Fill and Sign the Pilgrim Enrollment Form

Costs of Bicycle Traffic for the Overall Economy Comparing Bicycle and Car Traffic in Vienna(Results of a Comprehensive Study) This contribution fits into all four main themes of the coming VeloCity conference, ideally as a Sub-plenary presentation Michael Meschik and Gregor Trunk, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, michael.meschik@boku.ac.at Current Situation – Bicycle lobbying groups (bow and) scrape for funding of bicycle traffic … For a long time bicycle traffic has suffered prejudices in the public opinion and maybe it still does so today: “Only poor people use the bicycle”, giving bicycle traffic the image of a mode of transport for “losers”, whereas people who “have made it” use the car as a symbol of their outstanding status. This is of course totally wrong: Wherever surveys probe into the characteristics of bicycle traffic, they reveal that cyclists are usually highly educated, well off and especially aware of environmental, social and health issues. Still, in most communities bicycle traffic is funded under several constraints: Other modes of transport are regarded as vital for society (public transport) and especially the economy (heavy goods traffic and car traffic). The bicycle is often regarded as a leisure time mode of transport. Money for bicycling infrastructure is grudgingly spent as the economic value of cycling is strongly undervalued. Even more difficult is the funding of soft‐policy measures to promote bicycle traffic with actions and campaigns. Several studies reveal the important role of cycling in transport, especially in inner‐city traffic: Given the average occupancy rate of cars, the bicycle uses confined inner‐city space much more economically than cars do. Moving or parked, a car occupies up to ten times the space needed by a bicycle per person transported. Without doubt bicycle traffic emits almost no dangerous emissions (NOx, CO2, particulate matter, noise etc.) compared with cars. Less well known are the effects of car and bicycle traffic on the overall economy of a city. Economic characteristics of bicycle traffic compared with car traffic Sustainability rests on three columns: Economy, ecology and social quality. Although many nonmonetary factors have to be taken into consideration, also financial aspects can be addressed in each of those three domains. The focus of a study on Vienna’s inner‐city traffic was on comparing most of the resulting financial effects of bicycle and car traffic on the economy as a whole. The different cost categories addressed were: health, time, accidents, vehicle operation and maintenance, traffic noise, pollutant emissions and CO2 emissions. All those cost categories were split into two components: internal costs (i.e. costs paid for by the respective user of this mode of transport) and external costs (= not paid by the individual transport user, thus paid by the general public). Internal and external cost‐components were identified and calculated for both mode of transport and assigned per driven kilometre. Other categories, like accessibility or job creation, were also addressed, but due to lacking economic evidence, they could not be included in the cost assessment. The assessment of costs was made in a rather cautious and conservative manner. For example, accident costs could not be calculated according to the risk potential one mode of traffic imposes on the other modes, but merely on the risk of being (severely) injured in a traffic accident as the user of a specific mode of transport. Car passengers are relatively safe in their vehicles, so they are exposed to a small traffic accident risk, although cars are the most common other party in accidents involving cyclists. As a result, the traffic accident costs per driven kilometre are three times as high for cyclists compared with car drivers. Results relevant to the present and for future inner‐city traffic scenarios At the time being, bicycle traffic accounts for five percent of all trips made by Vienna’s residents, car traffic (drivers only) for 24 %. In Scenario 1 the proportion of bicycle traffic in the modal split (again trips) is assumed to be 8 %. This is also the target value from Vienna’s transport master plan, connectedly car traffic decreases to 22.5 %. Scenario 2 assumes the following ratio in the modal split: car 21.5 % and bicycle 10 %. For Vienna this is assumedly the maximum potential to be assigned to bicycle use under the given conditions, according to a mobility study from Socialdata(Munich). Even in the current situation, with a mere five per cent on all trips in Vienna, cyclists generate a surplus to the economy as a whole (external costs/revenues), whereas car traffic causes a financial burden. Applied to one driven kilometre, the bicycle has three times higher accident costs but high health benefits, due to the physical exercise cyclists perform. The car has lower accident costs but offers no health benefit to its driver and inflicts additional costs for noise, pollution and CO2. Calculations for the two scenarios with increased bicycle use (e.g more kilometres cycled and slightly less driven by car) show growing benefits accordingly. Conclusions and outlook Scientific references did not give definite answers to all questions. There is plenty of research work still to be done on some categories of costs and also authors do not agree, whether some cost components are to be assigned to internal or external costs. Nevertheless, the study on the comparison of external costs of bicycle and car traffic in Vienna has shown that car traffic in a city tends to be expensive for the general public and the tax payer generally. On the other hand bicycle traffic yields a surplus for the city economy, and cyclists also use the cities’ resources in a gentle way. Therefore we can demand further support for cycling initiatives, knowing that expenditures will be paid back in excess by more cyclists on the streets and better living conditions in our cities.