Jonas Eliasson: How to solve traffic jams
Summary
TLDRビデオスクリプトの要約:交通渋滞は世界中の都市で共通の現象ですが、異なる都市構造にかかわらず存在します。計画的な解決策は効果がありませんが、ストックホルムでの交通渋滞料金の実験は、わずかな料金で20%の車が消失し、渋滞を大幅に軽減しました。渋滞料金は交通量を減らし、人々の行動を自然に変え、最終的には70%の市民がこの料金を支持しています。これは、複雑な社会問題を解決するのに「仕掛け」の力があることを示しています。
Takeaways
- 🌐 交通拥堵是一个全球性问题,存在于几乎所有城市,尽管城市之间存在显著差异。
- 🚦 城市类型包括典型的欧洲城市、美国城市和新兴世界城市,它们在道路容量、公共交通和车辆种类上各有不同。
- 🛣️ 交通规划者尝试了多种措施来解决拥堵问题,但似乎没有什么方法能够完全奏效。
- 🤔 这些尝试的共同点在于,它们试图规划人们在高峰时段不开车时应该做什么,这是一种对人们生活的规划。
- 🏗️ 规划复杂的社会系统非常困难,城市如伦敦的面包供应系统能够自我组织,无需中央控制。
- 💡 解决复杂社会问题的正确方法是创造激励机制,而不是详细规划,让人们自行适应新框架。
- 📍 斯德哥尔摩通过在瓶颈处对驾驶员收取一两欧元的费用来尝试减少交通拥堵。
- 💰 尽管收费不高,但这足以使20%的车辆在高峰时段消失,显著减少了交通拥堵。
- 📉 交通是一个非线性现象,减少一部分交通流量可以更快地减少拥堵。
- 📅 斯德哥尔摩自2006年1月3日引入拥堵收费以来,交通水平一直保持在较低水平。
- 📊 2007年的试验和公投显示,尽管最初人们反对拥堵收费,但最终70%的人支持保留这一制度。
- 🚶♂️ 那些减少开车的20%驾驶员可能自己都没有意识到他们的行为已经改变,他们的出行模式比想象中更不稳定。
- 🗳️ 通过调查发现,超过一半的人认为他们对拥堵收费的看法从未改变,即使实际上他们已经接受了这一变化。
- 🌟 通过适当的激励(如拥堵收费)来解决复杂的社会问题,可以让人们在不知不觉中接受并喜欢这种变化。
Q & A
交通渋滞はどの程度世界中で普遍的な現象ですか?
-交通渋滞は世界中のほぼすべての都市で存在する普遍的な現象であり、特に驚くべきことに、都市がどれほど異なるにもかかわらず。
ヨーロッパの都市とアメリカの都市の交通インフラの違いは何ですか?
-ヨーロッパの都市は密集した都市地帯、良い公共交通機関があり、道路容量は多くない一方で、アメリカの都市は広大なエリアに多くの道路があり、公共交通機関はほとんどありません。
交通計画者が試した様々な対策の中で、共通している点は何ですか?
-彼らの試みは、ラッシュアワーの自動車運転を避ける方法を見つけるための計画であり、人々の生活を計画することにつながっています。
1989年にベルリンの壁が倒されたとき、ロンドンの都市計画者が学んだ教訓は何でしたか?
-ロンドンのパン屋の供給について誰も責任を持っていないという複雑な社会システムの自己組織化の能力についての深い洞察を学びました。
ストックホルムでの交通渋滞料金の実験は何を証明しましたか?
-1〜2ユーロの料金でラッシュアワーの車の20%が減少し、交通渋滞が大幅に軽減されたことを証明しました。
交通渋滞料金が導入されてからどのくらいの時間が経ちましたか?
-交通渋滞料金は2006年1月3日に導入され、現在では6年半以上が経過しています。
2007年に交通渋滞料金が一時停止されたとき、何が起こりましたか?
-交通渋滞料金が一時停止されたとたん、車がすぐに戻ってきて渋滞が再び増加しましたが、その後も効果が続きました。
ストックホルムの交通渋滞料金に対する公衆の支持はどのように変化しましたか?
-最初は70%の人々が渋滞料金に反対していたが、後に70%の支持を得ることとなりました。
交通渋滞料金の導入により、車を減らした20%のドライバーはどのようにしていましたか?
-彼らは自分たちがラッシュアワーの自動車運転を避ける方法を見つけるために、微妙に日常生活を変えていたようです。
交通渋滞料金の支持を高めた要因は何だと分析されていますか?
-人々が渋滞料金を支持するようになった要因は、彼らが実際には自分たちの行動や考え方が変わっており、それに気づかずにいたという事実です。
交通渋滞問題を解決する際に「nudge」とはどのようなアプローチですか?
-「nudge」とは人々を正しい方向へ微妙に誘導するアプローチであり、彼らにどのように適応するかを教えるのではなく、彼らを適応する方向に動かします。
Outlines
🚦 交通渋滞問題の多面性と対策
第1段落では、世界各地の都市で起こる交通渋滞問題をテーマにしています。ヨーロッパの都市とアメリカの都市、そして新興国都市の異なる特徴と、それらの都市で行われてきた様々な交通改善の試みが紹介されています。しかしながら、これらの試みは効果が乏しく、渋滞を解決するための新たなアプローチが求められています。話は、社会の複雑なシステムを計画することの難しさにつながり、1989年のベルリンの壁の崩壊後の出来事から、複雑な社会問題を解決する際のインセンティブの大切さが説かれています。そして、ストックホルムでの渋滞料金の実験が紹介され、わずかな料金で多くの車がラッシュアワーから消えるという驚きの効果が語られています。
📊 渋滞料金の効果と社会的な受け止め方
第2段落では、渋滞料金が導入されたストックホルムでの交通状況の変化と、市民の受け止め方について詳述しています。渋滞料金の導入後、交通量は大幅に減少し、渋滞も大幅に緩和されました。しかし、この効果が持続するかどうかは疑問視されていました。実際には、渋滞料金が廃止された後にも交通量は増加しなかったことが明らかになり、市民の70%が渋滞料金の維持を支持するようになりました。この変化は、人々の行動や考え方の潜在的な柔軟性と、小さめのインセンティブが大きな変化を生む力があることを示しています。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡交通渋滞
💡渋滞料金
💡自己組織
💡インセンティブ
💡ニュートラル
💡複雑系
💡都市計画者
💡ストックホルム
💡社会問題
💡ナッジ
Highlights
Road congestion is a global issue affecting cities with different urban structures and transportation systems.
Traffic planners have tried various measures to alleviate congestion, but none have been completely effective.
Attempts to solve congestion often involve trying to plan people's lives for them, which is challenging.
The story of the Berlin Wall's fall illustrates the concept of self-organizing complex social systems.
Creating incentives rather than detailed plans is a more effective approach to complex social problems.
Stockholm's congestion pricing experiment reduced rush hour traffic by 20% with a small charge.
Traffic congestion is a nonlinear phenomenon where small changes can have significant impacts.
The introduction of congestion charges in Stockholm led to a substantial reduction in traffic and congestion.
Despite initial resistance, public support for congestion pricing in Stockholm has grown to 70%.
The removal of congestion charges led to an immediate return of traffic, demonstrating rapid adaptation by drivers.
The reintroduction of congestion charges was followed by a referendum, providing a unique opportunity for study.
The shift in public opinion towards congestion pricing indicates a change in perception and acceptance of the charges.
Interview surveys revealed that many drivers were unaware of their own behavioral changes due to the charges.
More than half of the surveyed individuals believed they had always supported congestion pricing.
The power of nudges in influencing behavior and solving complex social problems is demonstrated by the Stockholm case.
Properly implemented nudges can lead to embraced and even liked changes in behavior.
Transcripts
Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Morton Bast
Hi. I'm here to talk about congestion,
namely road congestion.
Road congestion is a pervasive phenomenon.
It exists in basically all of the cities all around the world,
which is a little bit surprising when you think about it.
I mean, think about how different cities are, actually.
I mean, you have the typical European cities,
with a dense urban core, good public transportation
mostly, not a lot of road capacity.
But then, on the other hand, you have the American cities.
It's moving by itself, okay.
Anyway, the American cities:
lots of roads dispersed over large areas,
almost no public transportation.
And then you have the emerging world cities,
with a mixed variety of vehicles,
mixed land-use patterns, also rather dispersed
but often with a very dense urban core.
And traffic planners all around the world have tried
lots of different measures: dense cities or dispersed cities,
lots of roads or lots of public transport
or lots of bike lanes or more information,
or lots of different things, but nothing seems to work.
But all of these attempts have one thing in common.
They're basically attempts at figuring out
what people should do instead of rush hour car driving.
They're essentially, to a point, attempts at planning
what other people should do, planning their life for them.
Now, planning a complex social system
is a very hard thing to do, and let me tell you a story.
Back in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell,
an urban planner in London got a phone call
from a colleague in Moscow saying, basically,
"Hi, this is Vladimir. I'd like to know,
who's in charge of London's bread supply?"
And the urban planner in London goes,
"What do you mean, who's in charge of London's —
I mean, no one is in charge."
"Oh, but surely someone must be in charge.
I mean, it's a very complicated system. Someone must control all of this."
"No. No. No one is in charge.
I mean, it basically -- I haven't really thought of it.
It basically organizes itself."
It organizes itself.
That's an example of a complex social system
which has the ability of self-organizing,
and this is a very deep insight.
When you try to solve really complex social problems,
the right thing to do is most of the time
to create the incentives.
You don't plan the details,
and people will figure out what to do,
how to adapt to this new framework.
And let's now look at how we can use this insight
to combat road congestion.
This is a map of Stockholm, my hometown.
Now, Stockholm is a medium-sized city, roughly two million people,
but Stockholm also has lots of water and lots of water
means lots of bridges -- narrow bridges, old bridges --
which means lots of road congestion.
And these red dots show the most congested parts,
which are the bridges that lead into the inner city.
And then someone came up with the idea that,
apart from good public transport,
apart from spending money on roads,
let's try to charge drivers one or two euros at these bottlenecks.
Now, one or two euros, that isn't really a lot of money,
I mean compared to parking charges and running costs, etc.,
so you would probably expect that car drivers
wouldn't really react to this fairly small charge.
You would be wrong.
One or two euros was enough to make 20 percent of cars
disappear from rush hours.
Now, 20 percent, well, that's a fairly huge figure, you might think,
but you've still got 80 percent left of the problem, right?
Because you still have 80 percent of the traffic.
Now, that's also wrong, because traffic happens to be
a nonlinear phenomenon, meaning that
once you reach above a certain capacity threshold
then congestion starts to increase really, really rapidly.
But fortunately, it also works the other way around.
If you can reduce traffic even somewhat, then congestion
will go down much faster than you might think.
Now, congestion charges were introduced in Stockholm
on January 3, 2006, and the first picture here is a picture
of Stockholm, one of the typical streets, January 2.
The first day with the congestion charges looked like this.
This is what happens when you take away
20 percent of the cars from the streets.
You really reduce congestion quite substantially.
But, well, as I said, I mean, car drivers adapt, right?
So after a while they would all come back because they
have sort of gotten used to charges.
Wrong again. It's now six and a half years ago
since the congestion charges were introduced in Stockholm,
and we basically have the same low traffic levels still.
But you see, there's an interesting gap here in the time series
in 2007.
Well, the thing is that, the congestion charges,
they were introduced first as a trial, so they were introduced
in January and then abolished again at the end of July,
followed by a referendum, and then they were reintroduced
again in 2007, which of course was a wonderful scientific opportunity.
I mean, this was a really fun experiment to start with,
and we actually got to do it twice.
And personally, I would like to do this every once a year or so,
but they won't let me do that.
But it was fun anyway.
So, we followed up. What happened?
This is the last day with the congestion charges, July 31,
and you see the same street but now it's summer,
and summer in Stockholm is a very nice
and light time of the year,
and the first day without the congestion charges
looked like this.
All the cars were back again, and you even have to admire
the car drivers. They adapt so extremely quickly.
The first day they all came back.
And this effect hanged on. So 2007 figures looked like this.
Now these traffic figures are really exciting
and a little bit surprising and very useful to know,
but I would say that the most surprising slide here
I'm going to show you today is not this one. It's this one.
This shows public support for congestion pricing of Stockholm,
and you see that when congestion pricing were introduced
in the beginning of Spring 2006, people were fiercely against it.
Seventy percent of the population didn't want this.
But what happened when the congestion charges
were there is not what you would expect, that people hated it more and more.
No, on the contrary, they changed, up to a point
where we now have 70 percent support for keeping the charges,
meaning that -- I mean, let me repeat that:
70 percent of the population in Stockholm
want to keep a price for something that used to be free.
Okay. So why can that be? Why is that?
Well, think about it this way. Who changed?
I mean, the 20 percent of the car drivers that disappeared,
surely they must be discontent in a way.
And where did they go? If we can understand this,
then maybe we can figure out how people can be so happy with this.
Well, so we did this huge interview survey
with lots of travel services, and tried to figure out
who changed, and where did they go?
And it turned out that they don't know themselves. (Laughter)
For some reason, the car drivers are --
they are confident they actually drive the same way that they used to do.
And why is that? It's because that travel patterns
are much less stable than you might think.
Each day, people make new decisions, and people change
and the world changes around them, and each day
all of these decisions are sort of nudged ever so slightly
away from rush hour car driving
in a way that people don't even notice.
They're not even aware of this themselves.
And the other question, who changed their mind?
Who changed their opinion, and why?
So we did another interview survey, tried to figure out
why people changed their mind, and what type of group changed their minds?
And after analyzing the answers, it turned out that
more than half of them believe that they haven't changed their minds.
They're actually confident that they have
liked congestion pricing all along.
Which means that we are now in a position
where we have reduced traffic across this toll cordon
with 20 percent, and reduced congestion by enormous numbers,
and people aren't even aware that they have changed,
and they honestly believe that they have liked this all along.
This is the power of nudges when trying to solve
complex social problems, and when you do that,
you shouldn't try to tell people how to adapt.
You should just nudge them in the right direction.
And if you do it right,
people will actually embrace the change,
and if you do it right, people will actually even like it.
Thank you. (Applause)
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)