Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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