Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jtrangeo

Sustainable transport: analysis frameworks

Barbara C. Richardson
*
University of Michigan, Transportation Research Institute, 2901 Baxter Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA

Abstract For both passenger and freight transport, this paper presents analysis frameworks illustrating the interaction of factors that inuence indicators of transport sustainability; identies opportunities for policy intervention; and illustrates the possibility of unintended consequences of such intervention and the tradeos among the indicators. The frameworks account for systematic relationships, feedbacks, and rebound eects of making changes to the system. For passenger transport, physical, psychological, and social needs present themselves as primary inuencers of sustainable transportation indicators. For freight, market forces and government policy are primary inuencers of variables that are predominantly of an economic nature. Questions for future research are presented. 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Sustainable transportation; Passenger; Freight; Analysis frameworks; Policy

1. Background It is generally recognized that the citizens of the world need to plan to sustain our planet. Playing a major role in the sustainability of the planet is every transportation system on earth. Not only do they play a role in the sustainability of the planet, but also they, themselves, must be sustained in order to continue to aord to all people access to the economic and social opportunities necessary for meaningful life. While great improvements have been made to many transportation systems, remaining problems are enormous. English language literature on sustainable transportation is vast and emanates primarily from Europe, North America, and Australia. Earlier writings began to address what the scope of transportation sustainability meant. DeCicco and Delucchi (1997), the Transportation Research Board (1993, 1997), and Richardson (1999, 2000) addressed passenger issues. Gordon (1995), ORourke and Lawrence (1995), Browne
*

Tel.: +1 734 936 2723. E-mail address: bcrichar@umich.edu

(1997), Duleep (1997), Joseph (1997), Rodriguez et al. (1997), Scrase (1998), and Whitelegg (1997) addressed freight sustainability issues. More recent literature ranges from European freight models (Beuthe et al., 2002; Friedl and Steininger, 2002; Priemus, 2002); to reviews of international transport sustainability practices (American Trade Initiatives, Inc., 2001; Deakin, 2002); an international conference on social change and sustainable transport (Black and Nijkamp, 2002); social and psychological driving forces behind changes in transport (van Geenhuizen et al., 2002); and the impacts of mobility management projects in 13 European countries (Wilhelm and Posch, 2003). Each transportation system is complex, and this complexity derives from the pluralism of its hardware (infrastructure and vehicles) and of the people and organizations involved. The complexity is multiplied by the existence and roles of dierent modes, regulatory and legislative bodies, service providers, builders, nancing systems, technologies, land-use patterns, and, most importantly, human behavior. The consequences of transportation use are both positive and negative and are addressed in considering the sustainability of the

0966-6923/$ - see front matter 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.11.005

30

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

transportation system. Among these consequences are safety, congestion, fuel consumption, vehicle emissions, and access. By modifying the Brundtland Commissions denition of sustainability for the planet (United Nations, 1987), we can derive a denition of sustainable transportation as the ability to meet todays transportation needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their transportation needs (based on Black, 1996). Irrespective of the specic denition of sustainable transportation, there is frequently reference to the triple bottom line of economic, environmental, and social equity sustainability. (e.g., World Bank, 1996; Loo, 2002; Schipper, 2003). Even with this agreement on the triple bottom line, virtually every individual and group that addresses transportation system sustainability develops a dierent set of variables that they consider to be the indicators of sustainability. Based on a review of the literature, participation in committees, meetings, discussions, and task forces devoted to this topic, and empirical evidence, I have chosen to label as indicators of transportation sustainability these ve consequences, safety, congestion, fuel consumption, vehicle emissions, and access. Clearly there is room for discussion and debate on this choice. For example, Black et al. (2002) use the term indicators to mean quantiable measures of performance resulting from transportation policies. They note that indicators that can be grouped into three categories inuencing six subobjectives for sustainable transportation. They derive these from diagrams of hierarchies of non-sustainable and sustainable transportation systems similar to those developed by Richardson (1999, 2000). The consequences of transportation use do not occur in a vacuum. Each is aected by a set of causes. To help in understanding these causes and their impacts, I present two frameworks for analysis of transportation system sustainability, one each for passenger and freight transportation. In each I set forth the consequences of transportation use: safety, congestion, fuel consumption, vehicle emissions, and access (the latter only for passenger transportation), these being some of the key indicators for sustainability. For each of the consequences, I have indicated what factors aect it, and what factors aect those factors, and so on. The frameworks are built based on the methods of inuence diagramming (Clemen, 1996) and root cause analysis. The aim of developing these frameworks is to identify those elements that have the most direct eect on indicators of transportation sustainability that can be inuenced by government policy or industry action. In combining the dierent indicators of sustainability in single charts, the interrelationships among these indicators and the factors aecting them are illustrated. To change any of these indicators in a positive direction, it is necessary to change those factors that inuence

it. Changing a factor that inuences one indicator may also change another indicator in an unexpected way. Because the indicators function in a system, it is necessary to look at the factors inuencing the indicators in a systemic way.

2. Objectives The objectives of this paper are: (1) to present a method to illustrate the interaction of the factors that inuence the indicators of transport sustainability, (2) to identify factors that inuence the indicators of transport sustainability, (3) to show the interactions of these factors via analysis frameworks, (4) to identify opportunities for policy intervention, (5) to raise the possibility of tradeos among the indicators of transportation sustainability and unintended consequences of policy intervention, and (6) to do these for both the freight and passenger components of the transportation system.

3. Method The method used to create the passenger and freight frameworks in the gures was developed over several years, as were the frameworks. Their earliest versions were rst presented by Richardson in 1999 and 2001, respectively. Figs. 19 reect input from several sources. Transportation sustainability literature searches on both passenger travel and freight trucking were conducted. These yielded information, particularly with regard to freight trucking, which was generally limited to environmental and economic factors. Much of that discussion can be summed up as a conict between the economic benets from ground transportation and their social costs such as air quality problems, and the diculty of designing public policy solutions to such problems because of the interrelated nature of the environment, economic activities, and the infrastructure that links them. Interestingly, safety was not strongly addressed in this literature. In contrast to the freight literature, the passenger transportation sustainability literature more broadly included societal factors, safety, access or mobility, land use, and congestion. Faculty, sta, and students of the University of Michigan and Northwestern University participated in focused discussions on factors aecting future transportation sustainability. University faculty and sta who participated in the discussions were from the elds of urban planning, environmental studies, transportation, public policy, natural resources, engineering, and business. Several trucking industry executives who were members of the University of Michigan Trucking Industry Program Advisory Board participated in a facilitated discussion on trucking sustainability and also responded to a survey

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Road Design Driver Factors: Knowledge, Time, Money, Interest, Ability, Experience, Attitude Human Error Vehicle Maintenance Vehicle Factors

31

Crash Avoidance

Safety

Crashworthiness

Vehicle Manufacturers

National Resources National Defense Needs Government Policies Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing

Fuel Technology

Fuel Consumption

Vehicle Prices Individual Desires Voter Preferences Land Use Physical, Psychological, Social Needs Market Forces Fuel Prices VKT Congestion

Emissions Technology

Environment

Availability of Public Transportation

Individuals' Income, Age, Health

Access Ability, Means to Drive

Fig. 1. Passenger factors aecting sustainability of the transportation system.

that focused on the factors critical to the long-term viability of freight trucking. Input from these participants reinforced the inclusion of safety, access, and congestion as indicators of sustainability. In contrast with the literature, both University and trucking industry executives indicated that safety is a primary concern from both economic and societal perspectives, and the executives unanimously assigned safety an importance score of 5 on a scale of 15. Both the passenger and freight sustainability frameworks have beneted from collegial review. Because approximately 95% of vehicle kilometers of travel (VKT) in the United States is by road, the default focus in developing the frameworks is road-based. However, other modes are explicitly brought into the freight framework, and the variables in the passenger framework allow for the consideration of other modes. For example, see rail service characteristics in Fig. 7 and public transportation availability in Fig. 1.

4. Framework for analysis of sustainability of passenger transportation Each of the ve indicators of transportation system sustainability, fuel, access, congestion, emissions, and

safety, has a wide range of factors that inuence it, and factors that inuence those factors, and so on. These multiple layers of passenger-related factors inuencing transportation sustainability are organized into the diagram shown in Fig. 1. Note that the indicators of transportation sustainability are on the right side of the diagram. Each of these is inuenced by a set of factors, some of which are common to several sustainability indicators. For example, vehicle kilometers of travel affect safety, congestion, the environment, and fuel consumption. Similarly, individual desires aect safety as well as all of the other sustainability indicators. Because of the strong interdependence of land use and transportation, land use was included in the frameworks as one of the inuencers of the indicator variables. Fig. 1 can be subdivided into ve charts that delineate, for each of the ve indicators of sustainability, the inuencing factors. The advantage of Fig. 1 is that the whole picture is presented, showing the maze of inuences and interrelationships of the factors. The advantages of Figs. 26 are that each sustainability condition can be reviewed with greater clarity. For example, Fig. 2, Passenger Factors Aecting Safety, shows that levels of national resources and physical, social, and psychological needs are behind individual desires, which

32

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Road Design Driver Factors: Knowledge, Time, Money, Interest, Ability, Experience, Attitude Human Error Vehicle Maintenance Vehicle Factors

Crash Avoidance

Safety

Crashworthiness

Vehicle Manufacturers

National Resources National Defense Needs Government Policies Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing

Vehicle Prices Individual Desires Voter Preferences Land Use Physical, Psychological, Social Needs Market Forces Fuel Prices VKT

Fig. 2. Passenger factors aecting safety.

inuence voter preferences, which along with national defense needs inuence government policies (such as taxation). Government policies, along with the price of owning and operating a vehicle and market forces, impact land use, and together they inuence VKT. VKT, with other factors, inuence all of the indicators except access. Fundamental to understanding highway safety are the human, the vehicle, and the environment in which the vehicle is driven. These three factors are shown as key inuencers of safety. Similar tracings can be made through the charts in Figs. 36. Fig. 5 deals with access as an indicator of transportation sustainability. In this context, access refers to access to social and economic opportunity. It is possible that access could increase with a decrease in trac. Coming from all of the transport sustainability indicators are arrows indicating a feedback loop for the whole system.

5. Framework for analysis of sustainability of freight trucking Based on a synthesis of the information provided by the literature search, the three discussion groups, and

the survey, a framework for analysis of sustainability of the freight trucking industry was developed and is shown in Fig. 7. Figs. 8 and 9 show the frameworks for safety and for fuel use, congestion, and the environment. The framework for freight transport, while having some inuencing factors in common with the passenger transport framework (e.g., VKT and vehicle and fuel price), is dierent from it. While both passengers and the shippers of freight seek to optimize their own utility functions, the dierences in the two frameworks derive mainly from the complex bundle of economic, temporal, psychological, safety, and convenience needs that are inherent in humans and not in freight. Trucking safety is primarily a function of the road environment, crashworthiness of trucks and other vehicles, and the incidence of crashes, as shown in Fig. 8. Crashworthiness is inuenced by truck weight and safety features that can, in turn, be inuenced by government policy. Crash incidence is inuenced by a number of factors, including truck driver behavior, weather conditions, behavior of drivers of other vehicles, and VKT. Truck driver behavior can be inuenced by a wide range of factors which, in turn, can be aected by government policy on hours driven, and by the demand

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Vehicle Manufacturers

33

National Resources National Defense Needs Government Policies Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing Vehicle Prices

Fuel Technology

Fuel Consumption

Individual Desires

Voter Preferences Land Use VKT

Physical, Psychological, Social Needs

Market Forces Fuel Prices

Fig. 3. Passenger factors aecting fuel consumption.

National Resources National Defense Needs Government Policies Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing

Vehicle Prices Individual Desires Voter Preferences Land Use Physical, Psychological, Social Needs Market Forces Fuel Prices VKT Congestion

Fig. 4. Passenger factors aecting congestion.

for goods being delivered by truck. The road environment is aected by nature, market forces, and government policy. Government policies would, in turn, be inuenced by shippers and the public.

As illustrated in Fig. 9, fuel consumption is inuenced most directly by land use, truck fuel economy, truck vehicle kilometers traveled, and congestion. Truck fuel economy is inuenced by truck weight, fuel quality

34
National Resources National Defense Needs

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Government Policies

Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing Vehicle Prices

Individual Desires

Voter Preferences Land Use

Physical, Psychological, Social Needs

Market Forces Fuel Prices

Availability of Public Transportation

Individuals' Income, Age, Health

Access Ability, Means to Drive

Fig. 5. Passenger factors aecting access.

National Resources National Defense Needs Government Policies Taxes

Vehicle Use Pricing Vehicle Prices

Individual Desires

Voter Preferences Land Use VKT Congestion

Physical, Psychological, Social Needs

Market Forces Fuel Prices

Emissions Technology

Environment

Fig. 6. Passenger factors aecting the environment.

and cost, and power plant. Both market forces and government policy inuence these. Options for government intervention, among others, include increasing the price of fuel by raising the fuel tax, enacting a carbon tax, or supporting the development of alternative fuel vehicles such as hybrid or fuel cells. In addition, governments could aect fuel consumption by lessening truck VKT by promoting intermodalism. In such a case, rail and water vehicles would be used in concert with trucks.

Water transport and train would be used for the longest distances, with trucks being used for the shortest distances. Because congestion is a function of truck VKT, eorts to lessen VKT should decrease congestion. Congestion is inuenced by land-use patterns as well as the level of truck VKT. Business, individual, and community land-use decisions will inuence the levels of density and their attendant implications. The nal element of sustainability, the environment, is a function

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Nature Road Environment

35

Safety Features in Trucks Hours Driving Hours of Service Rules Education Level Training Level Psychological/ Emotional Level Human Error Wage Level Sleep Deprivation Unsafe Speeds Lack of Experienced Drivers Truck Weight Truck Power Plant Fuel Quality Level of Fuel Tax Demand for Delivery of Goods by Truck Cost of Fuel # of Trucks on Road Frequency of Truck Use Shipper Requirements ( e.g., JIT, timeliness) Government Policy Cost of Shipping by Truck Distance Driven Efficiency of Freight Distribution Distance Between Origin & Destination Efficiency of Freight Packing Weather Conditions Truck Driver Behavior Re. Safety

Crashworthiness of Trucks and Other Vehicles

Safety

Demands on Truck Drivers

Incidence of Crashes Behavior of Non-Truck Occupants

Market Forces

Truck Fuel Economy Fuel Consumption

Truck VMT

Availability of Rail Service Infrastructure Cost Frequency Timeliness

Congestion

Truck Use Restrictions

Land Use Pattern Environment

Road Infrastructure Capacity Business Location Decisions

Pollution Control Technology

Fig. 7. Freight factors aecting sustainability of the transportation system.

of land-use patterns, pollution control technology, VKT, and congestion. Technology is inuenced by government policy and market forces. Government policy could come in the form of technology regulations, pollution standards, or vehicle-use restrictions. Market forces could come to bear, dependent upon competitive considerations. As with the passenger transport framework, there is a feedback loop emanating from all the sustainability indicators.

6. Interactions among inuencing factors There are a great many interactions among the factors inuencing the transport sustainability indicators in each of the frameworks, and also between the frameworks. In the passenger transport framework, pricing of vehicles, vehicle use, and fuel, land use, and VKT all inuence all of the sustainability indicators. Common

to all of the indicators are market forces, taxes, and government policies, along with all the factors that inuence them, including physical, psychological, and social needs and individual desires. In the freight transport network, VKT, fuel economy, and land use inuence fuel consumption, congestion, and the environment. VKT also inuences safety. In addition, market forces and government policy inuence all of the sustainability indicators. In addition to the road and rail infrastructure, common to both the passenger and freight transport frameworks are market forces, government policy, pricing of fuel, vehicles, and vehicle use, vehicle fuel economy, pollution control technology, vehicle crashworthiness, driver behavior, vehicle safety technology, land use, availability of alternative modes, and VKT. These interactions serve to illustrate the peril of addressing only one policy option or indicator in the belief that other indicators will remain constant. Changes

36

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Nature

Road Environment

Safety Features in Trucks Hours Driving Hours of Service Rules Education Level Training Level Psychological/ Emotional Level Human Error Wage Level Sleep Deprivation Unsafe Speeds Lack of Experienced Drivers Truck Weight Weather Conditions Truck Driver Behavior Re. Safety

Crashworthiness of Trucks and Other Vehicles

Safety

Demands on Truck Drivers

Incidence of Crashes Behavior of Non-Truck Occupants

Market Forces

Level of Fuel Tax Demand for Delivery of Goods by Truck # of Trucks on Road Frequency of Truck Use Shipper Requirements ( e.g., JIT, timeliness) Government Policy Cost of Shipping by Truck Distance Driven Efficiency of Freight Distribution Distance Between Origin & Destination Efficiency of Freight Packing

Truck VMT

Availability of Rail Service Infrastructure Cost Frequency Timeliness

Truck Use Restrictions

Road Infrastructure Capacity Business Location Decisions

Fig. 8. Freight factors aecting safety.

of unknown magnitude and direction of non-analyzed variables in the transport system are almost certain.

7. Policy and industry intervention opportunities The transportation system is a combination of individual and common goods. In the case of an entity that is privately held and does not interact with others, the benets of an investment an individual makes in that entity and the benets of an investment in the system by an individual are likely to be shared by all the users of the system. Consider pollution control technology. If an individual invests money to improve the pollution control technology in his own vehicle, he incurs the full cost of that investment, but reaps only a small percentage of the benet. If he invests in safety improvements to his vehicle, he reaps a much higher proportion of the bene-

t, and society also may benet. An example is if a noninvestor avoids involvement in crashes that the investor does not cause because of his new technology. In general, there is little motivation for most people to invest in those things that will help move us toward transportation system sustainability because the costs and benets are so out of line with each other. To address this problem, often referred to as an example of the tragedy of the commons, wide-scale intervention is needed. This intervention comes to the transportation system through government and industry initiatives. The organization of inuencing factors as shown allows the reviewer to consider not only the aggregated descriptors of the factors inuencing sustainability, but also the points of potential policy and industry intervention in the process toward transportation system sustainability. Some of the factors shown are amenable to change through the policy process, and some are not.

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

Truck Weight Truck Power Plant Fuel Quality Level of Fuel Tax Demand for Delivery of Goods by Truck Cost of Fuel # of Trucks on Road Frequency of Truck Use Shipper Requirements ( e.g., JIT, timeliness) Government Policy Cost of Shipping by Truck Distance Driven Congestion Efficiency of Freight Distribution Distance Between Origin & Destination Efficiency of Freight Packing Pollution Control Technology Land Use Pattern Environment Road Infrastructure Capacity Business Location Decisions

37

Market Forces

Truck Fuel Economy Fuel Consumption

Truck VMT

Availability of Rail Service Infrastructure Cost Frequency Timeliness

Truck Use Restrictions

Fig. 9. Freight factors aecting fuel consumption, congestion, and the environment.

In the case of passenger transport, industry has a clear role in developing technologies and vehicles that contribute to improved safety, fuel economy, and emissions. Less obvious, but very important, are opportunities for the industry to inform and educate the public regarding safe driving behavior and vehicle maintenance, or even to be in the business of providing mobility, rather than simply vehicles. In the realm of freight transport, industry has a very strong role to play in setting and enforcing rules governing driver behavior (e.g., hours of driving, training requirements, distance driven, and driving speed), eciency of freight distribution, and in vehicle factors such as the power plant, safety features, and pollution control technology. The policy intervention opportunities for government agencies are dierent from those for industry, and also dier among levels of government. At the national level, government can regulate features in both passenger and freight vehicles, for example, fuel, emissions, and safety technology and vehicle size and weight. It can pass laws regarding behavior such as speed limits, seat belt use, and alcohol use; levy taxes on vehicle sales, fuel, and driver licenses with the objective of covering the costs of the externalities of transport use; and invest in non-highway and public vehicles and infrastructure. Some of these can also be done at the state and local levels. Local government can, more easily than higher levels of government, set land-use policy that would alter transportation use patterns. It can also set and enforce restrictions on time and place of vehicle use. All levels of government have roles to play in the education of transporta-

tion system users with regard to the need to conserve energy, reduce pollution, and engage in safe driving practices.

8. Applicability of the method The method used to develop the analysis frameworks and the content of the frameworks are based on data collected in the United States, where the preponderance of personal trips made are by private vehicle. The method of developing the frameworks, including the assembly of views of concerned and knowledgeable parties and the organization of them based on root cause analysis and inuence diagramming, is expected to be generally applicable in most places. However, the factors and relationships in the frameworks shown would most likely be unique to each place in which they were used. The content of the frameworks would vary by geographic area, forms of government, the people and organizations contributing their views, their cultural background and expectations, the objective of the analysis at hand, residential and business density, and time. The frameworks as presented can be expanded to include more detail regarding inuencing factors or importance or strength of the connections between factors. Location-specic frameworks could be enhanced by contributions of research and data collection. The value of the method is that it provides a systematic picture of the entire transportation system and that it helps in setting forth the myriad consequences of

38

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939

change and the interactions inherent in the transportation system.

9. Findings and conclusions Given willing, knowledgeable participants, it was relatively straightforward to build the sustainable transportation analysis frameworks. These frameworks take into account systematic relationships, feedbacks, and rebound eects of making changes to the system. They illustrate that one-dimensional problem solving using cause-and-eect approaches will not be helpful in moving toward transportation sustainability. Interestingly, for passenger transport, physical, psychological, and social needs present themselves as primary inuencers of sustainable transportation indicators. For freight, market forces and government policy are primary inuencers of variables that are predominantly of an economic nature. These observations, combined with the interrelatedness of the inuencing factors, provide guidance for the planning of transportation system changes. It is hoped that these frameworks will help analysts, planners, and decision makers in moving toward sustainable transportation systems.

How can behavior be changed so that people use fewer resources, as do those who engage in voluntary simplicity? What will be the best ways of changing peoples behavior? Can the issue of sustainable transportation be raised into awareness as a public health issue as smoking has? What will be the best ways of getting new technology? How can public policy be inuenced so as to promote a sustainable transportation system? What are the key places in the decision process leading to a sustainable transportation system where policy intervention would yield the greatest results? Acknowledgments The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Sloan Foundation, the U.S. Department of Transportation through the Great Lakes Center for Truck and Transit Research, members of the University of Michigan Trucking Industry Program Advisory Board, many colleagues at Northwestern University and the University of Michigan, and, of course, anonymous reviewers.

10. Future research References The development of these transportation sustainability frameworks raises several questions that might be answered in future research. They are: Are there other indicators of sustainability that need to be addressed? What factors are not present in the diagrams? How can the impacts of change in technology and policy intervention be measured? For which items is more information required so that good decisions can be made? What is the ecacy of dierent technologies, for example, intelligent transportation system technologies? What methods would best be used to forecast impacts of changes in the inuencing variables? What would be the impact of analyzing sustainability? What can be done regarding land use patterns? What is the role of urban sprawl in sustainable transportation systems? What are the roles, responsibilities, and relationships of all participants in the transportation planning and policy setting processes? Do these participants need to reach consensus on a vision of a sustainable transportation system? How do they reach consensus?
American Trade Initiatives, Inc., 2001. Sustainable transportation practices in Europe. Report No. FHWA-PL-02-006. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Beuthe, M., Jourquin, B., Degrandsart, F., Geerts, J.F., 2002. External costs of Belgian freight trac: a network analysis of their internalization. In: Black, W.R., Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), Social Change and Sustainable Transport. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, pp. 219226. Black, W.R., 1996. Sustainable transportation: a US perspective. Journal of Transport Geography 4, 151159. Black, W.R., Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), 2002. Social Change and Sustainable Transport. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Black, J.A., Paez, A., Suthanaya, P.A., 2002. Sustainable urban transportation: performance indicators and some analytical approaches. Journal of the Urban Planning and Development 128 (4), 184209. Browne, M., 1997. Trends in urban freight transport: setting a framework for a sustainable future. In: Sustainable Freight Transport in the City, Conference Papers, held September 2425, 1997. Transport 2000, London. Clemen, R.T., 1996. Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA. Deakin, E., 2002. Sustainable transportation: US Dilemmas and European experiences. Transportation Research Record, No. 1792, pp. 111. DeCicco, J., Delucchi, M. (Eds.), 1997. Transportation, Energy, and Environment: How Far Can Technology Take Us?. American Council for an Energy-Ecient Economy, Washington, DC. Duleep, K.G., 1997. Keep on truckinsustainably? In: DeCicco, J., Delucchi, M. (Eds.), Transportation, Energy, and Environment:

B.C. Richardson / Journal of Transport Geography 13 (2005) 2939 How Far Can Technology Take Us? American Council for an Energy-Ecient Economy, Washington, DC, pp. 179194. Friedl, B., Steininger, K.W., 2002. Environmentally sustainable transport: denition and long-term economic impacts for Austria. Empirica 29 (2), 163180. Gordon, D., 1995. Sustainable transportation: What do we mean and how do we get there? In: Shaheen, S., Sperling, D. (Eds.), Transportation and Energy: Strategies for a Sustainable Transportation System. American Council for an Energy-Ecient Economy, Washington, DC, pp. 111. Joseph, S., 1997. Sustainable development, freight transport and the urban environment. in sustainable freight transport in the city. Conference Papers, Held September 2425, 1997. Transport 2000, London. Loo, B.P.Y., 2002. Role of stated preference methods in planning for sustainable urban transportation: state of practice and future prospects. Journal of the Urban Planning and Development 128 (4), 210224. ORourke, L., Lawrence, M.F., 1995. Strategies for goods movement in a sustainable transportation system. In: Shaheen, S., Sperling, D. (Eds.), Transportation and Energy: Strategies for a Sustainable Transportation System. American Council for an Energy-Ecient Economy, Washington DC, pp. 5976. Priemus, H., 2002. Toward multimodal networks and nodes of freight transport in the European Union. In: Black, W.R., Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), Social Change and Sustainable Transport. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, pp. 227234. Richardson, B.C., 1999. Toward a policy on a sustainable transportation system. Transportation Research Record, No. 1670, pp. 27 34. Richardson, B.C., 2000. Role of the motor- vehicle industry in a sustainable transportation system. Transportation Research Record, No. 1702, pp. 2127. Richardson, B.C., 2001. Freight trucking in a sustainable transportation system. Transportation Research Record, No. 1763, pp. 57 64.

39

Rodriguez, D.A., Richardson, B.C., Belzer, M., 1997. A methodology for estimating the driver safety and turnover consequences of an increase in wage levels. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Forum. Montreal. Schipper, L., 2003. Sustainable urban transport in the 21st century: a new agenda. In: Proceedings of Conference: Transportation, Energy, and Environmental Policy: Managing Transitions, held in Monterey, CA, 9/11/20019/12/01. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. Scrase, R., 1998. Driving Freight Forward. ITS International, pp. 4751. The World Bank, 1996. Sustainable Transport: Priorities for Policy Reform. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank, Washington, DC. Transportation Research Board, 1993. TRB Conference Proceedings 3, International Symposium on Motor Carrier Transportation, Williamsburg, VA, May 31, 1993. TRB, Washington, DC. Transportation Research Board, 1997. Toward a sustainable future, addressing the long-term eects of motor vehicle transportation on climate and ecology. Special Report 251. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. van Geenhuizen, M., Nijkamp, P., Black, W.R., 2002. Social change and sustainable transport: a manifesto on transatlantic research opportunities. In: Black, W.R., Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), Social Change and Sustainable Transport. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, pp. 316. Whitelegg, J., 1997. Evaluating strategic transshipment sites and urban distribution centres. In: Sustainable Freight Transport in the City, Conference Papers, held September 2425, 1997. Transport 2000, London. Wilhelm, A., Posch, K.-H., 2003. Mobility management strategies for the next decades: ndings and recommendations from largest European Mobility management project. Transportation Research Record, No. 1839, pp. 173181.