Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
50 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
SMART
|
Specific, measureable, achievable, relavant, time bound
|
|
|
SMART objective:
|
-reduce number of traffic fatalities nationally by 20% of 2009 by 2015
-replace the gas tax by a road pricing scheme as the primary funding source for transportation by 2015 |
|
|
Policy analysis
|
:Different motivations (scientific, professional, political)
:Analysis (thoughtful, impartial assessment, define problem clearly, id alternatives, evaluation criteria, conclusions clearly stated) :Transportation policy analysis (economic, equity, institutional, financial, future implications, political context) |
|
|
policy recommendation
|
may take shape in many forms:
-funding availability -legislation -pilot tests -deployment -new starts -operational strategies -new research -enforcement |
|
|
monitoring and evaluation
|
:important test to see if your approach is working or if it needs to be tweaked
-short term vs. long term -is it impacting the right beneficiaries? -exogensous factors -degree of impact -challenges -lessons learned |
|
|
how is surface transportation funded?
|
::motor fuel tax has served as primary funding source for US roads over 70 years
-federal tax: currently $.184/gallon for gas and $.244/gallon for diesel -provides 90% of the revenue for the federal highway trust fund ::Federal highway trust fund revenue from motor fuel tax -$35.2 billion in FY06 -$25.5 bil v. $9.7 bil gas v. diesel ::state and local motor fuel tax -state range from 0-40 cents/gallon -some local jurisdictions impose additional motor fuel taxes -most state/local are flat per-gallon fees |
|
|
gas tax
|
:::almost perfect
-raises substantial revenue -easy to pay -easy to collect -easy to administer -minimal evasion -protects privacy -minimal burden on businesses :::HOWEVER -not sustainable from a revenue standpoint:: -increasing fuel efficiency -new alternative fuels -global warming -need for energy independence -political realities **revenue depends on the use of a commodity that we are trying to discourage use of******* |
|
|
characteristics of a new revenue stream (evaluation criteria)
|
-should raise sufficient revenue
-economically feasible -reliable source of funding -easy to collect and administer -equitable -accepted by public -easy to transition |
|
|
Credit Products
|
:::Leverage limited federal funding in a prudent, budget-effective way
:::Facilitate the borrower's access to the private capital markets by overcoming market imperfections :::Designed to assist transportation projects that are large-scale investments and those which can generate own revenue streams ::: Disadvantages ◦ Debt concerns at state and local levels especially if revenue does not materialize or economy sours |
|
|
state infrastructure banks
|
:::Can give states significantly increased flexibility in project selection and financial management.
:::Much like a private bank, a SIB uses seed capitalization funds to get started and offers customers a range of loans and credit enhancement products. :::Designed to allow for SIB funds to revolve (i.e., as loans are repaid to the SIB, the SIB uses repaid funds to make future rounds of loans) |
|
|
advantages of SIB
|
-Flexible project financing. SIBs can assist projects through a variety of innovative financing techniques, including a range of loans and credit options that provide flexibility to tailor financial assistance to meet a project's specific needs. Examples of assistance to be offered by SIBs include low interest flexible term loans, debt service guarantees, lines of credit, and other capital financing support.
-"Recycling" of funds. Repaid SIB loans can be "recycled" as a source of funds for future transportation projects. SIBs can offer financial assistance to one set of projects and, as assistance is repaid, funds are replenished enabling assistance to other projects. By preserving the corpus (body of the fund) of the SIB, a state can provide expanded financial assistance to projects in perpetuity. -Accelerated completion of projects. SIBs can enable projects to start sooner by using diverse sources of funds to acquire necessary capital. Combining diverse funds also gives a SIB the flexibility to assemble |
|
|
Disadvantages of SIB?
|
|
|
|
National Infrastructure Banks
|
::
|
|
|
Private Activity Bonds
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC-PRIVATE-PARTNERSHIP
|
◦ Public-private partnerships (P3s) are contractual agreements formed between a public agency and a private sector entity that allow for greater private sector participation in the delivery and financing of transportation projects. (USDOT FHWA definition)
◦ “PPP is any medium-to-long term relationship between the public and private sectors, involving the sharing of risks and rewards, multi-sector skills, expertise and finance to deliver desired policy outcomes.” (Standard & Poor definition) |
|
|
WHY USE A P3
|
◦ The Public Sector does not have sufficient resources (time, money, staff)
◦ To make (additional) projects affordable when the public authority does not want to, or cannot, increase its levels of borrowing - off-balance sheet financing ◦ Call upon private sector know-how, expertise and human resources ◦ To share or transfer risks ◦ To ensure Value for Money |
|
|
PLAYERS & THEIR ROLES (P3)
|
◦ Public Sector Officials – generally set the terms of what, when, and how a project should be constructed in a RFP (Request for Proposal)
◦ Concessionaire/Private Sector – generally have relationships with financiers, designers, construction companies, and operators (all-in-one consortium) ◦ Bankers – required for the financing of the project ◦ Lawyers – everything is comprised of contracts, so without lawyers on all sides, nothing would move forward ◦ Civil Society – stakeholders in the process and outcome of the transport project – can provide support or challenges |
|
|
KEY POINTS (P3)
|
◦ Process Matters – when do get the private sector involved?
◦ Risk/Reward – how much risk and reward do you want to take on/share? ◦ Is the system integrated with the rest of the surrounding transport systems? ◦ Are you planning for now, 10 years from now and 20 years from now? How do extensions fit into planning, contracting and financing? |
|
|
Equity Analysis
|
• Notoriously difficult
• Several types of equity • Numerous Impacts • Various ways to measure them • Conflating and Conflicting objectives are frequent :::Equitable by one measurement but inequitable by another measurement :::Disability services and “get what you pay for and pay for what you get” go against each other :::Interaction effects |
|
|
horizontal equity - get what they pay for
|
◦ Distribution of impacts between individuals and groups considered equal in ability and class
◦ Equal individuals and groups should receive equal shares of resources ◦ Transportation policy should not favor any particular individual or group or class |
|
|
Vertical Equity with regard to income and social class
|
◦ Distribution of impacts between individuals and groups that differ in abilities and needs (income, social class)
�:: Policies which favor economic and socially disadvantaged class – progressive �:: Policies which penalize economic and socially disadvantaged class – regressive ◦ Affordable modes, discounts, special fares etc are supported by this definition ::::• Not everyone is in the same social class or has the same income • Distribution of impacts btw individuals and groups that differ in abilities and needs (income, social class) • Across incomes across class, etc… • Affordable modes, discounts, special fares etc are supported by this definition • Subsidies aren’t always bad • Sometimes go against Horizontal, they play vital role in vertical equity • Mitigating when recognize their will people disadvantaged |
|
|
Vertical equity with regards to mobility need and ability
|
◦ Distribution of impacts between individuals and groups in terms of transportation ability and need
� ::Travelers with special constraints eg. ◦ Accessibility, inclusive design etc :::: • Distribution of impacts btw individuals and groups of terms of transportation ability and need • Travelers with special constraints, eg • Accessibility, inclusive design etc. • City streets • Ramps? • Considering needs of able as well as anyone who might use system • PROJECT COSTS • Mobility audio etc… |
|
|
how to analyze equity
|
-No single right approach
:Depends on the :Type of equity • Going to charge people of same station differently? (Horizontal) • Intermodal or specific mode of transportation -How people are categorized -Which impacts are considered -How they are measured Using an indicator-based approach |
|
|
Using an indicator-based approach
|
• Identifying equity objectives
• Rate them based on impact assessment • Evaluate them with other planning objectives like congestion reduction etc ::Think of them both together good for planning |
|
|
Characteristics of Sustainable Planning
|
-Equity is considered on par with planning or mobility objectives
-No bias in terms of a particular mode -Belief that economic growth can be “decoupled” with transport growth -Consensus-building and buy-in by politicians, technicians and public -Regional goals to manage demand -Serious treatment of demand and supply solutions and not just supply solutions. |
|
|
Rural Transport Benefits
|
-Improved social networks and enhanced social capital from people finding it easier to maintain links with family members outside of the immediate rural area.
-Enhanced community development may arise from the community working together to maintain or improve their own transport conditions. -Increased confidence in an ability to travel to access services and opportunities. -Improved health and education through easier access to services. -fewer users -large geographic scale, low density -less maintenance |
|
|
rural to urban
|
Some areas don’t want to grow that much
• Some like the small town feel • Community in the Amazon connected to outside world • Good – access to markets • Bad – access to things world suffering |
|
|
rural v. urban
|
Differences
• Construction options more limited in rural • Lack of local capacity • Smaller roads, historical areas, preservation • Land use • Capacity • Geography • Density • Vehicle Sizes • Not much private-public |
|
|
approach to rural transport
|
-multi pronged approach
• Rural Transport Services • Rural Transport Infrastructure • Location and Quality of Facilities |
|
|
Location and Quality of Facilities
|
Further and Further larger pool of areas
|
|
|
Rural Trans Infrastructure
|
• Roads, Paths, Tracks owned locally
• Inter and Intra village • Infrastructure for connecting to regional networks :::Main Features • Ownership and Maintenance • Financing • Physical construction • Traffic |
|
|
multi-pronged approach
|
|
|
|
Rural Transport Services
|
|
|
|
levels of access
|
-No (motorized) Access
- Partial Access - Full Access -Basic Access ◦ Provision of reliable, all-season passability to as many villages as possible by the prevailing means of transport |
|
|
Features of Basic Access
|
• Passability
• What can pass through • Adequate level of accessibility to higher networks • Adequate access to local social and economic facilities • Adequate access to domestic activities • Trafficable… |
|
|
Implementation Methods of rural transportation improvements
|
-Labor-Based Technology
-Small-Scale Contractor Development -Community Contracting -Maintenance Financing |
|
|
Environmental Impacts
|
|
|
|
Emission Impacts
|
|
|
|
Adaptation to Climate Change: Transportation Sector
|
|
|
|
Climate Change Impacts of Greatest Relevance for U.S Transportation (TRB Special Report 290
|
|
|
|
Increases in very hot days and heat waves
|
◦ Operations
- |
|
|
Increases in Arctic Temperatures
|
◦ Operations
- |
|
|
Rising sea levels, combined with storm surges
|
◦ Operations
- |
|
|
Increases in intense precipitation events
|
◦ Operations
|
|
|
More frequent strong hurricanes (Catg 4–5)
|
◦ Operations
- |
|
|
Near-term operational responses from transportation providers.
|
◦ Enhanced Snow and Ice Control
- |
|
|
Adaptation Options
|
�
Critical Infrastructure Monitoring ◦ Pipelines � Land subsidence � Bridge Supports Better Land-Use and Controls ◦ Better requirements/zoning practices in coastal, low lying areas |
|
|
Resilience
|
refers to a system’s ability to accommodate variable and unexpected conditions without catastrophic failure, or “the capacity to absorb shocks gracefully”
|
|
|
reliability v. resilience
|
reliability: playbook applies; travelers adapt behavior within long-term norms; scripted response, planning is critical, single point failures
-resilience: playbook won't apply; travelers adopt short term behavior; reactive response; operational agility is critical; multiple failures |
|
|
resilience relates to uncertainty and choices
|
-� What we don’t know we cannot plan for
�- If we only needed to plan for one set of conditions or a known set of conditions, we wouldn’t need to be resilient �-How do you plan for the unknown? Or at the least the very unlikely? :::choices: � Why do people want choices even though they might not use it? � “Seats as flotation devices” � “Option value” in economics |
