1

Ian Philips

Modelling adaptive capacity to fuelshocks – an indicator for sustainabletransport policy.

Institute for Transport Studies: University of Leeds

abstract

• There is a possibility that a fuel shock could occur; a severe restriction in the amount of fuelavailable for transport. This would restrict the movement of people. The spatial pattern of thecapacity of individuals to adapt to a fuel shock is of concern to policy makers. Additionally thescope for policy makers to estimate the effects of schemes to increase adaptive capacity on groupsof people at small geographies would allow them to target resources to more vulnerable areas.An indicator is built which reports the proportion of people in an area who would have the capacityto make a journey such as their current commute immediately after the fuel shock begins.The model used to generate the indicator value is described. A population micro-simulation is usedto estimate characteristics of individuals living in Output Areas (OAs) across England. Characteristicssuch as Body Mass Index and fitness are generated by combining census data with data from theHealth Survey for England. The physical capacity to propel a bicycle is estimated for individuals. Thenature of the road network and the topography are also considered in estimating the maximumdistance people could travel.The model can examine the effects of policies to increase adaptive capacity to fuel shocks such asincreasing fitness, reducing obesity, increasing the availability of bicycles and reduction of barriersto direct journeys by bicycle such as cycle and pedestrian bridges across rivers.

3

Why anindicator?

1

2

3

Modelling adaptivecapacity to fuel shocks

4

•There are finite limits toresources

•So that means …

Problem

This might happen where you live

5Problem

FUEL SHOCK

PERMENANTLY

NO FUEL

• What modes could we use to getaround?

• How can we do something nowwhich would make a differencein the future?

6

Fuel Shock Resilience

77

Of who to what? (same normal / new normal)

•Government Keep business running

•Individuals: Quality of life?

8

Personal FuelShock Adaptive

Capacity

The ability of peopleto continue makingjourneys immediatelypost shock. (at ourscale of interest).

Research Questions

What level of adaptive capacity does ourcurrent pattern of travel andtransportation provision have to asudden and unpredictable fuel shock?

If we want to improve things beforethe shock then how do we assess apolicy in terms of its effect onadaptive capacity?

10

Planners shouldconsider adaptivecapacity

Policies wouldaffect adaptivecapacity

Assessmentframeworksassess policiesi.e MCA or CBA

Assessmentframeworksneed indicators

Adaptivecapacityindicator

Why an indicator?

The indicator is:the percentage of employed

people who could get to work bywalking and cycling tomorrow if

there was a fuel shock

11

What’s theindicator

Scope and guiding approach forconstructing the indicator

12

No Prediction

Not Freight

Data Assumptions

Quantitative Comparison

Graph: types of adaptive capacity

13M

ove

ho

me

t = fuel shock t = later

Ab

ility

tou

sead

apti

veca

pac

ity O

ther

Ch

ange

job

time

Bicyclecharacteristics

Variationin circuity

Transportavailability for

essentialworkers

Weight

fitness

Age

Current commutedistance

Bike availability

BMI

Height

Timebudget

Physicalconstraint

Socialconstraint

Walkingspeed

Slope

Bicyclingspeed

NetworkPermeability

Pedallingpower

Gender

Number ofstops andstarts perjourney Maximum safe,

healthy commutedistance by active

modes

Maximumcycling

distance

Maximumwalkingdistance

interventions toreduce obesity

Proportion of populationable to get to work post

shock

interventions toincrease bikeavailability

interventions todecrease currentcommute distance

interventions todecreasenetwork barriers

Cyclingacceptability

Area dataproportion ofroute network

with cyclefacilities

interventions todecrease number ofstops on cyclejourneys

interventions oncycleinfrastructure &speed limits

Ability toget to

work byPT

Ability toget to

work bybus

Currenttrain

commuters

Publictransportinterventions

3

2&3

2&3

2&3

Bicyclecharacteristics

Variationin circuity

Transportavailability for

essentialworkers

Weight

fitness

Age

Current commutedistance

Bike availability

BMI

Height

Timebudget

Physicalconstraint

Socialconstraint

Walkingspeed

Slope

Bicyclingspeed

NetworkPermeability

Pedallingpower

Gender

Number ofstops andstarts perjourney Maximum safe,

healthy commutedistance by active

modes

Maximumcycling

distance

Maximumwalkingdistance

interventions toreduce obesity

Proportion of populationable to get to work post

shock

interventions toincrease bikeavailability

interventions todecrease currentcommute distance

interventions todecreasenetwork barriers

Cyclingacceptability

Area dataproportion ofroute network

with cyclefacilities

interventions todecrease number ofstops on cyclejourneys

interventions oncycleinfrastructure &speed limits

Ability toget to

work byPT

Ability toget to

work bybus

Currenttrain

commuters

Publictransportinterventions

3

2&3

2&3

2&3

individual capacity to walk andpropel bicycles

Time budget

Supply factors

Slope

Maximum traveldistance

Commutedistance

Vs

indicator

Why an individual approach?People vary in their ability to travel by walkingand cycling. Their pedalling power is based onpersonal attributes like age gender and fitness.These attributes vary between individuals andbetween locations. Access to bicycles andneeding to escort kids to school also variesbetween individuals and location. The othergroups of factors like slope and commutedistance also vary geographically.

If we take the “average person” it excludes avery large amount of people from the analysis.

So an individual approach makes sense

Stage 1 spatial micro-simulationSample population

Individual andaspatial

Aggregate spatialConstraint tables

software

Syntheticpopulation

HSE microdata20081754individuals(nothouseholds)

age-sex-economicactivity;NSSec;Education;(2001 OAcensus data)

Stage 2 of the modelStage 1 Synthetic individual

CanIndividualcommuteY /N?

Draw maximumtravel distance

Draw commutedistance

OAindicator

%Vs

AggregateEscort?+

+

+

+

+

Multipledraws

Bike?

Assess alternatives:

VsDo minimum Do Policy

e.g policy to increase fitness and reduce obesity

Keep same individuals – not re-draw, compare like with like avoidsnoiseIs there a significant difference in indicator value for a given OAwhen the policy is implemented?

20Problem

2020

Working model20

Better way to add attributes

Dynamic? 2011?

Check / test / analyse

21Problem

2121

Thank you21

Questions

Comments

• Image credits:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org

• Further information available on request