Improving Freight Transportation Policy in the Netherlands
Given these considerations, the researchers redefined the goal of the study and expanded its policy scope beyond mode-shift options.
It was also apparent that there were likely to be many policy possibilities, and that preferences among these policies would depend on the relative importance placed on their effects. For example, people concerned about environmental effects are likely to evaluate policy options differently from people concerned about economic effects. Thus, it would be necessary to assign various weights to the negative impacts, and these would need to be taken into consideration when developing alternative strategies.
While the Dutch had already developed various computer models of freight traffic and its impacts, none were sufficiently comprehensive to encompass the full range of possibilities. So the researchers developed a policy analysis model that enabled them to assess policy options extending out to the year 2015 for several alternative economic scenarios. They identified nearly 200 tactics that might be combined into various strategies for improving freight transport, screened them, and evaluated the effects of the remaining ones on a broad range of performance measures, including noise, safety, emissions, congestion, costs, added value to the economy, and employment. The tactics evaluated fell into three broad categories:
- Direct mitigation tactics. These tactics focused on reducing one or more of
the negative impacts at their source--for example, building cleaner diesels to
reduce emissions, using speed limiters on trucks to reduce emissions and
- Transport efficiency tactics. These tactics focused on using the truck
and transport infrastructure more efficiently--for example, rewarding truck
drivers for more efficient driving, using larger trucks.
- Mode shift tactics. These tactics were designed to stimulate the shift of
freight off the roads and onto other modes of transport--for example,
developing new waterways and rail spurs, designating freight-only rail lines.
The most cost-effective strategies for mitigating the negative effects of freight transport depend heavily on improving operational efficiency. The figure above shows one of many strategies the EAC developed through various combinations of nearly 200 tactics designed to improve freight operations. Because this strategy includes efficiency tactics at the top of its list, the costs associated with its implementation would increase only at the very margin of improvement, when other tactics are called into play.
Policy ConclusionsUsing the policy analysis model, the researchers combined various tactics and weightings to produce a wide range of strategies for improving freight transport. Their use of the model led to a number of significant findings.
The most important tactics focus on improvements in transport efficiency. Efficiency tactics improve many negative impacts and by their nature tend to save money. For example, reducing the total number of kilometers traveled affects all impact measures and also reduces investment and operational costs. Two of the most promising tactics in this area are to permit 50 tonne trucks in the European Union and to use telecommunications to improve routing of trucks and provide real-time planning of pickup and delivery (thereby reducing empty trips and partial loads). In addition, many of these tactics do not rely on future technological developments; they can be implemented immediately. Finally, these tactics call for the involvement of many stakeholders, so the burden of implementation does not fall on a single agency or group.
Some direct mitigation tactics can effectively complement efficiency improvements. Although direct mitigation tactics can sometimes lead to dramatic improvements in certain negative impacts, they generally rank lower in cost-effectiveness than efficiency tactics because they focus on only a few impacts and have net positive costs. The importance of these tactics (e.g., using quieter tires, using electric vans in urban areas) lies in the fact that they can fill gaps among improvements provided by efficiency tactics by focusing on particular impacts. The costs of these tactics might be made more manageable by targeting the largest contributors to an impact. For example, they could be selectively implemented to target urban vehicles, international (or national) trucking, or specific commodities.
Mode-shift tactics are not the best solution for the Dutch. Mode-shift tactics are either not very cost-effective or have little effect. Waterway and rail improvements are relatively expensive, and they cannot realize much mode shift for a number of reasons. First, the average distance traveled by national freight is less than 50 kilometers, and rail or waterway transport would usually require truck transport to and away from these centers. Second, service characteristics of these modes are unfavorable to modern business practices. Third, mode-shift tactics that attempt to focus on the international movement of goods affect a relatively small quantity of transported goods, because these goods are already shipped mostly by water. It is possible, nonetheless, that better modal transfer facilities and attention to improving the freight servicing characteristics of waterways and rail will make these modes more attractive in the future.
Reducing the negative effects of road transport is everyone's business. Freight transport systems have only a limited ability to reduce the negative effects of road transport on such elements as the environment, congestion, and noise. Relative to passenger transport, freight is responsible for only a small part of the problem. Thus, significant mitigation of road transport impacts must include attention to passenger transportation as well as freight. Also, the government cannot reduce the negative impacts of road transport all by itself. Businesses, railway, inland shipping, passengers, and truckers must do their parts as well.
Use of Methods and FindingsStudy results are being incorporated into the policymaking process. The Ministry is using the study's findings in its current negotiations with freight transport organizations concerning ways to mitigate negative impacts on the environment. The Ministry has also used the model developed in the study to determine which tactics to pursue
further and to consider transportation issues in the larger context of the European Union, most notably in its recent discussions with Parliament about developing a new freight rail line from Rotterdam to Germany (the Betuweline). The government is looking into the possibility of applying the same general methodology to other segments of the transportation system, such as passenger and maritime transport.
RAND research briefs summarize research that has been more fully documented elsewhere. This research brief describes work performed for the Netherlands Ministry of Transport, Public Works, and Water Management by RAND's European-American Center for Policy Analysis (EAC); it is documented in FORWARD--Freight Options for Road, Water, and Rail for the Dutch: Final Report, by Richard J. Hillestad, Warren E. Walker, Manuel J. Carrillo, Joseph G. Bolten, Patricia G.J. Twaalfhoven, and Odette A.W.T. van de Riet, MR-736-EAC/VW, 1996, 224 pp., ISBN: 0-8330-2416-7. A brief overview of the project is provided in FORWARD--Freight Options for Road, Water, and Rail for the Dutch: Executive Summary, by Richard J. Hillestad, Warren E. Walker, Manuel J. Carrillo, Joseph G. Bolten, Patricia G.J. Twaalfhoven, and Odette A.W.T. van de Riet, MR-739-EAC/VW, 1996, 29 pp., ISBN: 0-8330-2418-3. Abstracts of RAND documents may be viewed on the World Wide Web (). RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve public policy through research and analysis; its publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors.
All rights reserved. Permission is given to duplicate this on-line document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.Published 1996 by RAND
RAND's Home Page