1. The future of rush hour avoidance measures Lessons learned from 4 large projects in the Netherlands Jorrit Nijhuis (Ministry of Infrastructure & Environment) Matthijs Dicke-Ogenia (Goudappel Coffeng) Utrecht, ECOMM 22nd May 2015

2. Rijkswaterstaat Rush hour avoidance measures - characteristics Encourage drivers to reduce trips in rush hour Monetary reward Reduced number of trips = trips in reference period – trips in rewarding period GPS or camera as a registration technology

3. Rijkswaterstaat Rush hour projects in the Netherlands The four largest projects –Brabant –Utrecht –Arnhem-Nijmegen –Rotterdam

4. Rijkswaterstaat A sustainable behaviour change!

5. Rijkswaterstaat Be careful with apps

6. Rijkswaterstaat Costs of rush hour avoidance measure Positive social benefit/costs ratio however ……. Significant costs for: –Monetary reward – €2.000.000 per year –Registration technology (should a participant be rewarded)

7. Rijkswaterstaat Service providers: reduction in costs technology Government: reduction in costs reward

8. Rijkswaterstaat Service providers and government aim at cost effective technology ParticipantsCostsEffect Camera registration+++++ On board unit (GPS)++++ Mobile devices (GPS) +++

9. Rijkswaterstaat Alternatives to a monetary reward Lottery Travel information Webshop Use of psychology

10. Rijkswaterstaat Use of psychology Major rewarding scheme (money, lottery, webshop, games, travel information) More participants …… …… that show more of the desired behaviour …… for a longer period of time …… resulting in a permanent behaviour change

11. Rijkswaterstaat Classical rush hour avoidance elements Scale: corridor, region (city), national Financial model: B2G, B2C, B2B Effect: short (months), medium (years), long term (structural) Selection and registration method: camera's, apps, on board unit (OBU) Rewards: financial (money, webshops, lottery), social (feedback mechanisms, communities), moral (avoidance plans)

12. Rijkswaterstaat Criticism on rush hour avoidance projects User: –Privacy (camera surveillance) –Injustice (non participants) Government –Investment costs –Financial model (B2G) –Complex & long time to market –Limited competition service providers –Structural effects Business –Difficult B2B/B2C business case

13. Rijkswaterstaat IMMA: Integrated Mobility Management Architecture Developed within Program Optimizing Use IMMA as a new approach: –Smart use of ITS: mobiles & apps –Integration of rush hour avoidance with other MM measures How it works: –Serviceproviders (apps) need to qualify for IMMA –Apps have (historical) GPS trackings –Travellers receive an “in app pop up” request for particition in rewarding scheme –If accepted the app is used for tracking, rewarding & user communication

14. Rijkswaterstaat IMMA Goals 1.Cost reduction Less complicated procurement More market competition Less structural use of camera’s 2.Shorter time to market 3.Reduction of privacy risks Less structural use of camera’s 4.Realising structural effects Source: project plan IMMA, 2015

15. Rijkswaterstaat IMMA Current proces June 2015: product design specifications End 2015: qualification proces serviceproviders First pilots in 2016 with use of IMMA 2016-2017: Objective baseline Recruitment Tracking Rewarding User Communication Enforcement 2017 Pr o jects

16. Rijkswaterstaat New business models for serviceproviders B2G: –Rush hour avoidance projects  Road construction works  Programme Optimising Use –Other MM projects (cycling, public transport use, etc.) –Research (surveys, GPS data) B2B: –Employers (MM in companies) –Loyalty programmes (marketing) –Data (user, travel & traffic info)

17. Rijkswaterstaat Questions & remarks?