From our Auckland correrspondent Darren Davis:
.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Transport has done a bunch of work on future demand which, as far as I know, is the first time a Government has been prepared to fundamentally challenge the view that traffic growth will continue unabated indefinitely.
It included the following typical graph beloved of urbanists showing how traffic projections have been proven wrong only to be recalibrated form the new base to show that the resumption of traffic growth is just around the corner. The difference this time is that the Ministry of Transport is using this graph to demonstrate how wrong past predictions have been, rather than the usual “traffic growth is just around the corner” scenario. Of note, since its peak in 2004, light passenger vehicle kilometres travelled per person (VKT per capita) in New Zealand has fallen by 8%, whereas in other western countries, VKT per capita has remained static.
“Figure 2 illustrates how our traditional forecasting models have consistently overestimated demand.”
This is clear in the following information from the Ministry of Transport’s website future demand section (my emphasis).
“New Zealanders drive nearly 30 billion kilometres each year in their cars, vans, utes and SUVs. The road network also carries 70 percent of all o
f our freight . As a nation we have built and continue to maintain a network of roads to allow us to make these trips.
The road network is worth more than $60 billion and costs more than $1 billion a year to maintain. We are planning to invest $10 billion over the next ten years to change the shape of the network to improve its quality and capacity.
This would be relatively straightforward if we knew how demand would change. The challenge we face, however, is there have recently been changes to the patterns of demand for personal travel. From 1980 to 2004 we saw annual increase in demand in the order of three percent per year. This highlighted the importance of tackling congestion and improving safety and gave us assurance revenue would grow to cover the costs of a growing network. From 2005 to 2013 total demand only grew by 0.25 percent per year.
We now face an uncertain future. We cannot be certain demand will return to pre-2005 levels of growth nor can we be certain it will remain flat. This means we can no longer rely on traditional forecasting models alone to help us to decide how to invest. Figure 2 illustrates how our traditional forecasting models have consistently overestimated demand.”
The Ministry of Transport’s commissioned work developed four possible scenarios (graphic attached) only one of which assumed a resumption of growth in the demand to travel with the courageous assumption that “New Zealand is awash with cheap energy, which powers rapid growth” but which also that demand pricing is in place.
“The conclusions of our work were that:
When we think about creating a thriving New Zealand we should recognise we are trying to improve access not just mobility. There are three different ways we can achieve this: with good transport systems; with good spatial planning; or by improving digital access. We need to integrate our thinking across these three areas to achieve the optimal outcome.
To reduce the uncertainty we face we should seek to better understand the factors affecting the changing patterns of demand and refresh our demand models accordingly. We should look both at social trends and also speed in development, take-up and impact of new technologies.
To ensure resilience of the access system we develop for New Zealand we should seek to build in flexibility where we can. This will allow us to respond more quickly to changing patterns of demand and reduce the likelihood that we will make investments which will become unnecessary.
We need to recognise that the investment decisions we make will shape patterns of demand and not just respond to them. We should move away from the approach of seeking to simply predict future demand and then provide for it. We should instead debate the sort of access we want and decide how to invest to support the future.”
While this advice is not official Government policy, information in it was included in official Ministry of Transport briefing material to the incoming Minister of Transport. It is interesting to note the differences between this work and what is at least implicitly assumed in the BC on the Move consultation which ends this Friday, December 12.
The full final report is available at the New Zealand Ministry of Transport’s website here http://transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Our-Work/Documents/fd-final-report.pdf and a bunch of other information, including links to summary and background reports is available at http://transport.govt.nz/ourwork/keystrategiesandplans/strategic-policy-programme/future-demand/
Excessive personal vehicle use has many undesirable effects, but only selecting articles and research which support one’s bias is blind. Way too early to claim post-motordom:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/nissan-u-s-sales-rise-13-in-october-1415013843
True, but buying a car and driving one are two rather different activities.
I live in a walkable community and the whole family uses active transportation and transit much of the time, but I own a car because there are some trips where the alternatives simply cannot compete. In the last decade our needs have evolved and the car we bought 10 years ago is no longer a good fit. If we could afford it we would replace it with a different type of vehicle.
So I’m not at all surprised to see automobile sales rising in the years since the recession. More people can afford to adapt their vehicle(s) to their changing needs than could do so in 2008.
As David said, ownership and use are very different things. Another example: http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/bike-sales-outstrip-cars/2007/01/04/1167777207692.html and http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/143181-bicycle-sales-boom-us-amid-rising-gas-prices.html
Yeah, it’s funny how much in denial the industries are in. Well, at least their public image. Behind closed doors I’m sure they know what the real trends are and are likely interfering in the public process of alternatives.
Last summer I was with a friend and we were biking down Terminal Avenue where they were building a new Mercedes dealership. My friend said “Still trying to make a go of it, are we?”.
A cute comment but facetious and inaccurate. Daimler Group sales for Canada hit a record high in 2013. Apparently they are making quite a go of it.
Indeed in this posts subject country, New Zealand, car sales broke a 30 year record in 2013.
Yeah, I’m sure they’ll do just fine.
Some shaky data to base decisions on. There are so many different variables that may ir may not be constants.Calculation of VKT is very vague. Samples of odometer readings when cars are resold. Especially now when the average Canadian car is 10 years old. As the USA finally shakes off the 2008 meltdown expect to see miles traveled climb especially now that oil prices are plummeting.
Interesting comments. Yes, new vehicle sales are at a recent high but that is for the small part of vehicles purchased new in New Zealand – and our economy is (finally) growing strongly and with strong growth in housing prices fuelling a “wealth effect” leading to increased personal indebtedness, including car purchases. But the vast majority of vehicles purchased in New Zealand are imported second-hand from Japan. This flood of Japanese imports has collapsed the price of second-hand cars which, by global standards, are extremely cheap. In spite of these cheap cars, per capita VKT has dropped by 8% since 2004. So there is a big distinction between car ownership and car use as evidenced by countries such as Germany which have similar car ownership rates to New Zealand but much lower rates of car use. Japan is an extreme example of this and in fact a key attractiveness of Japanese imported second-hand cars is their extremely low kms. It’s not uncommon for a six-year old imported car from Japan to have less than 20,000km on the odometer.
Fuel prices have dropped to less than $1/litre in Fraser Valley (outside Metro Van fuel tax area).
Reblogged this on Adventures in Transitland! and commented:
My piece on the Pricetags blog on some innovative work commissioned by the New Zealand Ministry of Transport questioning whether traffic growth is every likely to resume.
Regardless if traffic is growing or declining the amount of space for more highways is NOT increasing. Constantly expanding highway infrastructure (i.e. 10-lane Port Mann, new Massey crossing, etc) is a BAD idea and a waste of our tax dollars. More busses and trains is good for commuters, both on transit and in cars.