IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v113y2015icp106-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transport transitions in Copenhagen: Comparing the cost of cars and bicycles

Author

Listed:
  • Gössling, Stefan
  • Choi, Andy S.

Abstract

In many cities of the world, bicycle infrastructure projects are implemented to foster more sustainable transportation systems. However, such projects have often raised questions regarding their public funding, as they entail considerable costs. This paper reviews cost–benefit analysis (CBA) frameworks as these are presently used to assess bicycle infrastructure projects. Specific focus is on the CBA framework developed in Copenhagen, Denmark, a self-declared “city of cyclists”. In this framework, costs and benefits of car and bicycle, the two major urban transport modes, have been assessed and are compared across accidents, climate change, health, and travel time. The analysis reveals that each km travelled by car or bike incurs a cost to society, though the cost of car driving is more than six times higher (Euro 0.50/km) than cycling (Euro 0.08/km). Moreover, while the cost of car driving is likely to increase in the future, the cost of cycling appears to be declining. The paper concludes with a discussion of the applicability of the Copenhagen CBA framework to advance sustainable transport planning and to motivate and justify urban restructuring.

Suggested Citation

  • Gössling, Stefan & Choi, Andy S., 2015. "Transport transitions in Copenhagen: Comparing the cost of cars and bicycles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 106-113.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:113:y:2015:i:c:p:106-113
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915000907
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    2. Börjesson, Maria & Fosgerau, Mogens & Algers, Staffan, 2012. "On the income elasticity of the value of travel time," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 368-377.
    3. Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, 1993. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 205.
    4. Hopkinson, P & Wardman, M, 1996. "Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 241-249, October.
    5. Bithas, Kostas, 2011. "Sustainability and externalities: Is the internalization of externalities a sufficient condition for sustainability?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1703-1706, August.
    6. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas, 2012. "The value of time and external benefits in bicycle appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 673-683.
    7. Tilahun, Nebiyou Y. & Levinson, David M. & Krizek, Kevin J., 2007. "Trails, lanes, or traffic: Valuing bicycle facilities with an adaptive stated preference survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 287-301, May.
    8. Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Iacobelli, Andrés & Valeze, Claudio, 2000. "Estimating demand for a cycle-way network," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 353-373, June.
    9. Jones, Tim & Novo de Azevedo, Laura, 2013. "Economic, social and cultural transformation and the role of the bicycle in Brazil," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 208-219.
    10. Elliot Fishman & Simon Washington & Narelle Haworth, 2013. "Bike Share: A Synthesis of the Literature," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 148-165, March.
    11. Knudsen, M.Aa. & Rich, J., 2013. "Ex post socio-economic assessment of the Oresund Bridge," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 53-65.
    12. Parks, Sarah & Gowdy, John, 2013. "What have economists learned about valuing nature? A review essay," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 1-10.
    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. Gössling, Stefan, 2016. "Urban transport justice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-9.
    2. Iwińska, Katarzyna & Blicharska, Malgorzata & Pierotti, Livia & Tainio, Marko & de Nazelle, Audrey, 2018. "Cycling in Warsaw, Poland – Perceived enablers and barriers according to cyclists and non-cyclists," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 291-301.
    3. Kearns, Michelle & Ledsham, Trudy & Savan, Beth & Scott, James, 2019. "Increasing cycling for transportation through mentorship programs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 34-45.
    4. Aldred, Rachel & Watson, Tom & Lovelace, Robin & Woodcock, James, 2019. "Barriers to investing in cycling: Stakeholder views from England," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 149-159.
    5. Sambracos, Evangelos & Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Maniati, Marina & Ramfou, Irene, 2019. "Decision-making process for evaluating socio-economic impact of green transport policies in insular areas," MPRA Paper 98356, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Zhao, Chunli & Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Olafsson, Anton Stahl & Carstensen, Trine Agervig & Meng, Xiaoying, 2018. "Urban form, demographic and socio-economic correlates of walking, cycling, and e-biking: Evidence from eight neighborhoods in Beijing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 102-112.
    7. Zhao, Chunli & Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Olafsson, Anton Stahl & Carstensen, Trine Agervig & Fertner, Christian, 2018. "Cycling environmental perception in Beijing – A study of residents' attitudes towards future cycling and car purchasing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 96-106.
    8. Stefan Gössling & Andreas Humpe & Todd Litman & Daniel Metzler, 2019. "Effects of Perceived Traffic Risks, Noise, and Exhaust Smells on Bicyclist Behaviour: An Economic Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, January.
    9. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    10. Giménez-Nadal, J. Ignacio & Molina, José Alberto, 2019. "Green commuting and gasoline taxes in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 324-331.
    11. Suah Kim & Namjo Kim, 2020. "A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Vehicle Restriction Policy for Reducing Overtourism in Udo, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Gössling, Stefan & Cohen, Scott Allen & Hares, Andrew, 2016. "Inside the black box: EU policy officers' perspectives on transport and climate change mitigation," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 83-93.
    13. Kamila Turečková & Jan Nevima, 2020. "The Cost Benefit Analysis for the Concept of a Smart City: How to Measure the Efficiency of Smart Solutions?," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, March.
    14. Aldred, Rachel, 2016. "Cycling near misses: Their frequency, impact, and prevention," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 69-83.

    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:ecolec:v:113:y:2015:i:c:p:106-113. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.