Congestion Longer waiting and trip time Delay for work and study Stress on drivers and passengers Lower productivity Hinder economic development
Pollution Air pollution Noise pollution. Endanger people’s life
Problem definition : Fast growing number of car ownerships results in large number of private cars on the road, which will further cause serious problems such as congestion and pollution Objective : Analyze the current car ownership system in Singapore Propose policies Reduce the current growth rate of car ownership.
Outline Methodology and formulation - Haidong Model Build – Haidong and Lin Di Result and Sensitivity analysis - Yingnan Policy – Qin Shuang
COE system in Singapore Bidding for COE Start Scrap or export the car with financial incentive Year 10 Certificate of Entitlement Released twice a month with limited quota Five categories Valid for 10 years Bidders indicate their reserved price Highest bidders stay within the quota will get COEs. What is COE?How to bid for COE? Obtain the COE
Specification of our study Target on category A and B of COE Study period: from 2000 to 2050. Simulation on yearly basis Actual data for first 10 years Projected data for rest of 40 years
Methodology Formulation Model Building Result Analysis Identification of factors Examining relationships Represent in CLD iThink Data Converter Stock and Flow
Formulation - Causal Loop Diagram car population private car population growth rate planned by LTA Annual COE quota bidding success rate number of new bids COE price total expense of car public transport attractiveness COE valid period + - + + + - + + - - - B B
Model Building - Stock and Flow Diagram Total no. of cars Disposal per year New purchase per year New COE per year Actual COE for first 10 years Projected COE after 10 years COE quota Car ownership net increase rate Discrepancy between desired & actual growth rate Max allowable net increase rate Effect of discrepancy on COE growth rate Modified COE growth rate Reference COE growth rate Effect of no. of bids on COE growth rate Disposal rate for first 10 years Delayed disposal rate COE valid period Perceived discrepancy
success rate perceived success rate COE price population growth ratio nominal new bidsreference population populationeffect of perceived success rate on number of new bids perceived annual expense effect of perceived annual expense on number of new bids perceived public transport convenience relative public transport affordability public transport availability base new bidsprobability of withdrawal modified COE growth rate reference COE growth rate effect of number of bids on COE growth rate effect of discrepancy on COE growth rate equivalent annual expense
Sensitivity Analysis To verify assumptions To design policies Average bus fare Average bus capacity Life time of a car Reference COE growth rate Average bus usage per year COE price against success rate Effect of discrepancy on COE growth rate Effect of car expenses on no. of new bids
Average Bus Capacity Current value: 100 No. of runs: 10 Variation type: incremental Increment: 15 Start value: 50 End value: 200
Policies Policy 1: Tighter control on maximum net growth rate of car ownership Policy 2: Improve public transport efficiency Policy 3: Reduce the COE validity period
Car ownership net increase rate Maximum allowable net increase rate Discrepancy between desired and actual car ownership growth rate Perceived discrepancy Effect of discrepancy on COE growth rate Net COE per year COE quota Modified COE growth rate Policy 1:Tighter control on maximum net growth rate of car ownership How does it work?
Policy 1:Tighter control on maximum net growth rate of car ownership Current situation
Policy 1:Tighter control on maximum net growth rate of car ownership What is the difference?difference
Policy 1:Tighter control on maximum net growth rate of car ownership Reduce the car ownership by about 600,000
Policy 2: Improve Public Transport Efficiency Increase average bus capacity from 100 to 150 by having more double-decker buses Increase the bus growth rate 360 to 720 Reduce average bus fare from $2 to $0.5
Bus Net bus increase rate Average bus capacity Actual bus number increase rate for first 10 years Populatio n Public transport availability Estimated bus number increase rate after 10 years Increase Average Bus Capacity and Bus Growth Rate How does it work?
Average usage of bus per year Average bus fareNormalizing factor for public transport affordability Equivalent annual expense Relative public transport affordability Reduce Average Bus Fare How does it work?
Total number of bids received New bidders for COE Public transport availability Relative public transport affordability Perceived public transport convenience Policy 2: Improve Public Transport Efficiency How does it work?
Policy 2: Improve Public Transport Efficiency Reduce the car ownership by about 400,000
Disposal per year Delayed disposal rate COE validity period Car ownership New purchase per year Policy 3: Reduce the COE validity period from 10 years to 5 years How does it work?
Policy 3: Reduce COE validity period from 10 years to 5 years Reduce the car ownership by about 100,000
Conclusion Limitation of policiesA combination of policies can be usedLimitation of our research
Effect of Perceived Success Rate on Number of New Bids
equivalent annual expense disposal priceone-off paymentCOE validity period total annual cost One off paymentGSTAverage Open Market Value of a car Total vehicle Tax GST rateExercise dutyAdditional registration fee Registration fee Exercise duty as % of OMV ARF as % of OMV