PUTTING TRANSPORT INTO

CLIMATE POLICY AGENDA

World Conference on Transport Research Society (WCTRS)

http://www.wctrs.org/

November 2012

URGENT!

There is an urgent need to involve transport as a major sector in the climate change negotiation. WCTRS could

help UNFCCC and the IPCC to promote this process.

WCTRS (World Conference on Transport Research Society)

The WCTRS covers multi-modal, multi-disciplinary, and multi-sectoral fields. The

members span almost all aspects of transportation research, planning, policy and

management. The World Conferences held every 3 years mirror this breadth of

interests. 67 countries are represented in the WCTRS, with more than 1,500

members.

President: Anthony May (University of Leeds, UK)

Chair of Scientific Committee: Yoshitsugu Hayashi (Nagoya University, Japan)

WCTRS SIG11 (Special Interest Group11) - Transport and the Environment

The SIG11 aims at seeking ways to establish effective mechanisms for mitigating environmental

degradation due to transport in the international domain. The following topics are researched: a)

Comparing the emission of greenhouse gas and air pollution between countries and cities, b)

Diagnosing transport system and its resulting global and local environmental degradation and

prescribing countermeasure policies, and developing an evaluation system of their performance, c)

Providing scientific instruments for evaluation of international mechanism for environmentally

sustainable transport and the methods to collect the necessary financial resources.

Contact:

Hayashi and Kato Laboratory, International Center for Sustainable

Transport and Cities (SUSTRAC), Graduate School of

Environmental Studies, Nagoya University, Japan

Address: 464-8603, C1-2, Nagoya, Japan

TEL: +81-52-789-2773

E-mail: tracc@genv.nagoya-u.ac.jp

Website: http://www.sustrac.env.nagoya-u.ac.jp/en/

Global Environment Research Fund (S-6-5), Ministry of Environment,

Japan

Graduate School of Environmental Studies & Global COE Program “From

Earth Science to Basic and Clinical Environmental Studies”,

Nagoya University, Japan

Sponsored by:

- Recommendations from WCTRS to COP18 -

Yoshitsugu Hayashi, Kazuki Nakamura, Kei Ito, Aoto Mimuro,

Nagoya University, Japan

Editors:

Trip Frequency

Built-up Area Public Transport Development

Fuel Economy

Traffic Congestion

Road Development

Urban Compactness

× ×

Travel Demand Car Dependency Technology(Travel Distance)

GDP GDP

(CO2 Emission Factor)

GDP

(Modal Split)

＝

CO2 emission

GDP

AVOID SHIFT IMPROVEMitigation

Car Ownership

LEV Share

CUTE

Matrix

Strategies

Avoid Shift ImproveReduce transport

demand

Reduce emission

per unit transported

Reduce emissions

per kilometer

Instr

um

en

ts

TechnologicalTransit Oriented

Development (TOD)

Integrated Public

Transport System

Highly Competitive

Mass Transit System

Intermodal Freight

Transport

Low Emission Vehicle

(LEV)

Alternative Energy

Advanced Infrastructure

Technology

Logistic Efficiency

RegulatoryCompact City

Mixed Land Use

Bus/Tram Priorities

Parking Regulation

Traffic Access Control

Emission Standard

Top-Runner Program

Informational

Tele-Work

Smart Choice on

Workplace and School

Awareness Campaign for

Public Transport Use

Eco-Drive

Intelligent

Transportation System

Labeling of Vehicle

Performance

Economic

Fuel Tax

Road Pricing

Relocation Subsidy

Car Registration Tax

Fuel Tax

Road Pricing

LEV Preferential Tax

Fuel Tax

Time

CO

2

Em

issio

n / p

erso

n

Developed

Countries

Developing

Countries Leap-frog

Sharp

Reduction

Business as usual Expected trend

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045

Other Africa

South Africa

Other LA

Brazil

Middle East

India

Other Asia

China

Eastern Europe

Asian TE

Russia

Korea

Japan

Australia and NZ

Other OECD Europe

UK

Italy

Germany

France

USA

Mexico

Canada

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Billio

n V

ehicles

Source: Lee Schipper

1

18

Car Ownership Trend

Transport

23%

Other Sector

77%

Transport

Other Sector

?%

2007 2050

Can Developing Countries Take a Leap-Frog Pathway?

Upgrading Transport to a Key Sector

The Vicious Circle in Urban Transport

1 2

● The mechanism of CO2 emissions from transport can be decomposed into various elements of land-use

transport systems and technologies. While economic growth is likely to change these elements in a way

that causes more emissions, mitigation options need to be introduced to control the change in each element

and hence to achieve a low-carbon transport system.

● In the pioneering work of the WCTRS project “Comparative study on Urban Transport and the

Environment (CUTE)”, a matrix of mitigation options was developed (the CUTE Matrix). The strategies for

low-carbon transport have 3 components: AVOID (reduce unnecessary transport demand), SHIFT (reduce

emissions per unit transported), IMPROVE (reduce emissions per kilometer). Each strategy should involve

measures that include technological, regulatory, informational and economic instruments - as seen in the

matrix below.

Mitigation Options: the CUTE Matrix

Reference : WCTRS and Institute for Transport Policy Studies (2004) Urban Transport and the Environment: An International Perspective. Elsevier Ltd.

● According to IEA’s forecasts,

China, India and other Asian

developing countries are expected to

have significant growth in car

ownership, an 18-fold increase from

2007 to 2050.

● The transport sector accounts for

23% of CO2 emissions (2007),

amounting to 6.6 Gt-CO2, and it is the

fastest growing sector for carbon

emissions. Given the expected

dramatic growth in car ownership in

developing countries, the influence of

the transport sector on climate

change must not be neglected.

Per

Ca

pit

a G

HG

Em

issi

on

Low Carbon SocietyBackcastingDeveloping Countries

Leap-frog

Developed Countries

(source: Hayashi)

Sharp reduction

● To avoid the BAU pathway, which may

lead to catastrophe, a “Sharp Reduction”

strategy should be implemented in

developed countries, and a “Leap-Frog”

strategy should be adopted in developing

countries.

3 4

Vision in Urban Transport

● Low-carbon urban transport systems can be designed with a policy package among measures for land-

use transport planning (AVOID & SHIFT) and advancement of transport technologies (IMPROVE). It is

important to develop hierarchical land-use transport systems to meet long-term changes in daily travel

demand, particularly the increasing local travel demand resulting from an ageing society.

A Necessary Policy Package

Early Implementation of Extensive Measures is Needed

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045

Do Nothing

Mitigation Scenario

● The level of implementation of each

strategy (AVOID, SHIFT, IMPROVE) to

achieve a 70% reduction in CO2 emissions

from urban transport by 2050, as compared

to the 2005 level, was examined for all urban

areas in Thailand. The result showed that,

even if all passenger vehicles are electrified

(IMPROVE) and the urban expansion rate is

reduced by 10 % from a Do-Nothing

scenario (AVOID), large-scale development

of trunk public transport would be needed,

which amounts to 4,420 km of railways, 220

km of LRT (Light Rail Transit) and 1,260 km

of BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) (SHIFT).

● Accordingly, it is important that policies to

apply new technologies and change the

land-use transport system are implemented

extensively and urgently as a package in

order to develop a low-carbon urban

transport system in Asian developing

countries.

CO

2 e

mis

sio

ns fro

m u

rba

n p

asse

nger

ca

rs

an

d m

ass tra

nsit in T

ha

iland (

Mt/

ye

ar)

A Hierarchically Connected Compact City

Para-transit Bus Rapid Transit

Transit Oriented

Development(TOD)

Compact city with well-

connected hierarchical

urban centers

Seamless &

hierarchical transport

system

Electric Vehicle

Fuel Cell VehicleSHIFT

AVOID

Low-carbon vehicles

and transport

operation system

IMPROVE

Vision in Inter-regional Transport

Mainstreaming Rail and Water

De-centralization Reduces More CO2

● Low-carbon inter-regional transport systems can be designed based on rail/water oriented inter-modal

transport corridors (SHIFT), supported by strategic domestic development patterns (AVOID) and low-

carbon vessel/vehicle technologies (IMPROVE).

● The impacts of spatial development patterns on the economy and CO2 emissions from inter-regional

transport in Thailand were examined. The result showed that, while the anticipated mono-centric

development, concentrating development more in Bangkok, would generate further CO2 emissions

through inter-regional trading, a change to poly-centric development would achieve CO2 mitigation.

Desirable Domestic Development Patterns

0 1000km

(US$)

30,000 3,000 2,000 1,500 1,000

GDP/人口(2008年）

International inter-regional transport Domestic inter-regional transport

②Inland corridors of low-carbon transport

①Coastal corridors of low-carbon transport

GDP/pop(2008)

６

５２

４ ３

７

１

1. Bangkok2. Central3. Eastern4. Western5. North Eastern6. Northern7. Southern

Promoting multiple growth poles

Mono-centric development Poly-centric development

CO

2 m

itig

atio

n

(%)

pro

du

ctio

n

(%)

21 3 4 5 6 7 Total 21 3 4 5 6 7 Total

+25%

+211% +58%

-42%

CO2

CO2

production production

5 6

Weak Supportive Financial Mechanism

Only 18 Projects for Transport in 5,716 CDM Projects (2012)

Proposers

Sectoral Scope Registered

Projects

Energy industries 4106

Energy distribution 0

Energy demand 51

Manufacturing industries 265

Chemical industries 86

Construction 0

Transport 18

Mining/mineral production 61

Metal production 9

Fugitive emissions from fuels (solid, oil and gas) 183

Fugitive emissions from production and

consumption of halocarbons and sulphur

hexafluoride

29

Solvent use 0

Waste handling and disposal 710

Afforestation and reforestation 40

Agriculture 158

Energy industries

71.8%

Energy distribution

0.0%

Energy demand

0.9%

Manufacturing industries

4.6%

Chemical industries

1.5%

Construction 0.0%

Transport 0.3%

Mining/mineral

production 1.1%

Metal production

0.2%

Fugitive emissions from fuels (solid, oil and gas)

3.2%

Fugitive emissions

from production

and consumption

of halocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride

0.5%

Solvent use 0.0%

Waste handling

and disposal 12.4%

Afforestation and

reforestation 0.7%

Agriculture 2.8%

Transport

0.3%

CO2 mitigation effect from green transport takes a long

time. However, the current carbon market treats only

short term emissions and, therefore, does not support

the long term effects as generated by transport

projects. To deal with the issue, conventional

international frameworks should be reformed. In

addition, more bottom-up approaches are also needed

to improve the feasibility of transport projects.

Lack of Consideration of Long-term

CO2 mitigation from Transport Projects:

Developing countries show their interests in transport development in NAMAs mainly through

public transport improvement (SHIFT) and technological advancement (IMPROVE). These

interests should be exploited to specify necessary transport projects in each country, while

encouraging their integration with land-use planning (AVOID).

It is important to develop methods to assess transport projects with the limited data available

in developing countries. While the methods may vary technically depending on the contexts

of countries, efforts should be made to make evaluation requirements simpler so that they

are generally applicable to developing countries.

Limited priority is currently given to low-carbon transport in many developing countries. They

need to be encouraged to assess low-carbon transport systems in terms also of co-benefits

for each country. These may include convenient & comfortable trips, economic growth with

less traffic congestion, mitigation of local pollution, and compact & smart land use.

Self-sustaining finance systems for NAMAs should be established. Value capture is one of

the most promising methods to take advantage of economic growth in developing countries,

in combination with taxation, subsidization, carbon charge, and etc.

2. Development of Bottom-up Approaches

d) Self-financing Mechanisms:

c) Assessment for Co-benefits:

b) Development of MRV(Measurement/Report/Verification) for Transport Projects:

a) Transport projects in NAMAs (Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions):

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) helps

developing countries to adopt less carbon intensive

strategies. However, among the roundly 5,716 CDM projects

authorized by 2012, only 18 have been transport projects. A

major barrier is the requirement for a precise forecast of CO2

reduction. A CDM Program Compensation Fund should be

introduced to allow a fluctuation by a given percentage in

emission rights from individual CDM project, while still

achieving targeted reductions for the CDM program as a

whole.

1. Improvement of International Frameworks

a) CDM Compensation Fund:

Difficulty in Assessment for Transport Projects

Country C--€

Country B--￥

Country A--＄

Transport Projects

x%x%

x%

b) Green ODA:

The Official Development Assistance (ODA) program, an inter-governmental grant from

developed countries to developing countries, is the largest financing resource for carbon

reduction in developing countries. However, ODA projects are based on proposals from the

recipient developing countries and the majority of transport proposals focus on the

improvement of roads, which are likely to increase emissions of CO2 and local pollutants.

WCTRS proposes instead the concept of a ‘Green ODA’, which requires proof that the

requested project is the best in reducing CO2.

Such a bilateral mechanism can provide a framework to facilitate low-carbon transport

projects. As rules of assessments for transport projects are individually set in each

mechanism, the effect of transport projects can be taken into account more flexibly,

depending on the capability of assessment.

• David Banister, University of Oxford, UK

• Pierpaolo Cazzola, International Energy Agency (IEA)

• Yves Crozet, Hector G. Lopez-Ruiz, LET, University of

Lyon II, France

• Atsushi Fukuda, Hisayoshi Morisugi Nihon University,

Japan

• Karst Geurs, University of Twente, Netherlands

Environmental Assessment Agency, Netherlands

• Jiro Hanyu, Yuki Tanaka, (Formerly) Institution for Transport

Policy Studies, Japan

• Shinya Hanaoka, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan

• Yoshitsugu Hayashi, Hirokazu Kato, Kazuki Nakamura,

Nagoya University, Japan

• Ali Huzayyin, Cairo University, Egypt

• Reiner Koblo, KfW Development Bank, Germany

• Jamie Leather, Asian Development Bank (ADB)

• Anthony May, University of Leeds, UK

• Fumihiko Nakamura, Yokohama National University, Japan

• Takaaki Okuda, Chubu Region Institute for Social and

Economic Research, Japan

• Tae Oum, University of British Columbia, Canada

• Haixiao Pan, Tongji University, China

• Marco Ponti, Milan Polytechnic University, Italy

• Werner Rothengatter, Patrick Jochem, Karlsruhe Institute

of Technology, Germany

• Wolfgang Schade, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and

Innovation Research, Germany

• Sanjivi Sundar, The Energy Research Institute (TERI), India

• Louis S. Thompson, Galeson and Associates, USA

• Michael Wegener, Spiekermann & Wegener Urban and

Regional Research, Germany

• The late Lee Schipper

Transport CO2 mitigation