Search

In many cities of the world, bicycle infrastructure projects are implemented to foster more sustainable transportation systems. However, such projects have often raised questions regarding their public funding, as they entail considerable costs. This paper reviews cost–benefit analysis (CBA) frameworks as these are presently used to assess bicycle infrastructure projects. Specific focus is on the CBA framework developed in Copenhagen, Denmark, a self-declared “city of cyclists”. In this framework, costs and benefits of car and bicycle, the two major urban transport modes, have been assessed and are compared across accidents, climate change, health, and travel time. The analysis reveals that each km travelled by car or bike incurs a cost to society, though the cost of car driving is more than six times higher (Euro 0.50/km) than cycling (Euro 0.08/km). Moreover, while the cost of car driving is likely to increase in the future, the cost of cycling appears to be declining. The paper concludes with a discussion of the applicability of the Copenhagen CBA framework to advance sustainable transport planning and to motivate and justify urban restructuring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transformation to climate neutrality of the transport sector raises multiple challenges at a time, with potentially conflicting objectives and further external effects. This calls for a balanced policy package of which empirical assessment is needed in order to i) quantify its effectiveness and ii) reveal effects of potential overlaps and interactions associated with individual measures within the package. This paper analyses the economic, environmental and distributional effects of a policy package that supports low-carbon passenger transport in Austria, co-developed with policy experts and stakeholders. The package includes hard measures such as a mandated phase-out of conventional cars and explicit road pricing, as well as soft measures to foster the uptake of public transportation. To assess these packages we make use of a computable general equilibrium model for Austria that incorporates heterogeneous household groups, CO 2 emissions and a detailed representation of the transport sector. We show that the decoupling of economic welfare and negative external effects of passenger transport is possible with a balanced policy package. Our analysis also highlights potential urban-rural conflicts, regressive impacts and negative public budget implications of single policy measures, issues that the suggested policy package as a whole can mitigate. • We develop policy packages for sustainable passenger transport with experts. • Their effects are analysed using a CGE model of the Austrian economy. • Decoupling of welfare and negative externalities of transport is possible. • Urban-rural conflicts and regressive effects can arise with single measures. • Policy packages can help alleviate potential conflicts and regressive effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]