Capital grants and recurrent subsidies: A dilemma in American transportation policy

Transportation policy in America distinguishes between capital expenditures and recurrent operating and maintenance costs. Federal policy and resources encourage capital-intensive projects, but traditionally have left to state and local governments the responsibility for maintaining and operating the facilities built with federal support. This has led to consistent underestimation of operating costs in the decision process leading to capital expenditures, and to overcapitalization of transportation networks. Today, faced with recurrent costs which strain local resources, there is pressure to broaden federal participation in operations and maintenance, and legislation is beginning to weaken the traditional distinctions between capital and recurrent expenditures.     

Transit funding: Implications of federal aid strategies

Federal funding strategies greatly affect investment in urban transportation facilities in the United States. This analysis concentrates on the implications of varying federal aid matching requirements, structuring aid programs as categorical or block grants, and allo cating funds on a discretionary basis or according to formula. Toward this end the effects of recent federal transit aid arrangements are assessed.Increased federal matching share broadens program participation, especially among smaller cities. However, when offered a choice, communities' preference for more generous federal aid shares is tempered by their election of discretionary grants (e.g., Urban Mass Transportation Administration - UMTA - Section 3) instead of drawing on formula funds (e.g., UMTA Section 5 or highway fund transfers). Formula funds are easier to administer, distributed quite evenly in the UMTA case, and generally more suitable than discretionary funds except where expenditures are large relative to budgets. Categorical aid programs shift local priorities, and thus should be used with cautionOverall, results suggest that one must begin with established transportation objectives against which to evaluate the effectiveness of funding arrangements. In particular, it is critical to make clear the rationale for federal involvement in funding specific programs. Four such federal funding intents are distinguished: compelling national interest, regional development, stimulation of recipient investment in the given program, or financial relief for the aid recipient. Conclusions are drawn as to the desirability of various funding policies according to such program intent.     

Analysis of cost estimation disclosure in environmental impact statements for surface transportation projects

Reliability in cost estimates in publicly funded projects is more important today than ever with increased governmental funding to infrastructure projects and associated accountability requirements, but surface transportation projects, large and small, in the United States have a legacy of cost overruns. The problems with these overruns start with the cost estimation process before projects begin. Studies have shown that early cost estimations reflect best-case scenarios rather than realistic expectations, and have attributed technical, economic, psychological, and political reasons for underestimation. The primary objectives of this research were to determine how costs have been presented and updated in environmental impact statements, to identify endemic technical problems with cost estimation during the environmental review of surface transportation projects, and to develop recommendations for improving cost estimation and disclosure. Cost estimation methods were analyzed from the documents of 100 projects, including draft environmental impact statements, final environmental impact statements, and records of decision. The study concluded that the lack of guidance on how to include cost estimation in environmental review revealed itself in the level of detail and attention given to estimating costs. Agencies omitted or included various aspects of cost estimation randomly. Professional organizations should fill the gap of the need for specific guidance to cost estimation for environmental review so it can evolve as a state of the practice.     

Cost-effectiveness of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from High-Speed Rail and urban transportation projects in California

A rising trend in state and federal transportation finance is to invest capital dollars into projects which reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, a key metric for comparing projects, the cost-effectiveness of GHG emissions reductions, is highly dependent on the cost-benefit methodology employed in the analysis. Our analysis comparing California High-Speed Rail and three urban transportation projects shows how four different accounting framings bring wide variations in cost per metric tonne of GHG emissions reduced. In our analysis, life-cycle GHG emissions are joined with full cost accounting to better understand the benefits of cap-and-trade investments. Considering only public subsidy for capital, none of the projects appear to be a cost-effective means to reduce GHG emissions (i.e., relative to the current price of GHG emissions in California’s cap-and-trade program at $12.21 per tonne). However, after adjusting for the change in private costs users incur when switching from the counterfactual mode (automobile or aircraft) to the mode enabled by the project, all investments appear to reduce GHG emissions at a net savings to the public. Policy and decision-makers who consider only the capital cost of new transportation projects can be expected to incorrectly assess alternatives and indirect benefits (i.e., how travelers adapt to the new mass transit alternative) should be included in decision-making processes.     

Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior

This paper describes the characteristics of transportation demand management. The origin of transportation demand management (TDM) as it has evolved in the US is related to federal policy initiatives that first focused on improving the efficiency of the urban transportation system through operational improvements, and then incorporated concerns such as air quality and energy conservation into the transportation planning process. The paper then examines the effectiveness of TDM actions, and concludes that those actions most likely to increase the “price” of travel for single occupant vehicle use will be most effective. The paper identifies several strategies for improving the effectiveness of TDM actions in the context of regional transportation planning, including: incorporating TDM as part of the solutions for regional transportation planning, linking TDM to land use decisions, making the costs of travel more apparent to the user, and making TDM implementation more palatable to the general public.     

The salience of megaregional geographies for inter-metropolitan transportation planning and policy making

Researchers have argued that megaregions are a crucial spatial scale to address infrastructure modernization, growth management, economic development and environmental impacts because processes affecting these domains are highly concentrated within megaregional spaces. This paper evaluates the conceptual issues and policy salience of megaregional planning in the U.S. by analyzing the results of a 2018 survey of 382 designated MPOs. Drawing upon the survey results, we find support for the notion that MPO partnerships operating at the megaregional scale are somewhat widespread and involve MPOs along with other partners, like state DOTs and councils of governments. A subset of common concerns—especially multi-modal freight, major transportation corridors, economic development, intercity rail service, and air quality—appear to motivate megaregional partnerships. MPOs were most likely to engage in megaregion-scale collaborations requiring relatively low levels organizational time and resources versus more substantive collaborative efforts to develop joint plans or coordinated project investments. At the same time, few MPO respondents viewed megaregional scale planning collaborations as a high priority or as highly effective. For the majority of MPOs, it appears likely that the costs of such collaborations currently outweigh prospective benefits. Survey respondents identified increasing staff funding, requiring state DOTs’ statewide plans to address megaregional issues, and facilitating and enabling inter-local agreements for megaregional planning as actions that would enhance the salience and effectiveness of megaregional planning. These actions will likely occur only if planning at this scale is embraced as an important priority by federal and state policy makers.     

Planning for economic and environmental resilience

Climate protection will require major reductions in GHG emissions from all sectors of the economy, including the transportation sector. Slowing growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be necessary for reducing transportation GHG emissions, even with major breakthroughs in vehicle technologies and low-carbon fuels (Winkelman et al., 2009). The Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) supports market-based policy approaches that minimize costs and maximize benefits. Our research indicates that significant GHG reductions can be achieved through smart growth and travel efficiency measures that increase accessibility, improve travel choices and make optimum use of existing infrastructure. Moreover, we find such measures can deliver compelling economic benefits, including avoided infrastructure costs, leveraged private investment, increased local tax revenues and consumer vehicle ownership and operating cost savings (Winkelman et al., 2009).As a society, what we build – where and how – has a tremendous impact on our carbon footprint, from building design to transportation infrastructure and land-use patterns. The empirical and modeling evidence is clear – people drive less in locations with efficient land use patterns, high quality travel choices and reinforcing policies and incentives (Ewing et al., 2008). It is also clear that there is growing and unmet market demand for walkable communities, reinforced by demographic shifts and higher fuel prices (Leinberger, 2006, Nelson, 2007). Transportation policy in the United States must rise to meet this demand for more travel choices and more livable communities.The academic, ideological and political debates about the level of GHG reductions and penetration rates that can or should be achieved via smart growth and pricing on the one hand, or measures such as ‘eco-driving’ and signal optimization on the other, have served their purpose: we know which policies are ‘directionally correct’ – policies that reduce GHG emissions even though we may not know the scope of those reductions. Now is the time to implement directionally correct policies, assess what works best where, and refine policy based on the results. It is a framework that CCAP calls “Do. Measure. Learn.”The Federal government is poised to spend $500 billion on transportation (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 2009). CCAP encourages Congress to “Ask the Climate Question” – will our transportation investments help reduce GHG emissions or exacerbate the problem? Will they help increase our resilience to climate change impacts or increase our vulnerability? And, while we’re at it, will our investment foster energy security, livable communities and a vibrant economy? Federal transportation and climate policies should empower communities to implement locally-determined travel efficiency solutions by providing appropriate funding, tools and technical support.     

Mitigating environmental impacts in advance: Evidence of cost and time savings for transportation projects

The traditional model for mitigating a transportation project’s environmental impacts typically operates project-by-project and delivers the mitigation just-in-time. In contrast, the newer practice of advance mitigation comprehensively assesses and mitigates impacts from one or multiple transportation projects before or during project planning, sometimes long before project construction begins. The practice has gained adherents for its potential to improve ecological outcomes, by better aligning mitigation and conservation goals. Advance mitigation also stands to reduce mitigation costs, an important secondary benefit for transportation agencies with constrained resources. Evidence of cost savings, however, has been piecemeal and anecdotal. This paper advances knowledge of advance mitigation’s financial impacts in two ways. First, it critically assesses the evidence about cost savings realized through advance mitigation, both through avoided up-front costs and reduced project delay. Second, it directly estimates the project time savings that might accrue with advance mitigation of state highway projects in California. Overall, the balance of evidence is encouraging for transportation agencies that would introduce the practice, and general agreement exists on its financial benefits. Considering project delays related only to the environmental process, we estimate advance mitigation could reduce delivery times by 1.3–5.0 months per project. Still, we also identify factors limiting comprehensive analysis. Transportation agencies adopting advance mitigation practices into their operations could use a pilot approach that includes rigorous environmental and mitigation cost accounting; such pilots would build needed empirical evidence of advance mitigation’s financial and ecological outcomes.     

Do the selected Trans European transport investments pass the cost benefit test?

This paper assesses the economic justification for the selection of priority projects defined under the auspices of the Trans-European transport network. Three different transport models are used to analyse the costs and benefits associated with the current list of 30 priority projects. Most of these projects fail the cost-benefit test and few of the economically justifiable projects would need European subsidies to ensure their viability. Two remedies are proposed to minimise the inefficiencies surrounding project selection. The first remedy would oblige each member state or group of states to perform a cost-benefit analysis, followed by peer review and ensure that the results were published publicly prior to the ranking of federally funded priority projects. The second remedy would require federal funding to be made available only for projects with important spillovers to other countries in order to avoid pork barrel political behaviour.     

The effects of federal transit subsidy policy on investment decisions: The case of San Francisco's Geary Corridor

In the United States, federal funding for public transit often accounts for a large proportion of a local agency's budget, especially for capital investments. For this reason, local governments can be expected to plan a portfolio of projects that maximize federal contributions. This study examines the financial effects of federal transit subsidy policy on local transit investment decisions. Data from a System Planning Study for the Geary Corridor in San Francisco are used as an illustration. It is found that federal transit subsidy policy provides financial incentives for local decision-makers to select capital-intensive investment options that may not be efficient or effective. While federal financial incentives are not the only factor influencing local investment decisions, some reform of the current subsidy policy may be necessary to reduce the incentive for ineffective use of public resources.     

Resolving the property right of transportation emissions through public–private partnerships

The application of public–private partnerships (P3’s) in the transportation sector has grown in popularity worldwide. Despite this important shift in the provision of transportation service, there are clear gaps in knowledge about the impacts of P3 projects, especially on emissions from transportation systems as a whole. Not only should policy makers evaluate the emissions impacts from P3 projects, but they should also think about innovative models that address or charge for emissions into P3 contracts. This addition to P3 contracts could provide a new solution to the long-existing property right paradox: who owns (is responsible for) emissions from transportation systems? This study attempts to fill the research gap by analyzing these innovative models. Using the road network of Fresno, California, as our case study, we offer a number of interesting insights for policy makers. First, average peak emissions costs range from 1.37 cents per mile (the do-nothing case) to 1.20 cents per mile (profit-maximizing cases) per vehicle. Although emissions costs from the P3 projects are lowest for the profit-maximizing cases, the system-wide emissions costs of these cases are highest because of spillover effects. Second, charging project owners for the emissions costs of P3 projects is not an effective way to reduce emissions or the total costs of travel, especially on a VMT basis. Instead, the public sector should implement emissions-included social cost-based price ceilings. When employing these limits, project owners could still be charged for the emissions costs. Finally, using total travel time as the only objective function for evaluating P3 projects can be misleading. Several P3 projects have shown better outcomes using total travel cost with the inclusion of emissions and fuel consumption costs, instead of using total travel time as the only objective function.     

Analyzing voter support for California’s local option sales taxes for transportation

Local and regional governments in the U.S. rely increasingly on voter-approved local option sales taxes (LOSTs) to fund transportation capital investments, maintenance, and operations. LOSTs typically present voters with lists of local transportation projects and programs to be funded by a ¼ to 1 percent sales tax increase. Most research on LOSTs are case studies, which make generalizations about LOSTs difficult. We conducted a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional analysis of LOST measures in California, the U.S. state with the greatest number of LOST measures. We examined 76 LOST measures put to voters between 1976 and 2016 to assess factors associated with voter support. LOSTs in California are enacted by counties, which we examined in addition to smaller intra-county geographies using both regression models and case studies. We tested several explanatory variables for association with voter support including macroeconomic and political context, planned measure expenditures, voter characteristics, and spatial distribution of proposed projects. We found that funding dedicated to public transit and returned to local jurisdictions predicts support at the county level, and that LOSTs that create new taxes—as opposed to extending or renewing existing taxes—are less popular with voters, all else equal. Our analyses of sub-county geographies revealed that political party affiliation is the strongest predictor of local voter support for LOSTs and that voters living adjacent to funded projects tended to be more supportive of LOSTs.

     

Evaluation,prioritization and selection of transportation investment projects in New York City

Over the last decade, a large number of high capital cost transportation projects have been proposed for the New York City Region. Many have resulted from addressing evolving capacity needs, changes in regional demographics and economics, meeting the improvements necessitated by operating century old subway systems and recognizing the impact of moving freight in a dense region. But the catalyst for bringing all of these projects to the attention of the public and all regional agencies was the tragedy of September 11, 2001. While these projects entail massive investments ($50–$60 billion), little analytical work has been carried out to measure the transportation and economic costs and benefits they entail and to categorize them accordingly. Competition among agencies to secure adequate resources to implement any of the desired projects makes such analysis necessary; yet there still remain political, vested economic interests and agency rivalry barriers to achieving this important planning objective. This paper reports the methodological approach taken by these authors for consistent and transparent project evaluation and then presents results from the ranking and prioritizing methodology. The policy underpinnings and implications of the analysis are discussed in a subsequent paper and thus only briefly touched upon here in the concluding section.     

When are subsidies to trans-European network projects justified?

The trans-European transport network (TEN-T) encompasses the major planned transport infrastructure in Europe, ranging from high speed rail to port infrastructure. Projects in this category are considered priority projects and receive European subsidies; but these have been insufficient to get these projects off the ground. This paper addresses two research questions. First, it sketches the basic economics of cross-boundary infrastructure projects: what pricing and investment policies can we expect, what is the role of through traffic and high fixed costs of infrastructure? Second, it examines briefly what lessons the EU could draw from the experience of other existing federal funding institutions like the US and Germany. These ideas are used to propose a new subsidy scheme for the TEN-T projects.     

Congestion relief toll tunnels

Changing urban land-use patterns have reduced the importance of traditional downtowns as the origin and destination of numerous vehicular trips. Much traffic on downtown-area freeways seeks merely to get past downtown, thereby worsening the level of congestion for those seeking access to downtown.A number of European cities have begun to develop a new type of transportation facility: congestion-relief toll tunnels in downtown areas. These projects appear to be economically feasible largely or entirely from premium-price tolls paid by users. Hence, they are being developed by private consortia, operating under long-term franchises from government. Other keys to the feasibility of such projects are peak/off-peak pricing structures (congestion pricing), nonstop electronic toll collection, and restriction of use to auto-size vehicles only (to reduce tunnel dimensions and therefore capital investment).Preliminary analysis indicates that congestion-telief bypass runnels for downtown Los Angeles and San Francisco would be economically feasible as private business ventures, if developed along European lines. Similar approaches might be applied to other controversial freeway projects in both cities, and to restructuring Boston's huge and controversial Central Artery/Tunnel project.Congress has already authorized public-private partnerships of this type, permitting private capital and private owner/operation to be used, both for new projects and to rebuild existing highway, bridge, and tunnel facilities. Six states and Puerto Rico have enacted private-tollway legislation under which such projects could be developed and operated.This type of project should be politically feasible, since it offers a way to make significant transportation improvements in impacted downtowns with little or no public funding. While transit proponents may oppose the construction of toll tunnels, highway users are likely to support such projects, and some environmental groups may support this method of implementing congestion pricing in urban areas, because of its potential for reducing air emissions.     

Hubris or humility? Accuracy issues for the next 50 years of travel demand modeling

This study reviews the 50-year history of travel demand forecasting models, concentrating on their accuracy and relevance for public decision-making. Only a few studies of model accuracy have been performed, but they find that the likely inaccuracy in the 20-year forecast of major road projects is ±30 % at minimum, with some estimates as high as ±40–50 % over even shorter time horizons. There is a significant tendency to over-estimate traffic and underestimate costs, particularly for toll roads. Forecasts of transit costs and ridership are even more uncertain and also significantly optimistic. The greatest knowledge gap in US travel demand modeling is the unknown accuracy of US urban road traffic forecasts. Modeling weaknesses leading to these problems (non-behavioral content, inaccuracy of inputs and key assumptions, policy insensitivity, and excessive complexity) are identified. In addition, the institutional and political environments that encourage optimism bias and low risk assessment in forecasts are also reviewed. Major institutional factors, particularly low local funding matches and competitive grants, confound scenario modeling efforts and dampen the hope that technical modeling improvements alone can improve forecasting accuracy. The fundamental problems are not technical but institutional: high non-local funding shares for large projects warp local perceptions of project benefit versus costs, leading to both input errors and political pressure to fund projects. To deal with these issues, the paper outlines two different approaches. The first, termed ‘hubris’, proposes a multi-decade effort to substantially improve model forecasting accuracy over time by monitoring performance and improving data, methods and understanding of travel, but also by deliberately modifying the institutional arrangements that lead to optimism bias. The second, termed ‘humility’, proposes to openly quantify and recognize the inherent uncertainty in travel demand forecasts and deliberately reduce their influence on project decision-making. However to be successful either approach would require monitoring and reporting accuracy, standards for modeling and forecasting, greater model transparency, educational initiatives, coordinated research, strengthened ethics and reduction of non-local funding ratios so that localities have more at stake.     

Public financing of private freight rail infrastructure to reduce highway congestion: A case study of public policy and decision making in the United States

As goods movement continues to increase it is expected to outpace infrastructure capacity in the United States. Moving a larger share of goods by rail rather than truck is a potentially cost effective part of a solution. Freight rail not only offers a substitute for truck trips but is a cleaner, more energy efficient, and safer alternative. Recently a number of private freight rail projects have received public funding. The public funds are aimed at increasing freight rail capacity with the goal of diverting some goods currently moved by truck to rail. While the benefits of moving goods by rail are relatively clear, it is unclear if public decision makers can effectively identify strategic rail investments that will achieve their policy goals. This study critically examines the analytical methods, models, and data that are commonly used to support decisions to provide public funds for private freight rail projects. This is accomplished through a case study of California’s Trade Corridors Improvement Fund program which provided $680 million for 11 freight rail projects. The study’s contributions include identifying critical analytical flaws and challenges affecting the benefit estimates that public funding decisions rely on. Improvements to current evaluation methods are also identified as are regulatory reforms and policy interventions that may offer more effective and reliable outcomes.     

New highways and land use change: Results from a quasi-experimental research design

Understanding links from new highway construction or capacity expansion to regional growth patterns is crucial for transportation planners and policy makers. In this paper, we incorporate a lagged adjustment regional growth model into a quasi-experimental research design to examine the association between new highway investments and land use change in three California counties. Our study areas provide a mix of urban, small town, and exurban highway projects in order to explore the different effects across project types and geographic contexts. The central finding of this research is that while improvements in surface transportation infrastructure can have large impacts on growth patterns, the nature of the effect depends on the context of the highway investment.     

Using risk analysis to determine the potential range of lifecycle costs for urban transit systems

Intense competition for limited public funding for urban transport projects can often result in proponents of individual schemes presenting minimized costs and maximized benefits to funding bodies to try to ensure that their scheme is chosen above others for funding. This presents public bodies with a problem, especially in an era when they are keen to attract private contributions for transit schemes. Risk modelling techniques can be of great assistance in ascertaining ranges of costs and benefits for individual submissions and deciding upon which projects should receive priority-not only those with greatest cost-benefit indices, but also those whose indices have low levels of associated risk to allay the fears of the traditionally risk averse private sector.