EPA - Ireland's Environment, An Integrated Assessment - 2020

Chapter 11: Environment and Transport The Department for Transport, Tourism and Sport has also acknowledged that the ASI framework is the best practice approach (DTTAS, 2019a). Building on this consensus, the next steps required are to: n ensure that appropriate evidence is made available to inform decision-making at each level n design policies and measures that can deliver effectively on each level and n apply governance and investment arrangements that fulfil the needs of the policy cycle. Evidence and Scenarios Energy and emissions modelling of transport in Ireland is predominantly focused on compliance with greenhouse gas and air pollution targets, in the medium term, up to 2030 and 2040. A framework for ‘sustainable mobility transformation’ has key requirements that have been fleshed out in detail internationally, including in the IPCC assessment reports. A core approach is to support decision-makers with appropriate evidence that allows the different potential long-term pathways, and their implications, to be more clearly understood. Energy and emissions modelling of transport in Ireland is predominantly focused on compliance with greenhouse gas and air pollution targets, in the medium term up to 2030, and recently to 2040. The cost effectiveness analysis and marginal abatement cost curves that are used to inform mitigation policy choice are limited to ‘improve’ measures for energy and carbon efficiency. This leaves key gaps in exploring the priority measures of ‘avoid’ and ‘shift’. In addition, these models focus on the cost per tonne of emissions mitigated, and, while this is one of the relevant considerations, it could also act as a barrier to change. This is particularly the case where capital costs are higher, and where the full benefits of new measures to society cannot be fully captured, which are common characteristics of public transport projects. Future visions and scenarios, including modelled pathways, are important contributors to policymaking. This evidence allows policymakers to consider the outcomes and implications of different paths. Existing modelling of emissions mitigation, by improvements in efficiency, needs augmentation with scenarios that allow consideration of the implications of major long-term changes in spatial and demand patterns, and in the potential for a considerable shift in modes to active and public transport. Scenario methods allow for wide variety in the complexity and approach to visions and analyses of potential future change. These range from summary assessments that draw on existing worldwide evidence, through narrative visions built with and by policymakers, using structured and facilitated strategic techniques, to modelled pathways that seek to quantify the impact of measures. Some advantages of modelled pathways are the indication of potential quantified emissions reductions they can provide, and also the comparability of measures. For example, in terms of ‘avoid’ measures, modelling could help to identify the higher emissions implications of further low-density spatial planning, and also the effectiveness of deeper measures for shifting to active and public transport modes. Modelling pathways that consider ASI measures, in the form of reduced demand and mode shift, would require further model development in Ireland. It would be useful to consider the relationship between enhancing modelling capabilities and the existing analytical contributions of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sports, in its National Investment Framework for Transport in Ireland, and the demand forecasts in the Strategic Investment Framework for Land Transport. As modelling and scenario studies are key tools used in support of policymaking, the enhancement of the capacity to model or quantify the spatial planning ‘avoid’ measures and transport planning ‘shift’ measures could assist in enabling further policy development in these areas. Sims et al. (2014) provide a comprehensive review of the sectoral transport-specific models that are designed specifically to consider compact spatial planning and mode shift measures. 10 As detailed by the IPCC, supporting a sustainable mobility transformation requires the use of long-term horizons in scenario studies, to 2050 and beyond (Sims et al. , 2014). The panel highlights that the lifetimes of transport infrastructure range from 50 to more than 100 years, a key factor in lock-in. The application of long time horizons is therefore one of the critical conditions of sustainable mobility and is mirrored in the need for long-term visions and planning. Sustainable urban mobility planning (SUMP) is now the default transport-planning concept in the EU, arising from the Urban Mobility Package (COM(2013) 91), with guidelines issued by the European Commission (Rupprecht Consult, 2019). Long-term scenario and vision building are central to this process, with good practice examples as diverse as the central region of Macedonia and cities such as Lisbon, Manchester and Prague (Directorate- General for Mobility and Transport, 2019b). SUMP requires the integration of key functions of spatial and mobility planning, and in Edinburgh, SUMP was led by the council’s spatial policy team (Rupprecht Consult, 2019). The Greater Manchester SUMP integrated spatial and mobility planning after recognising the growing pressure of population growth in the region (Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, 2019b), an appropriate comparison for Ireland. Integration of policy actors and related themes are important considerations, often including multi-level 10 These include land use planning that favours high-density or polycentric urban forms; public transport-oriented developments with mixed uses; and high-quality city environments (Sims et al., 2014, p. 637). 291