![[PukiWiki]](image/pukiwiki.png "[PukiWiki]")
Policies and measures for surface transport. Given the positive effects of higher population densities on public transport use, walking, cycling and CO2 emissions, better integrated spatial planning is an important policy element in the transportation sector. There are some good examples for large cities in several countries. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) can be effective in reducing private vehicle travel if rigorously implemented and supported. Soft measures, such as the provision of information and the use of communication strategies and educational techniques have encouraged a change in personal behaviour leading to a reduction in the use of the car by 14% in an Australian city, 12% in a German city and 13% in a Swedish city (medium agreement, medium evidence) [5.5.1]. Fuel-economy standards or CO2 standards have been effective in reducing GHG emissions, but so far, transport growth has overwhelmed their impact. Most industrialized and some developing countries have set fuel-economy standards for new light-duty vehicles. The forms and stringency of standards vary widely, from uniform, mandatory corporate average standards, through graduated standards by vehicle weight class or size, to voluntary industry-wide standards. Fuel economy standards have been universally effective, depending on their stringency, in improving vehicle fuel economy, increasing on-road fleetaverage fuel economy and reducing fuel use and carbon emissions. In some countries, fuel-economy standards have been strongly opposed by segments of the automotive industry on a variety of grounds, ranging from economic efficiency to safety. The overall effectiveness of standards can be significantly enhanced if combined with fiscal incentives and consumer information (high agreement, much evidence) [5.5.1]. Taxes on vehicle purchase, registration, use and motor fuels, as well as road and parking pricing policies are important determinants of vehicle-energy use and GHG emissions. They are employed by different countries to raise general revenue, to partially internalize the external costs of vehicle use or to control congestion of public roads. An important reason for fuel or CO2 tax having limited effects is that price elasticities tend to be substantially smaller than the income elasticities of demand. In the long run, the income elasticity of demand is a factor 1.5–3 higher than the price elasticity of total transport demand, meaning that price signals become less effective with increasing incomes. Rebates on vehicle purchase and registration taxes for fuel-efficient vehicles have been shown to be effective. Road and parking pricing policies are applied in several cities, with marked effects on passenger car traffic (high agreement, much evidence) [5.5.1]. Many governments have introduced or are intending to implement policies to promote biofuels in national emission abatement strategies. Since the benefit of biofuels for CO2 mitigation comes mainly from the well-to-tank part, incentives for biofuels are more effective climate policies if they are tied to entire well-to-wheels CO2 efficiencies. Thus preferential tax rates, subsidies and quotas for fuel blending should be calibrated to the benefits in terms of net CO2 savings over the entire well-to-wheel cycle associated with each fuel. In order to avoid the negative effects of biofuel production on sustainable development (e.g., biodiversity impacts), additional conditions could be tied to incentives for biofuels.
