Download Executive Summary (PDF - 1mb) - FIA Foundation

FIA Foundation
for the Automobile and Society
The Automobile and Society
Executive summary

The automobile in industrialised society
An introduction to the transport data
Cars per person
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100 0
Difference represents
SUVs, minivans and
pickups
1970 1976 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
= The automobile dominates passenger travel. At least 75% of
distance travelled is by car, except in Japan (63%) and Spain (69%).
= Car ownership is rising in every country.
= Transport is a major part of household expenditure - on average
about 14% of all expenditure. About 85% of this expenditure is for
the purchase and use of cars.
= For journeys up to 40 km long, travel by car takes no more than half
the time door to door as travel by bus or rail, except along a few
corridors suitable for heavy rail or express bus.
= A car allows access to wider choice and better opportunities for
employment, homes, and key services.
= Congestion is a growing problem in some areas. But overall,
average door to door travel times are not increasing.
= Road safety is improving. Fatalities per vehicle kilometre have
fallen by a factor of three since 1980, and by a factor of five in some
countries since 1970.
= Emission of toxic pollutants from cars has fallen dramatically. A new
car today is around 30 times cleaner than a new car in the early 1980’s .
= Cars are now responsible for less than 15% of greenhouse
emissions worldwide, and some 15-20% of greenhouse emissions
from developed countries. Governments and car manufacturers are
taking serious steps to improve fuel efficiency through technology.
= Car drivers pay up to four times more in road user taxes than the
amount reinvested in transport.
UK
Canada
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Spain
USA (all 4tyre)
USA (autos)
1

Mobility: the role of the car
= Rising car ownership causes similarities in overall travel patterns in
developed countries, particularly the dominant role of the car. Many
current trends in Europe are similar to those experienced in USA
twenty years ago.
= Within this overall similarity, almost every detail of travel patterns in
Europe and USA is different.
= For individuals, in USA cars are used more and fewer trips are made
by walking and public transport than in Europe: the differences
between USA and Japan are even greater.
Characteristics of personal travel, Europe and USA
Europe
Means of transport
Car
Walk
Pedal cycle
Train
Air
Other public transport
Personal travel
Average trip
numbers
Average trip length
Average travel time
Trips
%
62
25
*
1

eginning to be more like shoes, where different sets are kept for
different occasions.
= Using a car enables people to travel further in the same time. As car
ownership has increased, the average distance travelled per year
has also risen.
= The journeys people make by car are different to those by public
transport. Car trips are from anywhere to anywhere, and are often
across town or round the edge of towns. Public transport trips are
along corridors where many people travel, often radial into the
centres of towns.
= The majority of long journeys are for personal rather than
professional reasons. In Britain, the proportion increases from
58% for journeys of 120 - 160 km to 67% for journeys over
560 km. In France, about 80% of long journeys are for personal
reasons.
= In Britain and France, over 70% of long distance travel up to 500 km
is by car.
Travel by car
= Except for Japan, over 83% of distance travelled is by road, of
which over 80% is by car. In most countries 75 - 85% of the
total distance travelled is by car, except in Japan (63%) and Spain
(69%).
= The average distance travelled per person per year by car ranges
from 6,190 km in Japan to 23,130 km in USA.
= The average annual distance travelled per car varies from 9,300 km
per car per year in Japan to 19,100 km in USA.
The car and social issues
= In general, household car ownership increases as household
income increases.
= People travel more, the easier their access to a car. The less access
they have to a car, the more they walk and use public transport.
= For journeys up to 40 km long, travel by car takes no more than half
the time door to door as travel by bus or rail, except along a few
corridors suitable for heavy rail or express bus.
3

= On average, the fuel-only cost of car travel is about one-third
the cost of bus or rail fares, even after subsidies for public
transport.
= Cars enable their users to travel further to obtain access
to better jobs, houses, goods and services. Travel by car
saves time and increases opportunities for a wide range of
activities. Because car ownership is lower among poorer
people, the transport system can reinforce poverty and increase
social exclusion. This is now a significant concern in some
countries.
= Because most public transport journeys are along heavily
travelled corridors while car journeys are from scattered
origins to scattered destinations, improved public transport is
only an attractive alternative for a small proportion of car
journeys.
Traffic levels and congestion
= Traffic flows are increasing, but the rate of increase differs greatly
between areas. Traffic is hardly increasing in central cities and
growing most rapidly on inter-urban motorways.
= Traffic flows on motorways are higher in Britain than any other G7
country. They are 50% higher than in Germany, the next busiest,
and almost twice as high as in USA or Japan.
= Average traffic flows on all roads are higher in Britain than any other
G7 country. They are 25% higher than in Germany, the next busiest,
and almost twice as high as in USA or Japan.
= Average door to door travel time is not increasing. The car is
providing more journeys, enabling people to cover more distance,
without increasing the time spent travelling.
= Nevertheless, congestion is increasing in some localised situations.
Congestion measured as the excess time taken by motorists
because of traffic delays is increasing, particularly in urban areas in
USA and on inter-urban roads in Britain.
= Road pricing is in use in London as a demand management
measure and to raise funds for transport improvements, and in a
number of other European cities principally to raise funds for
transport investment. Pricing on inter-urban roads is currently used
to fund road maintenance and investment, but not to manage
demand.
4

Safety
= In all the G7 countries, road accident fatalities and the fatality rates
per population and per vehicle kilometre have been falling. In most
of them, the fatality rate per vehicle km reduced by a factor of about
3 between 1980 and 1999, and probably by a factor of about five
since 1970, when the number of fatalities was at its highest in
several countries.
Road accident deaths per billion vehicle km
100
80
60
40
20
0
1980
1990
1999
= The EU15 states have a target to halve road traffic fatalities by 2010.
Individual states have national targets and visions for road safety. It
is clear that safety will continue to improve.
= Despite the improvements in road safety since 1970, in 1999 there
were 42,122 persons killed in traffic accidents in EU15, 41,611 in
USA and 10,805 in Japan.
= These figures for road accident fatalities in Europe compare with 186
railway passengers and 25 airline passengers.
= Of the countries surveyed USA has the highest road accident
fatality rate per population, at 153 per year per million, and Britain
the lowest, at 59 per year per million.
= Spain has the highest fatality rate per unit traffic, at 28 per billion
vehicle km, and Britain the lowest, at 7 per billion vehicle km.
5

= In all the G7 countries except Japan, car occupants are half or more
of all fatalities.
= In both Britain and Japan, a high proportion of fatalities, over 25%,
are pedestrians.
= Britain, Italy and Japan have a high proportion of fatalities in urban
areas, over 40% of the total. Spain has the lowest proportion, at
18%.
= Motorways are very safe roads. In most G7 countries the fatality
rate per vehicle kilometre is about one-third that on other roads.
Despite carrying typically 18% to 28% of all traffic, only 3% to 8% of
all injury accidents and 6% to 16% of all fatalities occur on motor
ways.
= Road safety measures can be categorised as: decreasing exposure
(vehicle miles travelled); decreasing collision risk; and decreasing
the risk of death or injury. Risk of death or injury has been reduced
by improved vehicle design, improved roadside furniture and
protective equipment such as seat belts and air bags. Seat belt use
by drivers and front seat passengers varies from 96% in Germany to
around 30% in the Czech Republic.
Environment
Air quality
= Emissions of toxic pollutants from road transport have been falling
s t e a d i l y, despite rising traffic. This has been the result of
improvements to engine technology, including the use of exhaust
catalysts, and of tougher fuel quality standards.
= In the USA, allowable emissions of CO from cars has reduced to 4%
of the amount emitted before legislative controls; alowable emission
of hydrocarbons is 4%, and from 2004 will be 1%; and of NOx is 10%
and from 2007 will be 4%. Further planned reductions in emission
limits for vehicles in USA and EU15 will further reduce emissions per
vehicle km by factors of at least two for most pollutants.
= These improvements have been made possible by improvements in
the specifications for petrol and diesel fuel. As well as the reduction,
and eventual elimination, of lead in petrol, the amount of sulphur in
both petrol and diesel has been reduced by a factor of 10 since
1990, and will be further substantially reduced throughout Europe by
2005.
6

= Air quality in urban areas is improving. This is partly a result of
transport becoming cleaner and partly due to emissions from
non-transport sources of pollution being reduced.
= In particular, concentrations of lead have been falling since 1980,
and those of carbon monoxide, and various volatile organic
compounds and oxides of nitrogen since at least the mid-1990s.
= In US metropolitan areas, the number of days on which at least one
air quality limit was exceeded has been falling since at least the late
1980s.
= Improving technology is dramatically reducing the impact of cars on
air quality, though it is too soon to claim that the problem has been
completely overcome. Traffic has not been restricted to improve air
quality, except in a few, short-term, extreme incidents.
Greenhouse gas emissions
= Worldwide emissions of carbon dioxide, the principal manmade
greenhouse gas, rose 9 percent between 1990 and 1998.
Transport CO2 emissions
800
150
10
50
0
1982 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
UK
France
Germany
Italy
Spain
USA x 1/10
7

= Transport produces a small part of the worldwide emission of greenhouse
gases (probably between 10% and 16% of the total). In USA,
transport uses 28% of the national energy consumption and emits
33% of the carbon dioxide. In EU15, transport emits 29% of the
carbon dioxide. In less developed countries, transport emits a smaller
percentage of the total carbon dioxide emissions. Cars emit about
15% of the total carbon dioxide in EU15, and about 19% in USA.
= In USA, the total emission of CO2 rose 11% during the 1990s, with
transport rising by 19% and road transport by 16%.
= In EU15, emission of carbon dioxide CO2 has been almost constant
since the mid-1980s, but within this total, emission from transport
has been rising.
= In Britain, emission of CO2 by road transport has been almost
constant since 1990. Within this total, emissions from road freight
are rising, but emissions from cars have fallen marginally since
1993, despite a 12% increase in traffic.
= The US CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency) standards have
not been made more demanding since 1985 for cars and since 1995
for light trucks. Light trucks (e.g. SUVs, pick-ups etc) are allowed to
use 33% more fuel than cars.
= In 1998, the representatives of motor manufacturers from Europe,
Japan and Korea committed to reduce the new car fleet average fuel
consumption by 25% in 2008 (relative to 1995) in agreement with the
European Commission. Improvements already introduced have
reduced the new car fleet average fuel consumption in Europe in
2001 by 11.4% relative to 1995. This should compensate for
European traffic growth as these vehicles replace less efficient ones.
Noise
= Allowable noise levels for vehicles have been steadily reduced, so
that by 1996, the engine and exhaust of a heavy lorry made less
noise than those of a car in 1972, and 10 cars made about the same
noise as one did in 1972.
= Tyre noise is being reduced by improvements to tyres and road
surfaces, and noise barriers are being used to protect noise
sensitive areas.
= Despite these developments, road traffic is the external source of
noise that is heard indoors by the largest number of households, and
is the noise heard indoors that causes nuisance to most people.
8

Finance and the cost of motoring
Taxation of road users and government spending on transport
= Road transport offers such great advantages to its users that it is a
favourite source of revenue for governments. However, there are
indications in several countries that current levels of taxation of road
users are close to the limit of acceptability.
= Each country has its own systems of obtaining taxation revenues
from road users and of providing funds for the construction
and operation of transport facilities. There is a great difference
between North America and Europe in the balance between
revenue from road users and the spending on roads, and indeed in
the attitude to transport investment as a necessary support for
the economy.
= In USA, government spending on highways roughly matches
taxation revenue from highway users. Spending on other forms of
transport well exceeds revenue from transport users. A similar
situation applies in Canada.
= In Europe it is common for governments to use motorists as a source
of taxation for general revenue. In Spain, taxation from motorists
is four times, and in Britain five times, the amount spent by
government on roads. However, due to spending on other types
of transport, Spanish taxation revenue is only about twice the total
of government spending on all forms of transport, and in Britain
about four times.
= In France, revenue from road users approximately matches
government spending on all forms of transport, but is about twice as
much as government spends on roads.
= In Germany, since 1990, revenue from road users has exceeded
total government spending on all forms of transport (excluding a part
of funding for public transport).
National economy
= Transport is a major part of the economic activity of developed
countries, typically involving 12% to 19% of the national GDP.
= National statistics suggest that 4% to 8% of jobs are in car and
transport related activities, but when a wider definition of transport
related jobs is used, the percentage is higher.
9

= Countries that have indigenous car industries tend to be
chauvinistic in their car purchases. The high proportion of
indigenous cars purchased in France, Germany, Italy and Japan is
striking. Despite its indigenous industry, USA is now purchasing
40% of its new cars from Japanese and other Asian manufacturers.
= Official figures classify employment in transport as 4 - 8% of all jobs,
but when transport-related activities are included, the proportion is
higher than this.
Purchases of cars in different countries - 2001
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
country in which car purchased
Household spending on transport
France
Germany
Italy
Sweden
Britain
USA
Japan
other Asian
= Transport is a major part of household expenditure. In European
countries the average household spends some 1,750 - 1,850
Euro/year on car travel (85% of all spending on travel) and 200-300
Euro/year on all other travel. Spending on travel is typically 11 -
16% of total household expenditure. For households in Britain that
own a car, motoring is the biggest single item of household spending.
In the collection of these statistics, many inconsistencies, differences of definition and examples of
missing data have been found. Readers should appreciate that data such as traffic flows may be
uncertain to within 5%, number of vehicles to at least 2%, and financial information to possibly greater
uncertainty. The overall patterns described here are believed to provide a fair picture of reality, but
detailed individual results need to be treated with caution.
Financial statistics for Eurozone countries are given in Euros. For Britain, USA and Canada, for which
the rates of exchange vary, rates of exchange have been chosen that were typical of those in force
in 2001-02. These are 1 US$ = 1 Euro, 1 Canadian $ = 0.647 Euro and 1 £ sterling = 1.57 .
other
10

The motorist in industrialised society
An introduction to the opinion research
A major survey of motorists across eight countries has been conducted for
the Automobile and Society Report. Eight national surveys were conducted
(each reported in detail in the national sections) by polling organisation
MORI and her international partners. This report discusses the overall
findings and draws comparisons across countries and between key cities.
The objectives of the research were to understand the role of the car - and
in particular the attitudes of motorists towards their cars - in today’s
industrialised societies. In particular, the research aimed to assess the
extent of self-perceptions of car dependency amongst motorists; the degree
of their identification with their cars; and their willingness - or resistance - to
change and to the instruments of car restraint and modal shift.
Key findings
= The large majority of drivers acknowledge the car as a central and
critically important part of their own lives, and of their country’s prosp
e r i t y, despite some misgivings over the car’s impact on quality of life.
= Despite the progress made in road and vehicle safety, the risk of
accidents emerges as a prime concern for motorists - and indeed
ranks top in 4 out of the 8 countries surveyed.
= In all countries, the price of fuel doubling has a potentially far greater
impact on reducing car usage than does the cost of public transport
halving.
= Indeed, excessive cost seems to be the main catalyst in forcing
drivers (though by no means all of them) to part with their cars.
= When thinking about the future the most widespread expectation is
that, as drivers, they will increasingly have to spend more of their
income on motoring.
= There is also expectation of tightening controls, both in terms of car
usage generally and the environmental credentials of vehicles which
are used.
Attitudes to the car
More than half of drivers (56%) as a whole say they would find day-to-day
tasks more difficult if they no longer had a car:
= this rises to nearer three-quarters among those living in the US or
Germany;
11

= Italy and Spain buck the trend with just 27% and 44% respectively
feeling that no longer having a car would make daily life more
difficult.
Consequences of no longer having a car
Q. If you no longer had a car which, if any, of the following
consequences would you expect to apply to you?
100
80
60
40
20
0
‘Day-to-day tasks would become more difficult’
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source: MORI
Half (51%) of drivers say they would spend more time using public transport
if they no longer had a car. Again we see some marked variations across
the countries with the Germans and Japanese being apparently most willing
(or able) to use public transport, and French and Italians being least
likely to.
On a city or state basis, a transatlantic divide appears, with those living in
California or Toronto having very different views about the effect being ‘car
less’ would have on their everyday lives:
= those in Toronto or California are twice as likely as those
in European capitals to feel that not having a car would
impinge upon their social lives and force them to find a new
job.
29% of Parisians said they would be unaffected by not having a car - in stark
comparison to just 1% of those living in Toronto.
12

Consequences of no longer having a car
Q. If you no longer had a car which, if any, of the following
consequences would you expect to apply to you?
100
80
60
40
20
0
‘I would spend more time using public transport’
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source:MORI
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source: MORI
In terms of attitudes to the car, when asked to respond to positive and
negative statements about the car, there appears often to be a split between
France / Spain / Italy and USA / Germany / Japan.
For example, the majority of drivers as a whole (60%) disagree that
‘cars reduce the overall quality of life’. However, in France and Italy
more agree than disagree (56% and 49% respectively agree). German and
American drivers are least likely to feel that the car has impacted
negatively on their quality of life.
On the question of whether cars are ‘the worst invention of the 20 th Century’
sentiment is more clear-cut overall, with the large majority (87%)
disagreeing across the board, and with far less variation between countries.
Seven in ten drivers agree that cars are essential for economic prosperity
- this sentiment is felt most strongly in the US, Germany and Japan, with
over eight in ten in agreement. Drivers in Spain and Italy are least likely to
feel that cars are essential for economic prosperity with only just over half
in agreement, followed closely by GB (62% agree).
Despite some misgivings over quality of life, few people of any type
dispute the car’s role in promoting personal freedom; at least three-quarters
13

across the board agree that cars do this. Japanese drivers are among those
relatively least likely to agree (just 76% agree, against 91% in the US).
Cars are an important aspect of people’s freedom
100
80
60
40
20
0
10% 8% 8% 9% 9% 13% 11% 14% 10%
6%
1% 2%
3% 3%
7% 10%
8% 14%
84% 91% 90% 88% 88% 80% 79% 78% 76%
% agree
% neither/nor
don’t know
% disagree
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source: MORI
Motorists’ concerns
The risk of accidents is the top ranking concern among drivers as a whole,
with just over half citing this as a current concern:
= this was the top concern in Japan, France, Spain and Italy;
= but fell to #4 in Germany and bottom (#6) in Britain.
Other main concerns or worries tended to focus around:
= the cost of driving one’s car (ranked #1 in Germany, Canada and
USA but #4 in Spain, the least wealthy of the countries surveyed,
and in some ways the least car-dependent);
= and environmental issues - ranking either #2 or #3 in all countries
bar USA (#4).
14

Motorists’ current concerns and worries
Q. Which, if any, of the following motoring issues concern or worry
you as a motorist at the moment?
100
80
60
40
20
0
The car: constraints and alternatives
‘ The risk of accidents’
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source: MORI
The price of fuel doubling has a far greater potential impact in persuading
drivers out of their cars than does the cost of public transport halving (65%
vs 33%):
= however Germany, Canada and the US appear most sensitive when
it comes to the cost of running their car - indeed around seven in ten
say they would use their car less if fuel doubled in price. This is
despite these populations being circumstantially among the best
able to take a substantial price increase. (The price of petrol in the
US - although higher now - remains very low by European
standards). Spanish drivers, by contrast, appear least concerned
about the cost issue, in part suggesting they are less car-dependent.
However, one third of drivers as a whole claim that the price of fuel doubling
would have ‘no effect’ on their car usage:
= again, there is a marked split across the countries with this rising to
over two in five among those in Spain, France, Italy and GB, and
falling to around one in five among those in Germany, Canada, the
US and Japan.
15

Just over one-third of drivers would not be willing to make any of their
regular car journeys by another means. However, very few - 11% - are
unwilling to completely give up their car in any circumstance (23% in the US
- by far the highest national figure).
Giving up your car
Q. Thinking ahead, which one of these, if any, do you think would
lead you to give up your car?
100
80
60
40
20
0
Giving up your car
Q Thinking ahead, which one of these, if any, do you think would
lead you to give up your car?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
‘The cost of motoring becoming too much to afford’
Base: All drivers (11,884) Source: MORI
‘Not being able to afford to run a car’ appears to be the key catalyst for
giving up one’s car entirely - especially so in Germany where the figure
(62%) is far higher than anywhere else. Elsewhere, it is only a minority who
appear willing to be swayed - even by this extreme circumstance.
11% 19% 9% 13% 18% 14% 12%* 7%**
‘Congestion’
% capital city
Base: All drivers (11,884), * California, ** Toronto Source: MORI
16

More than two in ten Parisians claim they would give up their car if cars were
banned from the city centre. Congestion could also play a role among this
group with a similar proportion citing this as a reason to giving up their car.
The future
Half of all drivers believe that they will have to spend more of their income
on motoring in the next 5 years:
= this rises to two-thirds among American drivers, especially those
living in California.
Coming under pressure to use a car with lower emissions was mentioned
by 44% of drivers, this was most marked in Japan where this rises to 58%
and Toronto (61%). In this case, the Californian figure was no higher than
for the US as a whole.
Drivers in Britain are most likely to expect to spend more time in traffic jams
and come under general pressure to use their car less. Despite the
introduction of London’s congestion charging scheme, the figures for the
capital are in line with Great Britain as a whole.
By contrast, those in France are most likely to think that ‘nothing’ will change
(27% versus 11% across all countries combined):
= interviews were conducted, by telephone, between February - April
2003, based on a nationally representative sample of drivers in each
country;
= national sample of 11,884 drivers split as follows:
Canada
GB
Italy
USA
(1712)
(1363)
(1404)
(1400)
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
(1630)
(1404)
(1370)
(1601)
17

Objectives
FIA Foundation
for the Automobile and Society
The FIA Foundation has been established in the United Kingdom as a
registered charity with an endowment of $300 million made by the
Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), the governing body of
world motor sport and the international association of motoring
organisations.
Our objectives are to promote public safety and public health, the
protection and preservation of human life and the conservation,
protection and improvement of the physical and natural environment
through:
= promoting research, disseminating the results of research and
providing information in any matters of public interest which
include road safety, automobile technology, the protection and
preservation of human life and public health, transport and
public mobility and the protection of the environment; and
= promoting improvement in the safety of motor sport, and of
drivers, passengers, pedestrians and other road users.
The Foundation conducts its own research and educational activities
as well as offering financial support to third party projects through a
grants programme.
Visit www.fiafoundation.com for the
latest information on our activities

FIA Foundation 60 Trafalgar Square London WC2N 5DS United Kingdom +44 (0)207 930 3882 (t) +44 (0)207 930 3883 (f)
i n f o @ f i a f o u n d a t i o n . c o m w w w . f i a f o u n d a t i o n . c o m
R e g i s t e red in England and Wales as a company limited by guarantee No. 4219306 Registered UK Charity No. 1088670 Registered Office: FIA Foundation for the Automobile & Society 60 Trafalgar Square London WC2N 5DS