The East of England Transport Economic Evidence Study (TEES) A - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

The East of England Transport Economic Evidence Study (TEES) A presentation by The East

• f England Development

Agency

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Our presentation today

• The regional and policy context
• The need for further economic evidence
• EEDA Transport Economic Evidence Study (TEES)
• Applying the TEES findings
• Learning points

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

National Economic Context

• Eddington report priorities are:

growing and congested urban areas key inter-urban links links to international gateways targeted interventions and demand management

• Delivering a Sustainable Transport Strategy DaSTS
• the five

goals for transport: climate change safety, security and health quality of life social equity competitiveness and productivity

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

The East of England Region

‘Eddington Compliant’:

• International Gateways to the UK

Felixstowe Port Harwich Port Shellhaven Port Stansted Airport Luton Airport

• Growing urban areas –

‘Engines of Growth’: London Arc Cambridge Thames Gateway Norwich

• Key Interurban Corridors:

Road: e.g. M1, M11, A14, Rail: e.g. GEML, ECML

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Regional Economic Strategy 2008-2031

Three key RES objectives to 2031:

• Economic Growth (GVA / year of 2.1% per worker)
• CO2

Reduction (60% reduction on 1990 levels)

• Employment Growth (80% employment by 2031)

RES Transport Goal: “A sustainable transport system that fully supports sustainable economic growth” But how does transport in the East of England actually contribute to these objectives?

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

How can transport best contribute to economic growth objectives?

We needed answers to three key questions: 1. What is the real cost to the economy of constraints on the current (and future) regional transport network? 2. Where in the region does transport impose the most severe costs upon the economy? 3. What are the best solutions to address the economic problems caused by transport?

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

The Transport Economic Evidence Study

(TEES)

• EEDA commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to undertake the

TEES (published September 2008)

• Core requirements:
• Robust analysis – defensible modelling
• Use the DfT’s DaSTS principle – identify the problem first THEN

develop solutions to address this

• Incorporate the emerging DfT Wider Economic Benefit (WEBs)

analysis

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Methodology

Ι

Identify Problems:

■

the extent and economic cost of congestion

■

Use WEBs analysis to quantify the productivity losses

■

Establish the spatial distribution of cost of congestion

Ι

Establish Candidate Interventions

■

At the strategy/ package level

■

Cross-modal

■

Driven by spatial priorities and key links

Ι

Prioritise Interventions

■

Against RES

• bj ectives

■

Productivity

■

Carbon

■

Growth agenda

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Methodology

Ι

Regional model availability – from HA

■

Limitations on public transport and for urban analysis

Ι

Model scenarios

■

2003 Base (peak & inter-peak)

• Existing travel demand and costs

■

2021 Business As Usual (BAU) – (peak and inter-peak)

• Future travel demand and costs – RFA schemes + RSS housing & employment
• ‘ Realistic’ low congestion scenario and indicator of economic cost of

congestion

■

2021 ‘ zero congestion’

• Notional maximum economic disbenefit of congestion (not equivalent to

economic cost)

• Indicator of where improvements would yield the largest benefits

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Transport and Economic Benefits of eliminating congestion in 2021 (2021 values, 2003 prices)

Conventional Welfare £m p.a. GDP £m p.a. Welfare £m p.a. GDP £m p.a. Business User Benefits 338 338 462 462 Commuting User Benefits 204 244 Other User Benefits 537 643 Freight User Benefits 210 210 262 262 Total Conventional UBs 1,289 548 1,612 724 Wider Benefits Agglomeration 339 339 493 493 Imperfect Competition 55 55 72 72 Labour Supply 45 50 Labour Productivity Exchequer Impacts 18 20 Total Wider Benefits 411 438 585 615 Sum Total 1,700 986 2,197 1,339 WEBs as proportion of UB East of England UK 32% 36%

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Transport and Economic Benefits of reducing congestion to interpeak levels in 2021 (2021 values, 2003 prices)

Conventional Welfare £m p.a. GDP £m p.a. Welfare £m p.a. GDP £m p.a. Business User Benefits 220 220 329 329 Commuting User Benefits 127 146 Other User Benefits 205 238 Freight User Benefits 86 86 104 104 Total Conventional UBs 638 306 817 433 Wider Benefits Agglomeration 149 149 215 215 Imperfect Competition 31 31 43 43 Labour Supply 28 31 Labour Productivity Exchequer Impacts 11 12 Total Wider Benefits 191 207 270 289 Sum Total 828 514 1,087 721 WEBs as proportion of UB 30% 33% East of England UK

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S ummary Findings: Costs of Congestion

Ι

Congestion and overcrowding on the East of England’ s transport networks costs the UK economy:

■

£720m per annum by 2021 despite committed transport investment

■

As much as £1,340m per annum if all congestion could be eliminated

Ι

For all travel:

■

£1,100m and £2,200m per annum respectively

Ι

Equivalent productivity losses in the region:

■

On average nearly £400 per worker per annum

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Baseline Impact Assessment Framework

Focus Type Mode Flow (m) Congestion Index Congesti

• n Cost

WEB uprate Total Score London Arc - Thames Gateway Corridor HW 9,404 16.4% 1,545.6

53%

2,360 London Arc - Milton Keynes Corridor HW 10,566 14.6% 1,543.0

47%

2,275 London Arc - Haven Gatway Corridor HW 3,737 15.5% 578.4

33%

771 Greater Cambridge - Milton Keynes Corridor HW 4,200 11.7% 491.7

31%

645 London Arc - Greater Cambridge Corridor HW 3,507 10.6% 373.0

31%

488 Greater Cambridge - Greater Peterbo Corridor HW 3,849 9.5% 364.2

28%

468 Thames Gateway - Haven Gateway Corridor HW 1,919 9.2% 176.4

27%

224 Greater Cambridge - Haven Gateway Corridor HW 1,324 9.2% 122.1

18%

144 Greater Norwich - Haven Gatway Corridor HW 1,287 5.7% 72.9

17%

86 Milton Keynes - Greater Peterborough Corridor HW 546 10.9% 59.4

18%

70 London Arc EoG HW 287 16.8% 48.2

27%

61 Thames Gateway EoG HW 134 18.2% 24.4

21%

29 Greater Cambridge EoG HW 134 18.2% 24.4

19%

29 Haven Gateway EoG HW 142 16.7% 23.6

16%

27 Milton Keynes EoG HW 127 15.1% 19.1

23%

24 Greater Norwich EoG HW 38 10.2% 3.9

29%

5 Greater Peterborough EoG HW 42 3.1% 1.3

31%

2 Scheme Description Transport Impact

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Findings – S patial Priorities

Ι

London/London Arc to Thames Gateway (A13/ A127 and parallel rail routes)

Ι

London/London Arc to Milton Keynes South Midlands (M1 and West Coast Mainline)

Ι

London/London Arc to Haven Gateway (A12 and Great Eastern Mainline on to Norwich

Ι

Greater Cambridge to Milton Keynes South Midlands (A428 / A421 corridor)

Ι

Greater Cambridge to London/London Arc (M11 and West Anglia Mainline corridor)

Ι

Greater Cambridge to Greater Peterborough (A14 corridor)

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Findings – S patial Priorities

Ι

Corridor priorities:

■

key radial routes to London

■

key links to Cambridge

Ι

Engines of Growth priorities:

■

London Arc most important

■

Thames Gateway, Greater Cambridge, Haven Gateway and MK-S M

Ι

Peterborough and Norwich

■

less congested

■

but economic benefit potential

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Findings – S patial Priorities

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Linkages with employment and housing/ population

Ι

Growth in housing and network condition, 2003 to 2021

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

S tudy Findings (4) S trategy Tests

Ι

S trategy tests examined

■

S trategic Highway Test (Draft East of England Plan – 24 schemes)

■

Targeted Highway Improvements (14 schemes)

■

London Rail - Capacity Enhancement

■

Access to Gateways

■

Urban Access packages for Cambridge, Norwich and the London Arc

Ι

The Urban Access packages

■

good potential for economic gain

S trategy GDP Impact (£m pa) GDP Return DEEP Highway 90 2.4% Targeted Highway 90 2.7% Rail 119 5.1% Access to Gateways 68 1.9%

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Free Flow Targeted Highway Package DEEP Highway Package

Comparison of Productivity Gains per Worker - 2021

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Overall Conclusions

Ι

Very significant economic cost of congestion

Ι

Targeting highway investment can produce high economic rates of return

Ι

Rail capacity enhancements to/ from London offer the best potential for economic gain

■

Reinforces that the east of England is part of the greater south-east

Ι

The maj or investment scenarios alone will not solve the overall economic costs of congestion

■

reduce congestion by 8%

• 15%
• f total congestion

■

demand-side measures should also be considered

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Looking Ahead – Use of TEES

• Inform the 2009 Implementation Plan for Regional Economic Strategy

and Regional Spatial Strategy

• Inform funding decisions –

e.g. RFA2 transport review

• Provides a robust economic evidence base for regional partners
• DfT's DaSTS

consultation (2008) and work programme (2009-2012)

• Making the business case for increased expenditure (public AND

private) on transport in the East of England

• Demand Management –

justifies further investigation

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Learning Points / Issues

• A good transport model essential:
• Requires a regional transport model –

East of England one of few

• Incorporates road / rail / public transport –

but not perfectly

• Estimating carbon impacts / other WEBS
• What is realistic base scenario to test against?
• ‘Free flow’

Vs ‘Inter-peak’

• Extensive data requirements
• Devising and choosing option scenarios
• Finite funding for study –

limits scenario testing

• Schemes vs Packages
• Supply side measures vs demand side measures
• Estimating costs of options / scenarios!
• Disseminating results to stakeholders and partners
• “Listen to the numbers”
• clear winners and losers!
• Challenging perceptions and parochialism
• Difficult messages for some -

What about rural / regeneration areas?

Transport and the Economy in the East of England

Thank you

Contact: MikeSalter@eeda.org.uk AndrewSummers@eeda.org.uk www.eeda.org.uk/transport