Looking at sustainable urban mobility through a cross-assessment model within the framework of land-use and transport integration

In order to realise sustainable urban transport, it is necessary to combine different kinds of decision-making, including vision-led, plan-led and consensus-led approaches. In this paper, a cross-assessment model that supports both vision-led and consensus-led approaches is proposed as an analytical tool for developing sustainable urban transport and land use strategies for a low-carbon society. It is applied to an impact analysis of public transport and land use strategies in 2030 for all of Japan's 269 urban areas, with outcomes - including the financial balance of public transport operation, user benefits, and CO2 emissions reduction - compared by strategy and urban area. The analytical results show that three value factors related to efficiency, equity and the environment do not necessarily conflict with each other. In particular, it is clarified that CO2 emissions reduction targets can contribute to the improvement of financial balance and user benefits at the national level. In addition, the results of comparative analysis among the LUTI (land use and transport integration) scenarios demonstrate that a combination of urban transport strategies with land use control in the form of 'corridors and multi-centres' provides greater emissions reduction and increased user benefits.

[1]  Hermann Knoflacher,et al.  Transport policy between economy and ecology , 1991 .

[2]  P Mees,et al.  Density and sustainable transport in US, Canadian and Australian Cities: Another look at the data , 2010 .

[3]  K. Arrow.  A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare , 1950, Journal of Political Economy.

[4]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[5]  Michael A. Toman,et al.  Economics and "Sustainability": Balancing Trade-offs and Imperatives , 1994 .

[6]  M. E. Bouwman.  Changing mobility patterns in a compact city: Environmental impacts , 2019, Compact Cities and Sustainable Urban Development.

[7]  Brian McLoughlin,et al.  Urban Consolidation and Urban Sprawl: A question of density , 1991 .

[8]  L. Phillips,et al.  Multi-criteria analysis: a manual , 2009 .

[9]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[10]  Peter Newman,et al.  Cities and automobile dependence , 1993 .

[11]  Masanobu Kii,et al.  COMPARISON OF SUSTAINABILITY BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT CONSIDERING URBAN STRUCTURE , 2003 .

[12]  P. Mees.  Transport for Suburbia: Beyond the Automobile Age , 2009 .

[13]  Jeffrey Kenworthy,et al.  Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence , 1999 .

[14]  P. Newman,et al.  An international sourcebook of automobile dependence in cities, 1960-1990 , 1999 .

[15]  G Bouladon.  THE TRANSPORT GAPS , 1967 .