Learning from a crisis

 

Tom Van Vuren, technical director and practice leader transport planning Australia at Mott MacDonald, discusses what the COVID-19 outbreak can teach us about transport modelling.

A newspaper article in the earlier stages of the coronavirus pandemic used a headline that many of us working in transport could relate to: 'Coronavirus exposes the problems and pitfalls of modelling' (The Guardian 26 March 2020).

The need for, and reliance on, epidemiological modelling in this particular case has been exceptional and very visible to a public seeking answers, rather than wanting to understand how these were derived.

Transport models have long faced similar confrontations. Inevitably, transport policies and projects result in winners and losers, and obviously those losers will be vocal. The models are blamed.

Often the distribution of the costs and benefits are skewed, with concentrated costs for a few and dispersed benefits for many, which exacerbates the opposition to the measure and has regularly led to attempts to discredit the models used to underpin the decision. Modelling itself cannot be the sole defence – experience, expertise and judgement in the use of the results are essential.

Of course, for decisions as important as the long-term consequences of a transport policy or project on urban structure and the wider well-being of the population, we need some kind of modelling. We must have predictions of the outcomes of alternative decisions. And that is even more pertinent in the evaluation of the success of an intervention after implementation – modelling the counterfactual (what would have happened if had done nothing or something different) will help explain to a critical public and help decision-makers learn for the future.

The Guardian headline mentioned above and more recent articles elsewhere for example a Nature article of 2 April and a Conversation article of 4 April point to a number of lessons that we can learn from the COVID response to modelling

Without good data it is really hard to model, and the results inevitably have wide error bands. That was obvious in the early stages of the spread of the coronavirus, but it is also true for transport modelling. To what extent will previous trends and relationships continue? Will the way in which different modes are valued, the number and types of trips we make, differ in a post-COVID world? More than ever, old trends or poorly collected new surveys will make the models and the predictions less useful and more dependent on assumptions.

As they are mathematical constructs of complex phenomena, every model is full of assumptions. It is important to make these explicit so that a reader or end-user understands the model's limitations and to what extent the results can be relied on in each application. I would say that any debate on travel demand forecasts should, first and foremost, focus on the assumptions rather than the model itself. Without understanding and respecting these, the cautious findings of researchers will become the self-assured claims of politicians or activists.

There is always the risk of tried and tested models not being applicable for new situations. In the early stages of my career, all road forecasts were made with single-mode, car-only assignment models. Only after we saw practical examples of induced demand, generated traffic, did our practical models evolve to become multi-modal and represent additional responses to roads projects - not only mode choice but also destination choice and even departure time choice. These had existed in academia, but had been rarely implemented and used in actual decision-making. Some models may have an inherent bias; Caroline Criado Perez's book Invisible Women provides examples that force us to question traditional segmentation in transport models, and the valuation of benefits and disbenefits across the population.

We need to be prepared to change the model and to change the inputs and assumptions when new facts emerge, even if that indicates that a previous decision was wrong. Be willing to learn! Anecdotal evidence suggests that this is what led to a change in government policy in response to the COVID crisis. Just think what would be possible if new facts emerge showing that a transport intervention is actually not such a good idea. A political problem, probably, but what a triumph for evidence-based decision-making! Models cannot make the decisions –sense-checking, peer review, triangulation – we have enough tools available to validate the numbers, including the results from alternative models.

There is always uncertainty in the inputs to the forecasts. The future is even more uncertain than before and transport models rely on predictions of the economy, of the population, of urban development, and of travel behaviour over a long period of time, possibly more than 30 years ahead. Transport demand forecasts made before 2020 will inevitably turn out wrong – were the models wrong or our assumed future inputs? We must be willing to model different futures, different scenarios and be able to explain to people that there is a range of forecasts and that sometimes it's impossible to say which one is more likely to occur. And let's hope for a more helpful response than that attributed to LB Johnson: 'Ranges are for cattle, give me a number.'

Ever since stepping foot on British soil, it has surprised me that so much of the transport modelling effort in the UK is focused on project appraisal, and how little it is used to support policy-making. Even WebTAG, as Transport Analysis Guidance, is strongly driven by the needs of a robust appraisal of projects. It is not clear to me if such models contain all the levers or represent all responses to transport policies that focus on say behavioural change or active mode promotion. As I wrote in my July 2019 Highways Magazine article Limited Visibility, models will need to change to support climate change policy, and models will need to change to support a post-COVID transport world.

Quite a few of my transport planning colleagues hope that some of the beneficial side-effects of the responses to the pandemic: empty roads, improved air quality, greatly increased numbers of cyclists, will remain a feature of the future post-COVID transport system.

Modelling cannot help establish whether that will or will not be the case. But modelling can help identify what kinds of measure might help lock in these behaviours, be they regulatory or behavioural nudges or supply-side measures such as the temporary bicycle lanes installed in cities around the world. Rather than claiming the ability to forecast that future, what-if scenarios will help determine how the future transport system can be cleaner and greener. We can use our models better, to move from a predict and provide a paradigm to one of decide and provide.

And research is necessary to underpin the credibility of model assumptions. For example, will the continued need for social distancing mean that public transport becomes a less attractive alternative than is currently reflected in our models? To what extent will work from home become the norm? And will a reduction in commute trips be counterbalanced by increased travel for leisure and exercise? How will economic uncertainty affect car ownership? And what about oil prices?

The COVID crisis has illustrated to many that transport is indeed a derived demand, but that not everyone has the same opportunity to respond. We must model (and then keep monitoring) the wider health, environmental and socioeconomic impacts of transport interventions post-lockdown and control measures, with short, medium and long-term timeframes, and with a social lens to look at how this impacts differentially across society. We should welcome greater transparency and participation to allow effective scrutiny and challenge from scientists outside of our field.

For me, rather than coronavirus having exposed the problems and pitfalls of modelling, it has illustrated its value. The same is true for transport.

Register now for full access


Register just once to get unrestricted, real-time coverage of the issues and challenges facing UK transport and highways engineers.

Full website content includes the latest news, exclusive commentary from leading industry figures and detailed topical analysis of the highways, transportation, environment and place-shaping sectors. Use the link below to register your details for full, free access.

Already a registered? Login

 
comments powered by Disqus
 
 
highways jobs

Senior Structures Engineer

Kent County Council
£33,678 per annum
We are looking to recruit a Senior Structures Engineer to provide engineering support for maintenance of highway structures, liaising and... Kent
Recuriter: Kent County Council

Contracts and Strategy Manager

Royal Borough of Greenwich
£42684 - £45585 per annum
The Directorate of Communities & Environment prides itself on the service it provides to the residents of Royal Greenwich. We are looking to recruit s England, London, Greenwich
Recuriter: Royal Borough of Greenwich

Regeneration Delivery Manager - Heritage Action Zone

Royal Borough of Greenwich
£42684 - £45585 per annum
(Fixed Term Opportunity until March 2024)Woolwich town is undergoing a period of intensive regeneration with huge investment in new housing, transport England, London, Woolwich
Recuriter: Royal Borough of Greenwich

Senior Local Engineer

Birmingham City Council
£27,741 - £34,728
The Senior Local Engineer role is to provide technical service at senior level to Local Engineering teams Birmingham, West Midlands
Recuriter: Birmingham City Council

Traffic & Transportation Engineer

Conwy County Borough Council
£41,881 - £44,863 per annum
You should have a degree or diploma in civil engineering or other relevant discipline, and extensive experience in... North Wales
Recuriter: Conwy County Borough Council

Principal Development Co-ordinator

Gloucestershire County Council
£33,799.00 - £38,813.00 + 12% MRS
Leading on the review of Major Development Proposals. Gloucester, Gloucestershire
Recuriter: Gloucestershire County Council

Highways Development Management (HDM) Manager

Gloucestershire County Council
£53,445.00 - £58,008.00 + MRS
To oversee all aspects of Highways Development Management from pre application discussions to road adoption. Gloucester, Gloucestershire
Recuriter: Gloucestershire County Council

Principal Development Engineer

Gloucestershire County Council
£33,799.00 - £38,813.00 + 12% MRS
You will be responsible for undertaking design audit of third party developer works under Section 38 and 278 of the Highways Act 1980. Gloucester, Gloucestershire
Recuriter: Gloucestershire County Council

Director of Environment

Southwark London Borough Council
Up to £136,000
A fairer future for all A fairer future for all Southwark, London (Greater)
Recuriter: Southwark London Borough Council

Director of Public Health

Southwark London Borough Council
Up to £136,000
A fairer future for all Southwark, London (Greater)
Recuriter: Southwark London Borough Council

Parks Development Officer

Kirklees Metropolitan Council
£26,999 - £29,636 per annum
You will work with community groups, organisations, ward members, residents and colleagues in order to... Kirklees, West Yorkshire
Recuriter: Kirklees Metropolitan Council

Head of Infrastructure & Facilities

East Riding of Yorkshire Council
circa 100k
We are seeking a Head of Infrastructure & Facilities to lead the strategic management of the service in a unique and exciting opportunity for a... Beverley, East Riding of Yorkshire
Recuriter: East Riding of Yorkshire Council

Senior Professional and Technical Officer – Project Manager

Bristol City Council
£32,910 - £34,728
We are seeking to appoint a Project Manager, to work in the Transport Service, to help support the delivery of the above plans. Bristol
Recuriter: Bristol City Council

Skilled Road Worker (TRR)

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth
£26,025 - £31,536 depending on knowledge, skills and experience
Do you want to be part of a supportive team and use an innovative method of working on the highway? London (Greater)
Recuriter: London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth

Executive Officer

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth
£26,025 - £34,479 depending on skills
Are you looking for an opportunity within a friendly and supporting team? London (Greater)
Recuriter: London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth

Assistant Director of Transport & Sustainability

Royal Borough of Greenwich
£93,098 - £102,841
This dynamic role will see you provide strategic leadership to our transport strategy Greenwich, London (Greater)
Recuriter: Royal Borough of Greenwich

Highways Customer Communications Officer

North Yorkshire County Council
£27,741 to £30,451
We are looking for a strong communicator to join our Highways Team in Boroughbridge.   Boroughbridge, York
Recuriter: North Yorkshire County Council

Street Cleaning Operative / Driver

Barnet London Borough Council
Competitive Salary
We are looking for hard working, motivated, reliable people to join our team. Barnet (City/Town), London (Greater)
Recuriter: Barnet London Borough Council

Senior Network Support Engineer

The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Council
£36,600 - £49,600 per annum
We are looking for an experienced Senior Networks Support Engineer to provide up to date... Kensington and Chelsea, London (Greater)
Recuriter: The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Council

Director of Environment & Street Scene

Lambeth Council
£108,254 pa up to £122,045 pa.
Working with the community, you’ll ensure a safe, clean and sustainable environment for all Lambeth, London (Greater)
Recuriter: Lambeth Council