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.
トップ   編集 差分 バックアップ 添付 複製 名前変更 リロード   新規 一覧 検索 最終更新   ヘルプ   最終更新のRSS