|
Welcome Transport Leaders |
|
Welcome to this week's edition of the Transport Leader newsletter, your 5-minute guide to strategic transport thinking from around the world.
This week, I look at one reason why Anglosphere infrastructure is so much more expensive than European infrastructure, how Germany’s experiments with public transport fares have been going, and how we can use simple rules of thumb to improve project leadership.
Have a great trip!
|
In Today's Transport Leader: |
|
- The Hidden Reason Anglosphere Infrastructure Costs More Than Europeans
- Can you buy your way out of car dependency? Lessons from Germany
- Heuristics for Better Project Leadership
- Plus Quick Trips, Blog, Innovation and Tools
|
Would you like help navigating the politics of transport reform? |
|
When not writing this newsletter, I help overcome political and institutional barriers to better transport policy. I’ve a strong track record in this space, delivering my own reforms and supporting leaders to turn bold ideas into action.
If you're facing a challenge like this, feel free to get in touch at russell@transportlc.org. I’d be happy to explore how I can help.
|
|
|
|
Infrastructure
The Hidden Reason Anglosphere Infrastructure Costs More Than Europeans
Anglosphere countries have much higher unit costs than European ones for many kinds of infrastructure projects, including transport. This is often diagnosed as a problem of overregulation, and the answer is, therefore, to deregulate, usually by weakening protections, such as environmental ones. However, what if the problem is not overregulation but the system of approving infrastructure in Anglosphere countries generated by the common-law system? This paper makes the case.
Key Takeaways
- Infrastructure projects often face delays and high costs because of objections and risks that project leaders must address to avoid their projects being stopped.
- Planning objections are not fixed problems; they are often created by professional services firms, which project leaders hire to anticipate and mitigate risks.
- Projects spend a lot of money on risk prevention because even minor objections can lead to significant delays or project cancellations.
- Anglosphere countries use a "judicial" infrastructure planning system, where decisions are made like court cases, with project leaders and objectors presenting evidence. This is a consequence of the common law system.
- European countries often use a "corporatist" system, where the government works closely with project leaders to plan projects, reducing uncertainty and delays.
- Professional services firms play a big role in creating reports and solutions, but their work can also make the process more complex and expensive.
- Project leaders feel they must "bulletproof" their projects, spending extra money to address every possible risk, even unlikely ones.
- Judicial reviews focus on process, not outcomes, meaning project leaders must create detailed evidence to avoid legal challenges.
- The system creates a cycle where new objections lead to more reports, more costs, and more delays, making the process slower over time.
- A better solution might involve changing how planning authorities make approvals to duplicate the corporatist systems of Europe as closely as possible.
Comment
This is a very different take on the challenges of expensive infrastructure approval processes from the usual regulatory perspective. It gets to the heart of what is driving the need for huge costs before a shovel is even placed in the ground. It also has the benefit of not requiring a weakening of protections, which is politically challenging and unlikely to have sustained public support.
Is it the whole story of why infrastructure costs are so much more expensive? I don’t think so, I think the capacity of transport agencies in Anglosphere countries is also a significant contributor, but that is a topic for another time.
What next?
More work needs to be done to understand how the European approval processes work and how they can be replicated successfully within a common law system.
|
Fares
Can you buy your way out of car dependency? Lessons from Germany
In recent years, many jurisdictions have been experimenting with cheap fares. These tend to be popular with the public, and the logic is that they will encourage people to swap car use for public transport, reducing congestion and emissions.
From June to August 2022, Germany reduced the fare for all local and regional public transport nationwide to a flat rate of €9 per month. Then, two years ago, Germany introduced a nationwide unlimited €58 monthly transport pass, dubbed the Deutschlandticket. Are these innovations a success that should be copied, or consigned to the bin?
This research on the €9 per month and article on the Deutschlandticket considered a range of perspectives.
Key Takeaways
9-Euro ticket:
- Unlike many jurisdictions, public transport patronage in Germany has recovered quickly after the pandemic.
- The 9-Euro ticket is estimated to have increased train travel by as much as 35%, mostly at weekends and towards tourist destinations.
- However, the ticket had only a small impact on changes in mode, with a reduction in car traffic somewhere between 1 and 5%, with the smallest changes taking place during commuter times.
- The additional train passengers resulted in a significant increase in train delays.
- All of these effects dissipate after the ticket’s expiration; there was no permanent change in behaviour.
- Caution is needed regarding the environmental benefits of nearly fare-free ’go-anywhere’ public transport tickets.
Deutschlandticket:
- The Deutschlandticket has been very popular. It has over 13.5 million subscribers in a country with a population of over 83 million and costs around €3 billion per year.
- Estimates for reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are between 0.44 and 6.49 megatonnes. At the upper estimate, this is only around 1% of Germany’s GHGs.
- Subscribers mainly use the transport passes to commute to work, but have increasingly been using the offer for weekend trips.
- The ‘equity’ of the scheme is questionable. It mainly benefits larger cities, which boast extensive public transport networks and primarily caters to the needs of young white-collar workers.
Comment
Although the new fares have been very popular, the benefits have mostly gone to people who already used public transport in the form of reduced costs; they have not significantly reduced car use or emissions, and there are questions about fairness. €3 billion can buy a lot of extra bus services, and I wonder whether this would have provided better outcomes.
What next?
Many political leaders are attracted by free or cheap fares policies. Consider proactively briefing them on the pros and cons of these policies.
|
Leadership
Heuristics for Better Project Leadership
Heuristics are fast-and-frugal rules of thumb, used to simplify complex decisions. In project management, this translates into “project leadership by simple rules”
Projects are full of them:
- Projects Don't Go Wrong, They Start Wrong.
- Value Truth Over Good News.
- It’s the Benefits, Stupid!
This article argues that if you want a top-performing team running your project, you want a team that has thought long and hard about their heuristics, with every team member contributing and every member taking ownership of them.
The article uses the term ‘masterbuilders’ and defines project masterbuilders as individuals (with their teams) who have a track record of being able to deliver their projects as promised; that is, on benefits, on budget, and on schedule, or combinations of these that clearly spell success.
These Masterbuilders have heuristics that are typically:
- Limited in number: Usually a handful or two, and no more than a few dozen, for each masterbuilder.
- Personal: Tailored to the person and organisation using them.
- Specific: Based on well-defined and deep domain experience.
- Intuitive: Unreflected to the masterbuilder, unless deliberately teased out.
- Clear: Provide explicit guidance, once teased out.
To create your own project heuristics:
- Work on your project heuristics until you have a minimum of five to ten that you are satisfied with and that capture most of what is crucial to make your projects succeed, based on your experience.
- Encourage leaders to share their heuristics. Team members who know their leaders' heuristics are likely to be more effective.
If you are looking for inspiration, the article has many examples of heuristics that may resonate.
What Next?
What are your project's most important heuristics?
|
Quick Adventures in Transport Wonderland
Interesting articles, podcasts and papers that sent me down the transport rabbit hole this week:
|
Blog
This week’s blog was from a guest writer, Muriel Demarcus of Marsham Edge. It looked at how different jurisdictions around the world are seeing the benefits of dynamic route optimisation (DRO) using AI, what is needed to enable DRO and the barriers to adoption.
|
Innovation
Indian railways are using drones to clean trains and stations.
|
Tool
The Alliance for Innovation and Infrastructure has a page of useful one-pagers, many covering transport topics such as Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), High-Speed Rail, and Electric Vehicles.
|
|
|
|
Last Stop
This week’s newsletter has reached its destination.
Are you a transport professional looking to deepen your strategic thinking? 📚
In the coming weeks, I'll launch a Transport Leaders Book Club!
This isn't just another networking group.
It's a dedicated space for transport professionals to explore the ideas shaping our industry.
If you haven’t already expressed an interest, sign up here.
If you like whimsical articles about train journeys, here is one about getting from Portugal to Singapore.
Have a great week,
Russell
PS Please complete the poll below or reply to this email with article feedback or suggestions. I read every piece of feedback.
What did you think of this newsletter? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|