod appraisal a hes ‘bjecves need bind to derive an overall ew tll ws to rank each toaster accordingly fom "wordt f. Therefore, we need to try to develop a methodology that will allow ws to deri ‘all score for eich toaster. To do this, obviously we will need to score cach tower's tance aaint each objective, and then add the scores together. But you may dink tat features or abjectives ae ls important than others (afte al hat ya warng rack? "how vital is adjustable slot width’), How would we take that into account in oar 1 What we would have to eventually develop is what called s multi-criteria aalsy, shold conser the elevane weight to attach to each atthe andthe scare to give cach sing. fia element to conser inthis example isthe further objectives dat maybe should be ‘inthe min. ow would we go aout determining thi r has Hil? got igh? 1 obviously qute subjective in the ausignment of scores to each option, the form of ‘eis analy CHCA) that we developed inthis example ~ weights foreach stiribute sad cach ome’ performance in rlton to ta attribute has the advantage of making ring and weightng of objectives transparent, and to of greater wc to the decion wakes espe presenttion of results such as those forthe toasters, shown in Table 141 One 4 ‘TRANSPORT APPRAISAL eowtch of MCA cme fe compron of yey fleet se cep pe a ee rsuon ate ln nconprl wits gan eevee try SEIN we ope tee cn owe ot irene os thus clin cen MCAT dno nenpng cone pet rng eee MCA ton ooh rule UK Goemet Hatin psy en en ag cata Se UX ter pil to ee ed pil Ce ee, ery sgh Wak id eae poke! Pe i Cay cect hese ab ied meh be a The rationale for SSEPG Eda dng pte rrr me ang parce conn ene spit cP cv ebur stow hr ego! hr brn. ps Sra min pn ng tr ry hry congo chr tpn wie ei acerlssa amet any pepe tamary lo my Sane webs dea Seed ph il sl lt owe per penser pin 8 STE TT ie agi deste bued orale womper se hen ‘The principles upon which cost-benefit analysis is based be, Thi very import undeatand he rinlso wich cnt net na ae te wernt ours pe ae gpa ei Cfeampor proes, SDA il arms aan pt of ich apis ema oo fekey tela oa wleh pert pj are seed For exe al profane at wrk th tpt png ad wl sey hve ode wn frm of SBA, hence tery bepran itera how wo Origins of cast-benefit analysis ee natty nares ny oe eee ae ee Seater epg ga Se Canter etek mtn neater awe Serene marae eae ne sone nd, whee teams poste oapae projet tony pet ee eater eet reciente eco 345 RT APPRAISAL, 's CBA work? ‘ne of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to weigh up the costs and bencits of «project to f= the benefits are greater than the eos and, if 0, by how mach. For example ‘B, Sweden, the local trafic authority recently built «bypass. This i rather ununal ‘ruse it Tor tram: the tram network has become cangested inthe clty centre, 0 4 «ing built around in order to provide fst Journey tines across town and to provide ey opporcanites, "to ases whether or not this scheme was worth buiting, the talc authority is tikely 16 through some of the following steps ‘ose one or moe alternative option against which oases the ram bypass scheme, The ‘option (let's al ie Option B) would! have bsen to build nothing, or make only minor -ovements tothe existing nctwork. We can cll he tram bypass Option A. one a length of tine ~ probably several decades ~ over which to asess the costs ad sits ofthe scheme, 4 predictive mode to caleulate the ely ridership during the whole evaluation period he tram ncework in Opsions A, Band any ther posible options that were subject -ation, From this, ae key revenue. the same predictive model to calculate total journey times onthe diferent options over sole eration period, (Option A, cakulte the journey ime savings likly to reel fram the project by taking ‘he total jonrney tm for ll passengers on Option A fromthe total journey time for ssengets on Option B (or possibly restrixog this part ofthe analysis to total journey to thote pasengers who would use Option A or Option B, and not to include the agers who are attracted tothe tram because the network i impor). stmt way, calculate journey time saeings on the road network renting from the tram ‘if people are predicted to transfer from car and/or bus to tam. ste construction, maintenance ad operating corts of the diferent options. sory the benefits (revenue plus journey time savings) from dhe costs for Option A to cut whether benoits exceed costs and i 0, by how much. ‘ummarise ia Figore 14.3, from the discussion above that there ae some hey elements to any SCBA. These ct appr period ansport project such aa new rd produces benefits in the year that tis built and over ‘earn the future. The CBA must decide haw many of thes future years willbe taken ‘count; conventionally, inthe UK, projocts were antl recently assessed over 030 year ol bat this is quite an arbitrary name, related to accounting conventions the cont and tothe accuracy of predictive modelling In 2006 the Departinent for Transport LUK increased the appraisal period to 60 years, As we wl es ler, however the length ‘me chosen forthe CRA can have crit impact onthe end real TRANSPORT APPRAISAL. ‘Sum ot wer coats ‘Sum of usr coats [eramer| = [snacs a ee Value of scheme Flowre 143. Principe of SCBA ft The benefits hat reassessed “These normally include changes in the costs to were of the transport network a a result ‘of a new project. For example, a new road oF rl line can often be expected to reliewe ‘congestion on existing routes. This sa change in ser costs ~ the journey time (a wer coe) ‘wold normally be expected tol, a east inthe short to medium term, “The wer cots at are moat typically inhaled in SCBA are 1s trove time (and variants of eg paring search dine) fe revenues (eg fre parking charges, rad user charges) 1 whic operating costs (fue) 1 accident cots creasingly), alse and air polation recone eps n monetary ws, gf Fo. The preamp of Seat Gc as on te wpe awe awl Bl as eof treme Ths he wer cn ene new sto (he eter ht nce te wy eueny ran be compred to ue othe od newer a witout the ne (mama, The eucon i er ets on thew ate compre the of te esr moaned tye SCBA The cpl (conan snl owas (6 opeaing Cramrunc) oma be wei ont eee ene = Frcing enl moling Toners pert for SCBA motel ht wl pret eo he wane tc sand Wav ner ost forthe if he me Arcadia the est ston Fetch motling spas sh be ested a ony The mt apt mpl a forcing spins ating te oxcome of appa oS ch cated n UK unk rnd ser op 194 Prior to the Ter iewat um at the ams fee ot woul ie dveting ron etch Ga the nme ha whieh ul ne he dona tor hat no ee 347 ANSPORT APPRAISAL I pole ta pal da dos pe tak cua of dnd tac may owen te bc a3 et ‘mount of induced taf less than that whi ich would be predicted by «fed tip max approach, the bent ef he sada ieikterimated by the ler approach, Unfortunately, the predctn af the emote of rs ens ann xy cue, nl ne ht es uth the soope es but if you are particularly intrested init you shuld read the SAC {fort Deprinnt fr Trspor, 199), " “ee set vale following station: your model gives a eps lve a prodicted benefit for the year 2010 of £25,000 and Rr Ze" a normaly the most giant heeft in SCA of wanport schemes (th and so the value of time used is ascltely siping yal aloes ey sop sy pene see hoon a Shy a rides be fhe on tories an a eidocel ics pied mayne gga ie ane Tie sf ine the dn COA rtd he 2 ead he tit om tv mya tf Erp, Te ewe doo nem “Ph ak pope ht pte ca -ANSPORT APPRAISAL, ‘alice ar then calealited Thy can also sometimes be more reliably derived from obsery- ing people's acts! baviour where they can choose between paying fora shorter journey oF taking a longer roste to avoid psying atoll. For example before 2008 the Kincardine Bridge across the west end ofthe Forth estuary in Scotland had no tl, whereas there was toll on the Forth Beige. Studying river route chor in such cates can help ws to under sand how drivers tae olf cst watt ine, and hence to derive vaes of tne, Siar stadies have been undertaken of crossings of che Severn from Britl to Wale, and the opening of the M6 Toll motorway around Birmingham tn 2005 also presents simile Pern sf ews ohne ep dened be eign ine snd in non-working time, Examples of trips that are made la working time include lorry rivers at work; bus drivers at works and people wi ate travelling to meetiags, or sles representatives, who are travelling in time during which they are elng paid by their employer. Al ther trips, including trips made to and from work where the travelers not being paid by their employer, are deemed to be made in non-work time, However, in UK ‘wansport appraisal practice, a recent innovation made in 2006 was to separate no ‘working time into two caegores: time for commuting trips, and ime spent treveling for all other types of trip. As shown in the EU research project EVATREN (2008), there are wide variations acos the EU inthe way tht dine i valued in SCBA (categories into hich $s divided mich as work and non-work, at well athe act! values that are apple). ‘The value of trips made in non-work time Islet than those mad in work time. This because thee it no market for worktime ~ it cannot be bought and old. Values of non. work time represent the opportunity cost of the time invalved, meaning the value tht people attach to time because of what they could do with tinstead of traveling (This of ‘course is related, indirectly, co wage rates and to the proportion of people who are employed.) In contrat, there is 4 market for working tne — employers buy it and ‘mployees lt all th time and so the values uted for people traveling n working Sine ‘ppronimateto average wage rates paid to there groups of people. Within the UK, deta fom {he on-going Nationa Travel Survey (se fr example DfT (2007) inthe references section for farther details are sed to devie the average pay sates of the average person making the verge tp on works busines by ci, bus and other modes, You can se the elect ofthis in “ible 2/1 ofthe Dis Tonspee Economies Note (2 below). you ate particulary interested In thi topo, you thou rend Mack el. 200%). ‘A number of asunptons normally support dhe wie of standard values of working tine fn SCBA of transport schemes. Without these asumptons it becomes more dificult js the use of averaged wage rater a proxies forthe value of working time for appa purposes. These assumptions ar: 1 That ime spent raeling cannot be used for working, therefore the time saved thnks to ‘ny investment ina transport scheme incestes the amount of productive work that person can do, As consequence thi increases output per employee /or saves the ‘employer money. With the advent of laptop computers and moblle hones ths astamp- ‘on is increasingly open to challenge ba far the moment remain pac, 349 SPORT APPRAISAL 1 That ume saved du toe investment in a transport scheme ls wed by an employe todo ‘more productive work ~ not to, for example, havea longs lunch break or to got home ‘arler because you can itn all your busines meetings in shoeter time! Siena het lini ther et or indies, heveen wales of ume nd age tes, you may be asking yourself why UK transport appraisal practice crea F carey es andar vues of ime right across the county, when wage cates difer markedly ona “tional bss. From the point of wew of economic theory ii actully sonsenal Yo we \eraed values oftime theory dete th the alte of tne savings ie restr those aes ‘here values of time ae higher, and hereforeinesiment a sheme ith sar tne svings would eof greater value nan aren of igh wage rts than lower wage tn Other countries ve les standard vais of tne thn used nthe UK in Sweden, or example, diferent values of une ar wed for ea pasengers taellng fs dst tandard class (Bristow and Nellthorp, 2000). * sec alain “he cont of an aceldent are sever: | Thecotf poling the cent nd cng wp th men | Telos efctnome pros fem he ners wh ae jedi + The casts of medical treatment me ‘he pun and fe ed on heii ne se em ‘he pc eg af» le ste emronmat feral ore wo tev by the rode of tanprt in gene od terre pols lng Yo py al improvements. = a >the UK, l hese varios actors tke nt socount in dering ies secoun in deriving aes of standard sed for eluting he cost of ol aecient: Thr mean that he UK ha on of the igh ales for acid svings used in Europe. Porigl and Greece hate vary low fen “Fecting in part thi lower rats of pay at eos lower willngnes to poy for ley provements, but mostly because tract vations ae bed rely cm uray >t These counties alo have some of th bighest rates of taf aecdents inthe Evese tion, perp partly bese the low ale of accent svngs make it latte to ‘vest safety improvement schemes ha in intr with higher aluaton forsee nthe UK, diferent auton ar used frat onlays al the underred bet on hf wings py se which ne dared, eo

    Potrebbero piacerti anche