4 ms·

>The theory is disputed by the UK Department for Transport, which predicts that road traffic in the United Kingdom will grow by 50% over the coming 25 years An

by Aqwis 11y ago

>The theory is disputed by the UK Department for Transport, which predicts that road traffic in the United Kingdom will grow by 50% over the coming 25 years Any insight as to why they would predict this if road traffic empirically has been flat since the nineties?

fredley 11y ago
Because their budget is dependent on their own forecast of road traffic?
- arethuza 11y ago
  Worth noting that this is the same Department for Transport that is surprisingly keen on high speed rail links like HS2. [I'm in Scotland where good old low speed rail seems to having a resurgence the new (re-opened) line from Edinburgh down to the Borders looks fantastic - I'm kicking myself for not buying a house in Heriot a few years back].
- justincormack 11y ago
  Not as simple as that I don't think. Despite figures about decline in road traffic, there is a big division between London, where the traffic decline has been most (indeed, Wikipedia provides no ex-London numbers) and the rest of the country, where public transport is much worse. For example half the bus journeys in England took place in London. The UK currently buys more new cars than anywhere else in Europe as well, partly due to credit availability, but clearly there is demand, and there is a huge pro road pro motorist lobby, as is clear when fuel taxes are increased. So I think the DoT have ended up reflecting largely this pro car part of the UK.
  - kjjw 11y ago
    I buy new cars in the uk using credit but don't drive them much. My baseline miles per week is 0. Occasionally we use our car at the weekend. Still, I buy a brand new expensive car every few years. I guess I just old enough to.be effected by the idea of the car as a status symbol, but young enough to be caught up in urbanism.
    - justincormack 11y ago
      So you rent a status symbol to put outside your house? What an easy thing to just stop doing.
      - kjjw 11y ago
        Gosh you're right, I'll do it right now! Thanks!
        justincormack 11y ago
        Get yourself one of these instead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Headington_Shark http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Headington_Shark
        kjjw 11y ago
        I see it often enough already. In fact, I'd rather it was on someone else's house. I would forget it was up there if it was on my own.
    - sukilot 11y ago
      That's you but statistically behavior and wealth like yours is a blip.
  - revelation 11y ago
    Its hardly a matter of being wrong one year and accurate the next. They make wrong predictions every single year. Here's the US: http://www.ssti.us/2013/12/new-travel-demand-projections-are-due-from-u-s-dot-will-they-be-accurate-this-time/ http://www.ssti.us/2013/12/new-travel-demand-projections-are...
    - VLM 11y ago
      Note the careful editing to not show numerous historical examples where pre-90 or so, any negative fluctuation was a statistical fluke or a short term downterm, promptly made up. So pre-90 or so, it was always correct to extend the trendline at the average growth line. Admitting the party is over would offend very powerful monied interests. Follow the money... a lot of money is made building and selling exurbs, and a minor secondary industry is going to have political problems stating the high level policy change of "the party is over". A mayor, governor, president needs to state the policy change before the pothole filler is permitted to observe it. You see this phenomena in economic figures and in the meta selection of economic figures (the Dow, the unemployment rate, the GDP, the .gov inflation rate all used to "mean something" to the lifestyle of the general population. Not so any more, they are meaningless now in practice.)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
peatmoss 11y ago
Well, having worked in travel demand forecasting--a combination of bad statistical models, bad assumptions about travel, and the inherent problems with extrapolating to produce forecasts. Travel modeling is very useful, but long term forecasts can't really account for fundamental market shifts. In my region, Central Puget Sound, long term forecasts have been thrown some pretty big monkey wrenches since people started trying to use numbers with cars. Women entering the workforce, later Microsoft becoming a thing, etc. Oddly, some historic forecasts actually turned out reasonably well... probably by accident.

by Aqwis 11y ago

fredley 11y ago

Because their budget is dependent on their own forecast of road traffic?

arethuza 11y ago
Worth noting that this is the same Department for Transport that is surprisingly keen on high speed rail links like HS2. [I'm in Scotland where good old low speed rail seems to having a resurgence the new (re-opened) line from Edinburgh down to the Borders looks fantastic - I'm kicking myself for not buying a house in Heriot a few years back].
justincormack 11y ago
Not as simple as that I don't think. Despite figures about decline in road traffic, there is a big division between London, where the traffic decline has been most (indeed, Wikipedia provides no ex-London numbers) and the rest of the country, where public transport is much worse. For example half the bus journeys in England took place in London. The UK currently buys more new cars than anywhere else in Europe as well, partly due to credit availability, but clearly there is demand, and there is a huge pro road pro motorist lobby, as is clear when fuel taxes are increased. So I think the DoT have ended up reflecting largely this pro car part of the UK.
- kjjw 11y ago
  I buy new cars in the uk using credit but don't drive them much. My baseline miles per week is 0. Occasionally we use our car at the weekend. Still, I buy a brand new expensive car every few years. I guess I just old enough to.be effected by the idea of the car as a status symbol, but young enough to be caught up in urbanism.
  - justincormack 11y ago
    So you rent a status symbol to put outside your house? What an easy thing to just stop doing.
    - kjjw 11y ago
      Gosh you're right, I'll do it right now! Thanks!
      - justincormack 11y ago
        Get yourself one of these instead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Headington_Shark http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Headington_Shark
        kjjw 11y ago
        I see it often enough already. In fact, I'd rather it was on someone else's house. I would forget it was up there if it was on my own.
  - sukilot 11y ago
    That's you but statistically behavior and wealth like yours is a blip.
- revelation 11y ago
  Its hardly a matter of being wrong one year and accurate the next. They make wrong predictions every single year. Here's the US: http://www.ssti.us/2013/12/new-travel-demand-projections-are-due-from-u-s-dot-will-they-be-accurate-this-time/ http://www.ssti.us/2013/12/new-travel-demand-projections-are...
  - VLM 11y ago
    Note the careful editing to not show numerous historical examples where pre-90 or so, any negative fluctuation was a statistical fluke or a short term downterm, promptly made up. So pre-90 or so, it was always correct to extend the trendline at the average growth line. Admitting the party is over would offend very powerful monied interests. Follow the money... a lot of money is made building and selling exurbs, and a minor secondary industry is going to have political problems stating the high level policy change of "the party is over". A mayor, governor, president needs to state the policy change before the pothole filler is permitted to observe it. You see this phenomena in economic figures and in the meta selection of economic figures (the Dow, the unemployment rate, the GDP, the .gov inflation rate all used to "mean something" to the lifestyle of the general population. Not so any more, they are meaningless now in practice.)

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

peatmoss 11y ago

Well, having worked in travel demand forecasting--a combination of bad statistical models, bad assumptions about travel, and the inherent problems with extrapolating to produce forecasts. Travel modeling is very useful, but long term forecasts can't really account for fundamental market shifts. In my region, Central Puget Sound, long term forecasts have been thrown some pretty big monkey wrenches since people started trying to use numbers with cars. Women entering the workforce, later Microsoft becoming a thing, etc. Oddly, some historic forecasts actually turned out reasonably well... probably by accident.