Really good article on why people take transit

The fundamental attribution error in transportation choice

Original link: http://psystenance.com/2010/03/15/the-fundamental-attribution-error-in-transportation-choice/

Posted by Michael D on March 15, 2010

In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error refers to the tendency for people to over-attribute the behaviour of others to personality or disposition and to neglect substantial contributions of environmental or situational factors. (Actually it isn’t quite fundamental, as collectivist cultures exhibit less of this bias.) People are generally more aware of the situational influence on their own behaviour.

Thus, the fundamental attribution error in transportation choice: You choose driving over transit because transit serves your needs poorly, but Joe Straphanger takes transit because he’s the kind of person who takes transit. This is the sort of trap we find ourselves in when considering how to fund transportation, be it transit, cycling, walking, or driving.

Let’s say you live in a suburban subdivision. You can afford to drive, and it’s the only way you can quickly and easily get to your suburban office and to the store, and pick up your child from daycare. How do you interpret the decision of other people to take transit? Is it something about the quality of transit where they are? More likely you are going to attribute it to something about those people themselves — they’re poor, or they’re students, or they’re some kind of environmentalists. It’s difficult for people to realize the effect of the situation, e.g. one with frequent transit service to many destinations along a straight street that is easy to walk to. (I’d also point out that students, the poor, and even environmentalists do drive as well.)

Why do Europeans walk more, cycle more, and take transit more? Surely it is something about their culture? But this is an excessively dispositional attribution. I won’t deny that culture plays some role in transit use, especially in the decisions that lead to the creation of transportation infrastructure. But that infrastructure itself and the services provided on it are a strong influence on the transportation choices people make. The European infrastructure situation facilitates those other modes of travel much more so than does typical North American transportation infrastructure.

Where our infrastructure gets closer to the European model, so does the transportation mode choice, and conversely, where Europe is more like the North American model, Europeans turn out to drive more. If culture were really the driving force, you wouldn’t expect to see much fluctuation in transportation choice. But just as North America suburbanized and fell in love with the private automobile, so did Europe, albeit to a lesser extent. Only recently has Europe started again building new tram lines and clawing back space from the car. Copenhagen, now viewed as an urban cycling mecca, wasn’t always one. The rise of the car drastically lowered cycling there in the 1960s. Copenhagen owes its recent fame to restrictions on parking and to its dedicated cycling infrastructure, which have led to a cycling renaissance.

Consider how North American visitors travel in Europe. How do they get around London? The Underground. How do they get between London and Paris? The train. How do they get around Amsterdam or Copenhagen? Quite possibly they rent a bike. When in Rome, they do as the Romans do: they walk, take the subway or tram, or maybe ride a Vespa. What do European tourists do in North America? Generally they rent a car, because that’s the only realistic way to travel in most places. There are exceptions, of course: tourists to New York City or Washington, D.C. take the subway because that’s the most convenient way to travel in those cities.

We’re not so different from tourists in how we choose to get around. We may have our own preferences, but the biggest influence on our choice of transportation mode is what modes are available to us and how useful they are. Above all this is determined not by culture and personality but by the kind of infrastructure and transportation service provided.

Addendum: Jarrett Walker has some great commentary on this post at Human Transit. More context was given in the Streetsblog write-up.

traffic and pedestrian fatality rates in Canada

January 27, 2010

How pedestrians, cyclists and drivers can get along a little better

By CBC News
CBC News

Drivers, pedestrians and cyclists can all take some simple precautions to reduce the risk that they will be involved in an accident. While road fatalities have steadily declined in Canada since the early 1970s, the number of pedestrian deaths has remained at close to 400 for the past decade.

It's war out there as an ever-increasing number of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists compete for space on the world's roads.

Motor vehicle-related fatalities have been a fact of life since Irish scientist Mary Ward fell under the wheels of her cousin's steam-powered automobile in August 1869. She fell out of the vehicle as it hit a sharp curve - long before cars came with seat belts, air bags or even doors and drivers were distracted by GPS devices, cellphones or hot coffee spilling in their laps.

Thirty years later, Henry Bliss stepped off a trolley in New York City, turned to help the woman he was accompanying and was hit by a taxi. He died later in hospital, becoming the first pedestrian to be killed by a motor vehicle.

The World Health Organization estimates that more than a million people die each year on the roads. In Canada, 2,889 people were killed in traffic accidents in 2006. More than 1,500 were drivers of cars or trucks, approximately 635 were passengers in cars or trucks, 375 were pedestrians and 87 were cyclists.

While the number of Canadians killed on the roads has been falling steadily since the early 1970s, the percentage of fatal accidents involving pedestrians killed has remained around 13 per cent. According to Transport Canada:

• 419 pedestrians were killed in 1999.
• 335 pedestrians were killed in 2001.
• 374 pedestrians were killed in 2006.

In the city of Toronto, eight pedestrians were killed in the first 26 days of 2010 compared to 31 for all of 2009. Six others died during the same period of January in the suburbs surrounding the city.

Pedestrian fatalities
Vancouver (2007)	13
Edmonton (2007)	13
Toronto (2007)	23
Montreal (2007)	24
New York City (2006)	157
Los Angeles (2006)	99
Chicago (2006)	48

Most pedestrian and cyclist deaths occur in urban areas, often during rush hour or at night. Most victims - more than 60 per cent - are male.

Gil Penalosa, transportation activist and the executive director of the agency 8-80 Cities [http://8-80cities.org/index.html], has been vocal in trying to make cities safer for pedestrians and cyclists.

Penalosa has advised organizations around the world on how to reduce the rate of accidents in urban areas. Among his recommendations are:

• Create speed bumps and more signs to increase driver awareness.
• Install more lights on city sidewalks.
• Ban right turns on red lights.
• Reduce speed limits.
• Give pedestrians a five-second head start over cars on green lights.

Worst countries for pedestrian fatalities
Country	Population	Year	Total road traffic fatalities	Pedestrian fatalities (% of all traffic fatalities)
Peru	27,902,760	2007	3,510	78
Mozambique	21,396,916	2007	1,502	68
El Salvador	6,857,328	2007	1,493	63
Ukraine	46,205,382	2007	9,921	56
Ethiopia	83,099,190	2006	2,517	55
Statistics from other major countries
Russian Federation	142,498,532	2007	33,308	36
China	1,336,317,116	2006	89,455	26
UK	60,768,946	2006	3,298	21
Mexico	106,534,880	2007	17,003	21
Germany	82,599,471	2007	4,949	14
Canada	32,876,047	2006	2,889	13
Australia	20,743,179	2007	1,616	13
France	61,647,375	2007	4,620	12
U.S.A.	305,826,246	2006	42,642	11

Source:World Health Organization [http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241563840_eng.pdf]

Angelo DiCicco, general manager of Young Drivers of Canada for the greater Toronto region, says changing the number on a sign won't change anything unless speeding laws are better enforced.

"You have to change the driving culture in our society," DiCicco said. "The best way to do that is through education, making the driver more aware of pedestrians and cyclists."

DiCicco notes that an advanced green for pedestrians and cyclists could be helpful because it would make drivers more aware of - and better able to see - others on the road.

[For the interactive CBC page go to http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/01/27/f-road-safety-pedestrians-drivers.html) ]

drivers complain

[this from 2007, i like the suggestion that drivers complain all the time, bad roads, and then construction...]

Mountain mayhem! TheSpec.com - Local - Mountain mayhem!

Extensive road construction leaves drivers feeling they have nowhere to turn

Carmela Fragomeni
The Hamilton Spectator

(Oct 5, 2007)

Hurry up and wait. That's the mantra for motorists as Hamilton ramps up its road construction on the central Mountain.

Lime Ridge Mall is all but cut off. Major arteries -- Upper Wentworth, Garth, Stone Church, Mohawk and West 5th -- have all been torn up. Even the Wentworth exit from the Linc has been shut down at times.

The delays are driving motorists nuts as they try to find alternate routes -- and end up sitting in long lines. Rush hour is mayhem.

City staff say the construction is needed, and yes, all at once. These are major roads needing major work as soon as it can be done and with the roads budget being slashed next year, it's important to do the repairs now.

They say drivers can't have it both ways -- complain about the condition of the road and then also complain when it's getting fixed.

Some Mountain residents and drivers disagree with the city starting a project like the one by the mall before finishing another.

"I don't know what the urgency was to get it done while we're tearing up everything else," says resident Tony Tirone. "It's frustrating, time consuming and it just seems unnecessary."

cfragomeni@thespec.com

905-526-3392

http://thespec.com/article/259634

vanishing traffic

Roadblocks ahead

• 24 January 1998 by Mick Hamer
• Magazine issue 2118. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
• For similar stories, visit the Cars and Motoring Topic Guide

CLOSING roads cuts traffic, according to a report due out next month. The study, commissioned by London Transport and the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, suggests that the computer models used by urban transport planners produce the wrong answers.

The report is also bound to lead to calls for the British government's White Paper on transport, due later this year, to include a radical programme of pedestrianisation and expanded public transport.

Computer models used by transport planners effectively assume that closing one road moves traffic elsewhere, causing congestion. But researchers led by Phil Goodwin of University College London, the government's adviser on transport policy, found that this is not what happens. The team analysed 60 cases worldwide where roads had been closed-or their ability to carry traffic significantly reduced.

Goodwin's draft report shows that on average 20 per cent of the traffic that used a road seems to evaporate after it has been closed. In some cases up to 60 per cent vanishes. The examples studied by Goodwin's team were mostly in urban areas. However, the same arguments may also apply away from major cities.

"There is more scope for traffic restraint," says Steve Atkins of London Transport, who was involved in commissioning the study. He described the results at the Institution of Highways and Transportation in London earlier this week.

The report is the logical extension of the finding that building new roads generates traffic, accepted in 1994 by the government's Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment. "If extra road capacity generates more traffic, then the closure of roads is bound to cause less traffic," says Keith Buchan, a London-based transport consultant who advises the government on traffic forecasts.

Many of the road closures studied by Goodwin's team were forced on the planners. In the summer of 1994, for instance, structural problems forced the City of London to close Tower Bridge temporarily. It is a good example of "traffic evaporation", says Joe Weiss, the City's assistant engineer. "Three years later the traffic had still not returned to its original level."

One of the best documented cases is London's Hammersmith Bridge, which has been closed to all traffic except buses and cyclists since February 1997 after routine tests found that the bridge was not strong enough to cope with its load of 30 000 vehicles a day. London Transport surveyed people using the bridge a few days before it closed, and were able to contact the same individuals in the following weeks. Of the commuters who drove to work across the bridge at the beginning of 1997, 21 per cent no longer drive to work (see Figure). Again, congestion in neighbouring areas has not markedly increased.

But where does the traffic go? The report reveals that the commuting habits of individuals can vary enormously, even when their journeys are not disrupted by road closures. On different days, the same person may drive, use public transport or work from home. This flexibility allows people to cope with road closures.

Experts suggest that the report could have an immediate impact on policy. "It's quite interesting for the proposed pedestrianisation of Parliament Square and Trafalgar Square," says Hugh Collis of the transport consultants Ove Arup. "They should just do it."

-30-

[The report has been around for over a decade, but I get the feeling it would make traffic "planners" nervous here...]

The article is from http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15721180.200-roadblocks-ahead.html

Walkscore site

This likely isn't a perfect indicator, but I think that it's a useful tool when assessing a neighbourhood: http://www.walkscore.com/

building past the budget lines

*CATCH News – **January 21, 2010*
*Infrastructure deficit: What was said*

This week the Public Works committee formally received a report http://www.hamilton.ca/CityDepartments/PublicWorks/CapitalPlanning/Asset+Management/SOTI/2009+SOTI+Report.htm> on the state of the city’s infrastructure warning that the spending shortfall for roads, pipes, facilities and other structures exceeds $150 million a year. That led to the following exchange between downtown councillor Bob Bratina and the general manager of public works, Gerry Davis, transcribed by CATCH.

Bratina: Gerry, how much does it cost to maintain a lane kilometre ?

Davis: Summer and winter included, it’s approximately $10,000 per lane kilometre.

Bratina: How many lane kilometres have we added in the last ten years, roughly?

Davis: We’ve added, I would say, probably upwards 500-700 lane kilometres.

Bratina: A year, on average?
Davis: On average about 50 or 70 a year, Rick? So 60.

Bratina: So if we can’t afford to maintain these lane kilometres of road, why do we add them? It begs the other question. It’s a bit rhetorical but we’re providing – do the development charges that we apply to development recover the costs?

Davis: Through the growth component, when a developer – they’ll pay for the hard services, the capital cost, primarily. There may be a local component – roads, water, sewers. And then that road is handed over to the municipality to maintain. And other services are then required by the municipality – and that’s public works, policing, fire. But what happens in areas – we have assessment growth generated by the property taxes. That doesn’t come specifically to the police or fire or public works for waste collection, road maintenance, but there is a growth in revenues. I’m not saying it covers everything but that is, the capital cost is, primarily paid by the developer.

Bratina: Okay, so the evidence is that this so-called growth isn’t working because we’re $145 million a year short. So who should pay for that? And what I’m suggesting is that we’re building cheap houses for people who work in other communities. We hear this constantly shoved down our throat about how many people leave the city every day to go to work somewhere else. Well that’s because somebody who’s got a job in Peel can’t afford, at his wages a house there, so they get a nice taxpayer-subsidized house in Hamilton.
A good example is Maple Leaf , because the average, the 900 or so on the production line, mostly live in Hamilton, because they can’t afford on the wages they get to live there.
So we have to consider as a council, and get the accurate information. It’s fine to say well we’re going to get all these new taxes from all these new houses. There’s your proof that we’re not getting the money back. And if you look at a growing community – like let’s say Alberta – Edmonton and the oil boom – they’re desperately short of houses. And there’s new jobs, there’s new people moving in. They’ve got to build houses. We don’t. We don’t have all these new jobs being created. All we’re doing is subsidizing residences for people who work elsewhere.


CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) updates use transcripts and/or public documents to highlight information about Hamilton civic affairs that is not generally available in the mass media. Detailed reports of City Hall meetings can be reviewed at www.hamiltoncatch.org . You can receive all CATCH free updates by sending an email to info@HamiltonCATCH.org

electric cars shock to gas tax

---

Susan Tusa, Detroit Free Press

Tax cash cow turning a corner? TheSpec.com - Business - Tax cash cow turning a corner?

Electric cars will zap fuel revenue stream

Ross Marowits
The Canadian Press

MONTREAL (Jan 20, 2010)

The eventual popularity of electric cars will force governments to consider alternative revenues as they prepare to wean themselves off fuel taxes, industry observers say.

Canada's three levels of government share about $15 billion in taxes from fuel annually. But some of that revenue could be at risk if consumers turn en masse to plug-in electric or hybrid vehicles.

"What is being talked about is taxes on electricity, taxes on other modes of transportation like highway tolls," said Al Cormier of Electric Mobility Canada.

But the founder of the organization that promotes electric cars says taxation shouldn't be a major issue for at least five years. It will depend on fuel prices and electric car purchases.

The industry has forecast that there will be 500,000 plug-in electric cars in Canada by 2018. That's a small fraction of the 20 million vehicles on the country's roads today.

HEC business school professor Pierre-Olivier Pineau said governments have to rethink their tax intake as society looks to rid itself of its oil consumption habit. He said the most likely option is to implement carbon taxes or increase ones already in place in B.C. and Quebec.

Part of the government's tax solution might also involve charging higher rates to recharge a car than for residential uses.

Existing networks only charge one price for each household.

But "smart grids" that could be available in a decade would permit variances.

"It's becoming a buzzword and people think it will change a lot of things," he said.

Growing interest in electric cars has Canada's provincial and municipal electric utilities conducting pilot projects to get ready.

Hydro-Quebec recently announced a partnership with Mitsubishi to test the performance of 50 plug-in i-MiEV electric cars in the town of Boucherville over the next three years.

The $4.5-million project provides the public utility with another window on the electric car market. It is also testing a Ford Escape hybrid and a hybrid pickup truck, while batteries developed by its TM4 subsidiary are being tested overseas in vehicles being developed by Indian carmaker Tata.

Spokesperson Stacey Masson said the Mitsubishi project is part of the energy giant's overall strategy and will help it evaluate the impact of electric vehicles on its vast network.

B.C. Hydro launched its own trial of the cars in November and is also awaiting delivery of the Nissan Leaf in 2011.

Toronto and Calgary are also looking to test electric cars.

The vehicles are seen as part of the solution to global warming as they emit no greenhouse gases.

http://www.thespec.com/

---