Download Dia 1 - Epomm

The future of rush hour
avoidance measures
Lessons learned from 4 large
projects in the Netherlands
Jorrit Nijhuis (Ministry of Infrastructure
& Environment)
Matthijs Dicke-Ogenia (Goudappel
Coffeng)
Utrecht, ECOMM
22nd May 2015
Rush hour avoidance measures - characteristics
• Encourage drivers to reduce trips in rush hour
• Monetary reward
• Reduced number of trips = trips in reference period
– trips in rewarding period
• GPS or camera as a registration technology
Rijkswaterstaat
Rush hour projects in the Netherlands
• The four largest projects
– Brabant
– Utrecht
– Arnhem-Nijmegen
– Rotterdam
Rijkswaterstaat
A sustainable behaviour change!
Rijkswaterstaat
Be careful with apps
Rijkswaterstaat
Costs of rush hour avoidance measure
• Positive social benefit/costs ratio
however …….
• Significant costs for:
– Monetary reward – €2.000.000 per year
– Registration technology (should a participant be rewarded)
Rijkswaterstaat
Service providers:
reduction in costs
technology
Government:
reduction in costs
reward
Rijkswaterstaat
• Service providers and government aim at cost effective technology
Participants
Costs
Effect
+++
++
++
On board unit (GPS) +
+++
+++
Mobile devices
(GPS)
+
Camera registration
++
Rijkswaterstaat
Alternatives to a monetary reward
•
•
•
•
Lottery
Travel information
Webshop
Use of psychology
Rijkswaterstaat
Use of psychology
• Major rewarding scheme
(money, lottery, webshop, games, travel information)
•
•
•
•
More participants ……
…… that show more of the desired behaviour
…… for a longer period of time
…… resulting in a permanent behaviour change
Rijkswaterstaat
Classical rush hour avoidance elements
• Scale: corridor, region (city), national
• Financial model: B2G, B2C, B2B
• Effect: short (months), medium (years), long term (structural)
• Selection and registration method: camera's, apps, on board unit
(OBU)
• Rewards: financial (money, webshops, lottery), social (feedback
mechanisms, communities), moral (avoidance plans)
Rijkswaterstaat
Criticism on rush hour avoidance projects
• User:
– Privacy (camera surveillance)
– Injustice (non participants)
• Government
– Investment costs
– Financial model (B2G)
– Complex & long time to market
– Limited competition service providers
– Structural effects
• Business
– Difficult B2B/B2C business case
Rijkswaterstaat
IMMA: Integrated Mobility Management Architecture
• Developed within Program Optimizing Use
• IMMA as a new approach:
– Smart use of ITS: mobiles & apps
– Integration of rush hour avoidance with other MM
measures
• How it works:
– Serviceproviders (apps) need to qualify for IMMA
– Apps have (historical) GPS trackings
– Travellers receive an “in app pop up” request for
particition in rewarding scheme
– If accepted the app is used for tracking, rewarding
& user communication
Rijkswaterstaat
IMMA Goals
1. Cost reduction
•
•
•
Less complicated procurement
More market competition
Less structural use of camera’s
2. Shorter time to market
3. Reduction of privacy risks
•
Less structural use of camera’s
4. Realising structural effects
Source: project plan IMMA, 2015
Rijkswaterstaat
IMMA Current proces
• June 2015: product design specifications
Objective baseline
• End 2015: qualification proces serviceproviders
Recruitment
Tracking
• First pilots in 2016 with use of IMMA
Rewarding
• 2016-2017:
Projects
User
Communication
Enforcement
2017
Rijkswaterstaat
New business models for serviceproviders
• B2G:
– Rush hour avoidance projects
 Road construction works
 Programme Optimising Use
– Other MM projects (cycling, public transport use, etc.)
– Research (surveys, GPS data)
• B2B:
– Employers (MM in companies)
– Loyalty programmes (marketing)
– Data (user, travel & traffic info)
Rijkswaterstaat
Questions & remarks?
Rijkswaterstaat