Development of Tools for Assessing Wider Economic Benefits of Transportation (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

80 Accomplishments So Far The spreadsheet tools developed by SHRP 2 Project C11 have five salient uses: • They demonstrate that it is possible to estimate wider trans- portation impacts, including travel time reliability, inter- modal connectivity, and market accessibility. • They demonstrate that it is possible to calculate an economic value to households and businesses that are directly affected by those wider transportation impacts. • They provide a set of ready-to-use tools that staff of any DOT, MPO, or consultant can use to estimate the above- cited effects. • They generate transportation and economic metrics that can be used as input to multi-criteria, economic impact, or benefit–cost analyses. • They provide a set of analysis steps that can potentially be incorporated into more complete and long-range trans- portation, land use, or economic forecasting systems. These uses fall within the category of what are called “mid- dle stage planning,” which is a step beyond the simple viewing of comparable projects elsewhere (addressed by the T-PICS website of SHRP 2 Project C03), but short of the more sophis- ticated techniques incorporated into transportation, land use, and economic simulation and forecasting models. Yet it is clear that much more work remains to be done to improve these tools and their use. Remaining Needs The work accomplished by this project has shown not only (1) that it is possible to produce tools to assess wider trans- portation effects and their economic value but also (2) that there is significant need for future work to improve both the “state of the art” and the “state of the practice.” These needs fall into four categories: • Alternative Measures of Transportation Impact. The literature review has shown that for each of the dimensions of wider transportation impact (reliability, connectivity, and acces- sibility) there are multiple ways to measure the magnitude of effect. For example, reliability can be measured in terms of standard deviation around the mean, or schedule buffer time, and accessibility can be measured in terms of an effec- tive density measure that is based on a decay function, or else in terms of the effective size of the market within defined boundaries. Each metric has advantages and disadvantages that vary depending on the intended use, though in some cases alternative metrics can yield similar findings regarding the relative impacts of a proposed project. More research is necessary to further illuminate similarities and differences among these metrics, and to guide future use of them. • Economic Valuation. The economic valuation of these wider transportation impacts has been shown to vary widely depending on the type of transportation and industries that are involved or affected. For example, the benefits of timeliness and access to large-scale markets can depend on the type of product being shipped. The tools developed for this project distinguish between freight and passenger transportation, but do not distinguish impacts by industry. While those distinctions may be very important, the tools provided here were designed to illustrate how simple meth- ods can be used in a straightforward manner without fur- ther data requirements. However, these tools can provide a basis for tools enhanced with further detail to improve the benefit estimation process, particularly when system-wide freight models and economic impact models are available. • Completeness. The tools developed for this study illustrate how wider benefits can be incorporated into standard proj- ect evaluation procedures. But, they are still incomplete. C h A p t e R 6 Conclusions: Accomplishments and Needs

81 For instance, the business value of improved reliability has been calculated for freight deliveries, but is not yet opera- tional for commuting trips. Furthermore, no effort has yet been made to assess the value of quality of life improve- ments that residents may realize because of better accessi- bility to shopping, recreation, and tourism opportunities. In addition, the three dimensions of impact that were addressed here are not the only dimensions of wider trans- portation impact. They were selected largely because they were the most commonly reported objectives of highway capacity projects in the T-PICS database, but obviously there are other, localized social and environmental effects that also occur and need to be addressed in future research. • Relationship to Productivity and Competitiveness. These tools all attempt to measure impacts on households and businesses that directly make use of improved facilities, or are directly affected by their use (transporting workers, incoming supplies, or shipping products to customers). Yet there are also broader economic effects that occur as second- ary or indirect consequences, over a longer period of time. These include effects on business expansion and location patterns, supply and demand for labor, prices, and import and export patterns—all of which can also affect productiv- ity, competitiveness, and economic growth. Further research is needed to better distinguish productivity gains attribut- able to transportation system improvements.