Citizens for Appropriate Transportation (CAT)
The Eisenhower
Transportation Corridor
INDUCED TRAVEL DEMAND
After
two years and $140 million spent retooling the notoriously congested
-
Mr.
Jonak’s simple observation summarizes the complex issue of "induced travel
demand," or the degree to which building new highway capacity encourages
new car and truck trips that would not have otherwise occurred.
While
Think
of travel as something you purchase. The price you pay includes both the
dollars and the time you spend. If the price of gasoline were $10 per gallon,
people would travel less than if it were 10 cents per gallon. This simple
lesson of price vs. demand can be applied to time just as easily. If the time
it takes to get somewhere doubled, fewer people would make the trip. And if the
time it takes to go somewhere dropped – by adding a lane to the Eisenhower, for
instance – then more people would drive.
In
some cases, induced demand can be a good thing. State Departments of
Transportation frequently boast about the siting of new housing and jobs
resulting from highway investments. Indeed, one could question the value of a
public investment that did not attract users just as one could question the
value of a private sector product that did not attract customers.
But
induced demand also brings with it three serious problems.
First,
induced demand increases community and environmental impacts.
In
the case of the Eisenhower, induced traffic would have three sources:
Unfortunately,
you can’t choose which of these three kinds of traffic to get. While moving
traffic off city streets and onto the highway is beneficial, it comes at the
cost of reduced public transit use and an absolute increase in the number of
cars on the road. When new capacity induces new cars and trucks to use the
Expressway, more noise and air pollution result.
Second,
increased capacity can cause sprawl. Not only do drivers change their
short-term behavior in reaction to changes in price and time, but they change
their long-term behavior as well. How long it takes to drive to work, for
example, is a significant criterion in people’s choice of where to live. Reduce
the travel time, and you encourage people to live further away. As Washington
Post columnist Neil Pierce explains, "the added traffic…grows and grows
over the long term as people travel further and further on the new or widened
roads to take advantage of less expensive land. So government actually pushes
sprawling development, siphoning growth and vitality from existing cities and
closer-in suburbs. City and established suburb residents pay most of the
bill."
Third,
more cars mean more congestion. The irony is that induced demand
can undermine the very purpose for expanding the highway – reducing congestion.
Evidence
from around the country suggests that induced demand on an urban highway like
the Eisenhower could be significant, leaving the road almost as congested as it
is now:
And,
of course, there is every reason to believe that if expanding capacity on the
Eisenhower in
A
thorough and honest environmental impact statement would carefully model the
induced demand of the proposed highway expansion and weigh the purported travel
time benefits against the environmental costs of the project and the demand it
induces. Unfortunately, the Illinois Department of Transportation has not yet
agreed to conduct such a study.
Air
pollution update: Our last issue brief described the air pollution
consequences of automobile and truck exhaust. A few days after our brief was
mailed, the United States Environmental Protection Agency released its findings
concluding that long-term exposure to diesel exhaust is likely to cause lung
cancer and other respiratory diseases.
CAT Home | Previous Issue Brief | Next Issue Brief | Issue Brief Index