IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v115y2017icp180-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving scenario methods in infrastructure planning: A case study of long distance travel and mobility in the UK under extreme weather uncertainty and a changing climate

Author

Listed:
  • Zanni, Alberto M
  • Goulden, Murray
  • Ryley, Tim
  • Dingwall, Robert

Abstract

This paper develops a mixed method approach to infrastructure planning through a United Kingdom (UK) case study examining the impact of a changing climate on long distance travel and mobility between London and Glasgow. A novel combination of a qualitative method - Systematic Qualitative Foresight (SQF) - and quantitative simulation using discrete choice stated preference methods is applied. The main dataset is a travel behaviour survey of over 2000 residents of London and Glasgow. Three illustrative SQF-based scenarios are developed incorporating society, technology and climate dimensions. For each scenario, the choice of long-distance travel mode by two groups of respondents generated by cluster analysis is simulated using stated preference survey data to describe the choices likely to be made by actors within each scenario.

Suggested Citation

  • Zanni, Alberto M & Goulden, Murray & Ryley, Tim & Dingwall, Robert, 2017. "Improving scenario methods in infrastructure planning: A case study of long distance travel and mobility in the UK under extreme weather uncertainty and a changing climate," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 180-197.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:115:y:2017:i:c:p:180-197
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516304012
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    2. Li, Zheng & Hensher, David A. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Willingness to pay for travel time reliability in passenger transport: A review and some new empirical evidence," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 384-403, May.
    3. Dominic Stead & David Banister, 2003. "Transport policy scenario-building," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 513-536, December.
    4. Robert J. Lempert & David G. Groves & Steven W. Popper & Steve C. Bankes, 2006. "A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 514-528, April.
    5. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    6. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
    7. Hickman, Robin & Saxena, Sharad & Banister, David & Ashiru, Olu, 2012. "Examining transport futures with scenario analysis and MCA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 560-575.
    8. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    9. Garrido, Rodrigo A. & Mahmassani, Hani S., 2000. "Forecasting freight transportation demand with the space-time multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 403-418, June.
    10. Ryley, Tim J. & Zanni, Alberto M., 2013. "An examination of the relationship between social interactions and travel uncertainty," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 249-257.
    11. Zanni, Alberto M. & Bristow, Abigail L., 2010. "Emissions of CO2 from road freight transport in London: Trends and policies for long run reductions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1774-1786, April.
    12. Ryan, Mandy & Scott, David A. & Donaldson, Cam, 2004. "Valuing health care using willingness to pay: a comparison of the payment card and dichotomous choice methods," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 237-258, March.
    13. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    14. Zanni, Alberto M. & Ryley, Tim J., 2015. "The impact of extreme weather conditions on long distance travel behaviour," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 305-319.
    15. Louviere, Jordan J., 1991. "Experimental choice analysis: Introduction and overview," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 291-297, December.
    16. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    17. Tran, Martino & Banister, David & Bishop, Justin D.K. & McCulloch, Malcolm D., 2013. "Simulating early adoption of alternative fuel vehicles for sustainability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(5), pages 865-875.
    18. Morris, Eric, 2007. "From Horse Power to Horsepower," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6sm968t2, University of California Transportation Center.
    19. Hickman, Robin & Banister, David, 2007. "Looking over the horizon: Transport and reduced CO2 emissions in the UK by 2030," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 377-387, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edward Oughton, 2018. "Towards 5G: scenario-based assessment of the future supply and demand for mobile telecommunications infrastructure," Working Papers 2017/04 (revised), Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    2. Adel Ben Youssef & Adelina Zeqiri, 2022. "Hospitality Industry 4.0 and Climate Change," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    3. Yang, Xiaobao & Yue, Xianfei & Sun, Huijun & Gao, Ziyou & Wang, Wencheng, 2021. "Impact of weather on freeway origin-destination volume in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 30-47.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mandy Ryan & Verity Watson, 2009. "Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 389-401, April.
    2. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    3. Hoyos Ramos, David, 2010. "Using discrete choice experiments for environmental valuation," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    4. Marta Meleddu, 2014. "Tourism, Residents’ Welfare And Economic Choice: A Literature Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 376-399, April.
    5. Julia Martin-Ortega & Giacomo Giannoccaro & Julio Berbel, 2011. "Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(6), pages 1615-1633, April.
    6. Mulatu, Dawit W. & van der Veen, Anne & van Oel, Pieter R., 2014. "Farm households' preferences for collective and individual actions to improve water-related ecosystem services: The Lake Naivasha basin, Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 22-33.
    7. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Robinson, Jackie & Kaneko, Shinji & Komatsu, Satoru, 2013. "Estimating the value of economic benefits associated with adaptation to climate change in a developing country: A case study of improvements in tropical cyclone warning services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 117-128.
    8. Anabela Botelho & Lina Sofia Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2016. "Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: two stated preferences approaches," NIMA Working Papers 64, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
    9. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    10. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    12. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    13. Bart Neuts & Peter Nijkamp & Eveline Van Leeuwen, 2012. "Crowding Externalities from Tourist Use of Urban Space," Tourism Economics, , vol. 18(3), pages 649-670, June.
    14. Koistinen, Laura & Pouta, Eija & Heikkila, Jaakko & Forsman-Hugg, Sari & Kotro, Jaana & Makela, Jarmo & Niva, M., 2011. "Impact of meat type, methods of production, fat content, price and carbon footprint information on meat choice," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114710, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. del Saz Salazar, Salvador & Hernandez Sancho, Francesc & Sala Garrido, Ramon, 2009. "Estimación del valor económico de la calidad del agua de un río mediante una doble aproximación: una aplicación de los principios económicos de la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-27.
    16. Alemu I, Jahson Berhane & Schuhmann, Peter & Agard, John, 2019. "Mixed preferences for lionfish encounters on reefs in Tobago: Results from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Guerrero-Baena, M. Dolores & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Glenk, Klaus, 2019. "Willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply reliability: An approach based on probability density functions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 11-22.
    18. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Mohd Mustafa, Muzafarshah & Bakar, Normizan, 2019. "Are Malaysian Consumers Willing to Pay for Hybrid Cars’ Attributes?," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 53(1), pages 121-134.
    19. Kemper, Nathan & Popp, Jennie S. Hughes & Miller, Wayne P. & Goodwin, Harold L., Jr., 2006. "Running to Stand Still: Challenges Economists Face with Imperfect Data," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35315, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:115:y:2017:i:c:p:180-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.