General Innovation 3: STAYHOME

Leaders:
WP1, Pirkko Saarikivi, Lulu Hyvätti (Foreca)

Description:
What are the effects of choosing staying home instead of choosing to travel a certain route?

STUDYING THE EFFECTS OF CHOOSING STAYING HOME INSTEAD OF CHOOSING TO TRAVEL A CERTAIN ROUTE

 

 

1.  Purpose

 

Purpose of this document is to study the effects of choosing staying home instead of choosing to travel a certain route. On ROADIDEA innovation seminar in Budapest, one recurring idea and question was, what can be done to limit transport needs altogether? Is it possible to just stay home?

 

Transport policies involves a wide range of often contradictory requirements and variables such as safety, energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, noise, infrastructure provision and maintenance  to mention just a few.  At the same time there is a growing need for better transport solutions caused by urban economic growth and the need for reducing GHG emissions.  ROADIDEA project’s main aim is to provide clean, safe and efficient mobility for people and goods using a user-rather than a technology-centered approach.  In this paper the approach to the transport logistics is somewhat unorthodox, what are the effects of choosing staying home instead of choosing to travel a certain route?

 

Staying home may not be a realistic and viable alternative in most parts of Europe right now. In the light of current progress, the future from science fiction novels, where all divisions of life may be taken care from home is not so far away.

2.  Staying home multifunctional approach

 

Transport development has been one of the key drivers and facilitators for economic prosperity worldwide. At the same time the transport section is also significant contributor to GHG emissions.  EU and North America dominate transport-sector emissions in the world and EU alone represents 19,2% of global transport emissions . While environment policies have managed to reduce overall emissions in EU, transport sector emissions keeps rising in the EU area, especially in the new EU states. [i] Both in EU and US the legislative framework has reacted to rising emissions by contributing tougher vehicle emission limits. It has been estimated that traffic related pollution costs Europe 1,7% of its GDP, approximately 160 billion Euros per year. Besides contributing  to GHG emissions and climate change, aerosol particles from the traffic have several other negative impacts. They may hinder the visibility in urban areas (smog), and also increase the overall level of airborne pollutants causing health problems. Several studies have shown that fine particles from the traffic correlates with mortality. [ii] 

 

The most obvious and efficient way to reduce overall traffic is teleworking and working from home. However if the aim is to study the effects of staying home we must also consider all the different motivators and reason for travelling such as social, economic, political, cultural, religious and other possible reasons. Our daily routines may include numerous separate transport activities that vary according to personal needs.

2.1 Urbanization

 

In the EU 74% of the total population lives in cities and towns with more than 5 000 inhabitants. [iii] City planning requires that services, shops etc. are well served via urban transport. Staying home instead of choosing to travel is only possible, if society’s basic services are with in reach of every individual. Urbanization is the inevitable requirement for efficient service clusters to form. 

 

Urban living environment results several negative impacts on traffic. Noise pollution is getting worse, the number of traffic accidents is growing and traffic congestions are resulting more and more delays. Every year nearly 100 billion Euros (1% of EU’s GDP) are lost due to problems caused by chronic congestions.[iv] As a reaction against urban living style there has been a current trend towards suburbanization and urban sprawl. Suburbanization on the other hand may lead to low-density, spatially segregated land use which results increased transport demands.

 

According to Kyoto Protocol under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 128 countries agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions world wide by 8%. The EU managed to reduce it’s emissions 2,9% between 1990-2002. Further on European leaders agreed on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20% by 2020. [v]Energy sector produces more than 80% of all greenhouse gas emissions followed by industrial processes and waste. Transport is the third largest sector to cause greenhouse emissions (2002 19,4% of all greenhouse gas emissions in EU-25).[vi] 

 

2.2 Digital technology

 

Digital technology has changed the rules of communication and information distribution. According to Internet World Stats almost 1,5 billion people use internet with 21,9% population penetration. In Europe the usage is even bigger where over 384 million people have access to internet, which means 48,1% population penetration.[vii] The majority of European households have a computer and nearly half of the household population has now access to internet. [viii] Digitalization has already enabled several transport needs to be obsolete. It is possible to order food, pay bills, buy tickets and get education via internet just to mention a few of the numerous possibilities that modern technology allows us to do. New technologies improves the quality of life especially for elderly and those who are physically disabled.

 

In a modern digital society staying home is already a possibility to a group of people. All human needs can be fulfilled thru different modes of digital technology. While restricting all travelling may be economically and environmentally reasoned, the process of socialization and culturally related reasons still dominate our behavior.

 

Information technologies risks increase as the societies gets more depended on technology. Trends in cyber crime show significant growth and Pin fishing, credit card frauds and information breaches are common technology related crimes. Misuse of information is a serious problem at every level in society.

 

 

2.3 Teleworking

 

Internet usage does not correlate with working from home or teleworking. It has been said that outside the assembly line, almost any work can be done by teleworking. How ever in reality teleworking is still a very marginal phenomenon.  Less than 3% of the total working population in EU is working from home.  Some 4 % works from home occasionally.

 

According to European Working Conditions Survey report 2005 employers in European countries use average of around 40 minutes a day to travelling to and from work. Almost 60% of EU workers work all or almost all the time at company premises. On the other hand, although teleworking or working from home is not yet a real alternative to working on company premises, it is used by a substantial proportion of people as a complement to their normal working arrangements.[ix]

 

The obvious advantages of teleworking include reduction of traffic related negative impatcts such as pollution, noise, congestions etc. Recent studies show that overall productivity increases, job satisfaction rises and recruitment and retaining the employees gets easier.  Teleworking also reduces company overheads and lowers operational expenses. Teleworking may even persuade population to locate closer to the central business districts and increase centralization of cities. Which means that telecommunications and technology are not decreasing the value of face-to-face interaction and the need for cities and their services.[x]

 

Teleworking causes also negative impacts. Working isolated from workplace causes more mental health symptoms of stress compared to employers working in a work place. The differentiation of work time and recreation time may be more difficult and separation from the social network may also hinder career development and thus affect earnings.

 

The same time a company saves on equipment and premises, teleworking may cause new expenditures. When in a work place resources and equipments can be shared and time allocated, teleworking requires individual resources like computers, telephones and office equipment. 

 

3.  Staying home, effects

3.1 Economy

 

European transport sector is growing continuously. The fastest growing mode of transport was aviation with average increase of about 8% for international passengers. According to Eurostat the number of passenger cars per 1000 inhabitants has almost continuously increased between 1997 and 2002 in every EU country. While traffic has increased in EU the number of deaths in road accident has reduced from 1997 to 2002. In 2002 49 700 persons were killed in road accidents. Also road freight transport has increased by 4,9% between 1997-2002 and the passenger transport by rail (passenger-kilometers per inhabitant) has increased on average by 7%.

 

Transport sector is a major contributor on economy. The biggest sector in being the road transport, which provides jobs for more than 12 million people and it contributes 10% of European Gross Domestic Product.[xi]  Decreasing the transport sector means sizeable changes in society. The economic impacts alone would be very dramatic.

 

3.2 Environment

 

In a study about attitudes of European citizens towards the environment it was shown that EU citizens attach great value to the environment and are increasingly aware of the impact of its role in their everyday lives. 96% of Europeans stateted that protecting the environment was important for them personally. How ever economic factors were seen also important. The study showed that environmental and economic factors influenced their quality of life to a large and nearly equal extent.  Socio-demographic factors affected the concept of environment to climate change. The younger the respondents are and the longer they have spent in full-time education, the more likely they are to concept of environment to climate change.[xii]

 

European mobility week is an example of the current trend towards more environmentally friendly forms of transport. Growing concern over climate change and the oil price fluctuations have drawn much public attention towards reducing traffic related negative impacts.

 

Urban living compared to rural living has more impact on environment quantitatively. How ever in general, cities use natural resources more efficient. Concentration of people results more infrastructure, more services and more efficient use of resources.  Car use is considerably lower in cities compared to rural areas. Also per capita land and energy consumption are lower. Even if urban living causes many environmental problems, the logical answer to many traffic related problems still lie in urban living.[xiii]

 

4.  Conclusions

 

Predicting the future or building up hypothesis is always very difficult. The current trends towards urbanization and digitalization is changing our perception of the society constantly. In the situation where oil prices are fluctuating and people are getting more and more aware of the environment living in, it is in the forseeable future to limit the number of travel time and the energy used in it. Does it result on people staying home is yet to be seen.   

References