Fighting congestion, RAND-style

Study finds that tolls and parking charges are key to ease traffic 2

Earlier this year, the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit think tank, put out a report on how to get traffic moving faster. They considered lots of the standard solutions—improving signal timing, clearing accidents quickly, encouraging telecommuting, and so forth—and found that many of them could, in fact, provide some temporary congestion relief.

But here’s the rub: RAND found that over the long haul, these kinds of solutions simply don’t have much effect on congestion. They can briefly get traffic moving faster, but just about every improvement in travel time results in ... more people taking to the road! Over the long haul, apparently, most congestion relief efforts sow the seeds of their own destruction. Says RAND:

[W]hen traffic conditions on a roadway are improved during peak hours, additional travelers will tend to converge on that newly freed capacity from (1) other times of travel, (2) other routes of travel, or (3) other modes of travel, slowly eroding the initial peak-hour congestion-reduction benefits in the busiest travel corridors. Longer term increases in the demand for automotive travel resulting from population growth and economic expansion can further undermine a strategy’s effectiveness. This is why we often see, for instance, that flow improves for a short while when new lanes are added to a freeway but usually returns to former levels of congestion within just a few years.

In the end, RAND found that only a few strategies had any significant potential to curb congestion. The thing these strategies had in common was that they raised the cost of trips on congested routes. RAND singled out two basic tactics: charging tolls for driving where congestion is heaviest; and making it more expensive for drivers to park. See the chart after the jump:

chart

That red oval highlights the only solutions that the study’s authors believe have any significant potential to fight congestion over the long term. Sadly, RAND also found that the road pricing solutions—the top two—face huge political and practical obstacles.

Which leaves parking pricing in the sweet spot. Variable parking rates and parking "cashout" (more about that) are relatively easy to implement, and have great long-term benefits for congestion. Parking cash-out—where employers give workers the option to take a cash payment in lieu of free parking—has real financial benefits as well.

But for all the other congestion-busting ideas out there—well, they might help a bit, at least for awhile. Over the long run, though, as long as we give road and parking space away for free, we’ll still be struck in traffic.

Clark Williams-Derry is research director for the Seattle-based Sightline Institute, a nonprofit sustainability think tank working to promote smart solutions for the Pacific Northwest. He was formerly the webmaster for Grist.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. aullman Posted 6:04 am
    21 Dec 2008

    Paradigm shift could cut down on congestionTelecommuting can help some with roadway congestion, however to make a major impact, businesses will need to make a paradigm shift.
    Roadways are jammed up by workers driving back and forth to work every day.  Most of these workers could work remotely, but only a small percentage do.  There are social issues and facility issues which keep a high percentage of workers in their centralized offices.
    Remote Office Centers allow employees to work remotely from an office that is similar to their centralized office.  The only difference is the location.
    Remote Office Centers lease individual offices, internet and phone systems to workers from different companies in shared centers located around the city and suburbs.
    The way to solve congestion and energy issues is to bring the office to the employee, rather than have employees drive to the office every day.  Office can be located anywhere.  If you distribute offices around the suburbs, then congestion problems are solved.
    Remote Office Centers are fairly new, but can be found in many cities by searching the internet for "Remote Office Centers" in quotes or going to a free web site that lists ROCs:
    http://www.remoteofficecenters.com
  2. biodiversivist's avatar

    biodiversivist Posted 8:31 am
    21 Dec 2008

    I'm with aullmanAlso, I'm of the opinion that the problem isn't so much congestion as it is the futile building of new roads and lanes in an attempt to end congestion.
    Here's a radical idea--remove lanes. You would have fewer idling cars. People find their own solutions. Freight would move to ship or rail. Drivers will choose to get in line, move, carpool, telecommute or any number of other options. The streets of NYC are saturated even with all of the mass transit it has. Adding more mass transit would just increase density. It would do nothing to end street congestion.
    I for one have found alternative solutions and rarely choose to join the other parked cars on the interstate.



    In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement