Transportation policies - Research Paper Example

Transportation Policies: A Case of Germany vs. USA Public transport comprises is the publicly owned means of transportation in which the passengers travel. It is also known as public transportation, public transit, or mass transit. Public transport not only involves travelling by road and rail but also transports by slated ferries, and taxi services. It is commonly beheld as a public carrier and is usually configured to provide scheduled services on fixed routes on a non-reservation basis. The majorities of transit passengers in public transport travel within a local area or region between their homes and places of employment, shopping, or schools (Frondel and Vance 3). This article looks at the lessons that the US can learn from the public transport in Germany and the impacts it has contributed. In Germany and other industrialized nations in the world, public transport has increasingly been replaced by personal means of transport. The majority of the people in these countries do not use public transport. In the rural areas of this country, the majority of the rural dwellers suffer greatly from the unavailability or the total lack of public transport systems. This leads them to adapt to using the exclusive private systems of transport. This mainly involves the use of cars and vans for individual or family use. The public survey conducted in Germany in 2008 reported that 44% of the entire Germany population has never used public transport systems. This means that the entire German public transport system is mostly characterized by total to partial absence of people on public transport (Rietveld and Stough 5). According to research, the average Americans travel by cars twice as much than their German counterparts. They use transit six times less than the average Americans do. The results of these differences in statistics are due to income or residential density. The average Germans in the upper class make lower number of trips in their cars than Americans in the lower income class. Moreover, Germans who live in low-density areas travel by car about six times less than the Americans living at population densities areas do. The cause for these varying differences is the use of a transport network in the US, which is less sustainable than Germany (Rietveld and Stough 5). Another notable factor is the result of the difference in per capita carbon emission in the two different countries. The per capita carbon emission of passenger in the United States is three times larger than in Germany. The Americans spend five percent more of their income on transport than their German counterparts despite them having a half price of gas. Government outlays such as the federal, state, and local governments also contribute to these effects. The results of various researches shows that the average Germans spends less per capita income on transportation than the United States. These effects have been because of political, economic, institutional, and cultural policies in Germany (Schmucki 8). One of the major policies that have influenced public transport in Germany is the political policies. The German governments at all levels have influenced travel behavior through a series of policies enacted over decades. This has been achieved with pricing restrictions. The German government has determined the way the country’s’ public transport charges its passengers per kilometer. The Germans using the rail network are charged differently from those using the road network. In addition, the federal government of Germany sets different policies that are to be used in the different states of that country. For instance, there are various restrictions involving the maximum speed limit that a driver can exceed on various roads in different states of the country (Wachs 8). Besides, there are several restrictions on the level of mandated technology used on vehicles in Germany states. The reason for this is to curb the risks that come along with outdated technology that is used on various vehicles. The level of technology restricts some vehicles beyond a certain period from being purchased into Germany or operated in Germany. This is because old vehicles contribute greatly to increase in the number of risks because they are un-roadworthy. Moreover, this helps mitigate the harmful impacts of vehicles such as pollution through the emission of carbonic gases. The incorporation of public transportation at the metropolitan and national levels provides a viable alternative to the use of private transport (Koehler 3). Likewise, there are targeted regional planning policies, which encourage compact, and mixed use development. This helps to keep trip distance short and feasible for walking or cycling. The government, in political factors, also influences the individual travel behavior through land use and housing. In Germany, the residential areas are a distance apart from those in the US. This has contributed greatly to the average Germans using public transport to save on fuel than in America. However, in rural Germany where the public transport network is poor, there is no alternative than to use the private transport network (Murti and Boudette web). Economic factors are some of the greatest determinants of the policies to be implemented in a country. One of the economic policies in the use is to avail gas to all households at a subsidized rate. This makes this essential commodity cheaper and affordable in the US than in Germany. However, the Germans spend less despite them having a higher budget on gas than the Americans. This is mostly due to the provision of less expensive walking, cycling, and public transportation facilities instead of colossal roadway and parking supply, as in the United States (Koehler 3). In addition to economic policies, the Germans use more fuel-efficient cars, buses, and light rail. In comparison to the economic factors of the two countries, the transport network in Germany is more economically viable than the transport network in US. The average distance covered in miles per gallon in Germany is more on average than in the US. This means that the average German covers more in public transport than in US. Moreover, the Energy use per passenger per year, in million British thermal units in Germany is less than in the US (Murti and Boudette web). This means that the Germans use less energy on public transport than the Americans annually. Likewise, the Germans uses less energy per passenger per mile, in British thermal units than their American counterparts in the use of light trucks, transit buses, light rail, and heavy rail. The German transportation grid enables the majority of households to have a lower budget of transport. This shows that the transportation system is more sustainable in Germany than in the United States, judging from the above economic indicators (APTA web). The enhanced options to the automobile and less car dependence also lead to greater economic sustainability of transportation in Germany. However, the profitability objectives and policies in Germany make the public transport network to be less profitable than in America. This is because the transport network in America enjoys larger economies of scale than in Germany. One of the main reasons is because of the less fuel used per individual in America. Due to the less fuel charges, the American public transport system can cover a larger distance and carry more passengers because it is a more populous nation. Besides, the public transport financing is more in Germany despite their limited use. Public transport financing involves the purchase of transit trains, commercial vehicles such as buses, and trams to transport the passengers (Koehler 3). The US can learn several lessons from this efficient road network. The public policy can play a major role in reshaping America’s transportation network. This experience offers five lessons to the United States for improving transportation through changes in travel behavior. One of the major lesson is that the US should get the price right in order to encourage the use of less polluting cars, driving at non-peak hours and more use of public transportation. This will enable the country to maximize of in its profitability index and achieve its maximum potential. Secondly, America should integrate cycling, transit, and walking as a viable alternative to the cars (Schulz and Dosch 3). This is a necessary measure to make any sort of car restrictive measure publicly and politically feasible. Thirdly, the country should fully coordinate and integrate planning for land use and transportation to discourage dependency on car sprawl and promote transit-oriented development. Fourthly, it is essential to make public information and education in order to make feasible changes in conveying the benefits of more sustainable policies and enforcing their results over the long term. Lastly, the government should implement Policies in concurrence with long-term perspective. This is because it takes considerable time to gather the necessary public and political support and to develop appropriate measures (Schulz and Dosch 3). There are certain benefits that come along with this sustainable road network in Germany. These benefits are experience in the society, and include direct benefits, and external benefits. Most economic and social activities involve transport and some, such as a life-saving trip to a hospital or delivery of valuable goods, have extremely large benefits. However, the actuality of such benefits does not mean that all travel provides net benefits nor that increased mobility is necessarily desirable. One of the major benefits that come along is the benefit of mobility. This occurs in that it enables the conveying of goods and from one area to another. Secondly, many people will use public transport if the public transport policies are well utilized (Wolf 10). This is because the public transport tends to be cheaper than the private transport. Thirdly, the amount of goods transported in this public transport is more compared to private transport. Using commercial transport such as Lorries makes the conveyance of goods from one destination to the other cheaper. Fourthly, the use of public transport is cheaper both in the long term and in the short run. This is because the users of this transport network share the running cost of their transportation. This is usually it terms of fare (Wolf 10). Public transportation network has had various effects on the environment. One is that it has contributed greatly to the emission of carbon dioxide gas in the environment. This in turn has contributed to the accumulation in the atmosphere causing the global temperatures to increase. the increase in global temperatures have also had some effects in that it has caused increasing sea levels due to the melting of ice in high areas. It has also caused increased desertification in arid areas. The effects of desertification are that it contributes to food shortage in the world especially the arid and semi-arid areas (Baron 4). In addition, public transport has caused pollution of the air and the environment. Pollution of the air caused by the emission of gases from the vehicles exhaust pipes makes the air to be unhealthy for human breathing. Moreover, it has contributed greatly to the respiratory diseases such as asthma. Furthermore, the public transport system increases the chances of pollution in the environment. This occurs in that the level of noise from hooting of the trains and moving vehicle pollutes the environment. Noise pollution makes living in areas closer to the roads and the metropolitan rail network inhabitable. Moreover, public transport increases the chances of risks involving many people at a time. An example is the Madrid rail accidents in Spain, which caused the death of many people (Schmidt and Buehler 5). Various factors have hindered the implementation of a sustainable public transport system in the US. One of them is the federalist form of government. The federal government hinders this policy due to the various protocols that have to be observed. The different states have different laws, which govern them thus making it difficult to agree upon the best approach to this case. An example is the different maximum speed limits that are implemented on the roads of various states. In addition, the trend of most citizens in the US is towards the use of private cars. This has been contributed by the government’s policy of making private transport cheaper through subsidizing the cost of fuel. In addition, the cost of implementing a sustainable public transport is high. The reason is the high cost of equipment involved. For instance, it will be expensive installing a speed rail network in the country. Moreover, this implementation program takes a lot of time to be implemented and requires too much labor and modernized technology (Murti and Boudette web). In conclusion, the diverse transportation dogmas help explains the greater sustainability of transportation in Germany. The US has a high car use than Germany even though in Germany there is a high car ownership rate. Moreover, the German government made car use more expensive compared to its counterparts in the US. This is because of the high fuel prices in Germany compared to the US where the fuel prices are subsidized by the government. Sustainable transportation network also brings along some advantages in that it is extensive, frequent, convenient, and it is attractively priced which offers viable alternatives to the private transport in Germany. It would be better for the governments involved to concert with supportive land use policies. Each level of government in Germany unequivocally invigorated condensed, mixed-use improvements with superb conveniences for walking and riding. While every guideline matters individually, and collectively, these policies best explain the eminence of the transportation system in Germany. Public policy in America has been on crisis. Driving will be made possible if transportation policies provide innocuous, inexpedient, and applied alternatives. Without decreasing the ownership of cars, the lessening in driving would augment the sustainability of transportation in the United States. A supplementary sustainable transportation structure implies better choice of transportation services and lesser household transportation expenditures. Moreover, there will be higher quality of life in the longer term. Virtually all policy changes towards more sustainability in Germany were occasioned by calamities such as energy shortages, lethal heights of air pollution, and mounting transportation fatality rate. Works Cited APTA, "2007 Public Transportation Fact Book." 18 April 2012. Baron, Paul. Transportation in Germany: A Historical Overview, Transportation. Research Part A: Policy and Practice 29 (1) (1995):9-20. Frondel, Manuel and Vance, Colin. Rarely enjoyed? A count data analysis of ridership in Germany’s public transport. 2010. Hohenzollerns. 1-3, D-45128 Essen, Germany. Koehler, Uwe . Traffic and Transport Planning in German Cities. Transportation Research Part A 29A (4) (1995): 253–261. Murti, Bhattiprolu and Boudette, Neal. “GM Auditors Raise Doubts on Auto Makers Viability” The Wall Street Journal, Web 18 April 2012, Rietveld, In Piet and Stough, Roger. Institutions and Sustainable Transport: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Economies. 2007. Northampton, Edward Elgar Publishing. Print. Schmidt, Stephan and Buehler, Ralph. The Planning Process in the U.S. and Germany: A Comparative Analysis. International Planning Studies 12 (1) (2007): 55-75. Schmucki, Barbara. Dreams of Moving Traffic: Urban Transportation Planning in East and West Germany since 1945. 2001. Munich: Campus. Print. Schulz, Barbara and Dosch, Fabian . Controlling Trends in Settled Land Area in Germany and Switzerland. DISP Journal 41 (2005):5–15. Wachs, Martin. The Car and the City: The Automobile, the Built Environment, and Daily Urban Life. 1992. University of Michigan Press. Print Wolf, Winnfried. Railways and Automobiles: Passenger and Freight Transport on Rails and Roads: History and Perspectives. 1986. Hamburg: Rasch und Roehrig. Print. Read More