Search This Blog

Showing posts with label High Speed Rail. Show all posts
Showing posts with label High Speed Rail. Show all posts

Friday, 2 March 2012

High Speed 2 – What Can We Know?


Henry Overman, in the most recent issue of Centre Piece, the journal of the Centre for Economic Performance, concludes that he is sceptical of the benefits of the proposed High Speed line, because the opportunity cost is high. He wonders whether this is the best way to spend government money and if there are more effective projects.


This is a conclusion that is very seductive and needs careful examination. A series of smaller projects, invested over shorter periods, offer more certainty about both their costs and their benefits. They will not be game changers and can therefore be analysed in the context of ‘business as usual’. The Eddington review also came to the conclusion that sets of smaller projects had better ratios of benefits to costs.

The proponents of large projects therefore need to be clear both about their own assumptions and those on which the conclusion above is reached.

In the UK, we undertake extensive cost benefit analysis to reach conclusions about the value of investment. These are based, as Overman points out, on values of time about which it is possible to argue both about values and the ability to work on a train. He comes to no conclusion on these issues – although they are key to the comparison of cost benefit ratios of projects by which one might conclude that small projects are better.

The opponents of High Speed 2 have, after all, made great play of the proposition that it is not ‘worth’ £17bn of taxpayer funding to save 20 minutes in getting to Birmingham. I would agree that if this were the only argument, then it does seem a rather expensive toy.

Overman goes on, however, to point out rightly that the bigger argument about HS2 is about getting to Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Newcastle – and indeed points further North – quicker. The argument is really about growth. This is dismissed by Overman as likely to promote growth in the South as readily as in the North. If increased growth is desirable, this might not matter of course, but in fact we know that cities with the fastest employment growth have also seen the fastest growth in rail trips and we know that better and quicker trips attract more travellers. Overman’s dismissal seems to me to be premature, especially when this is such an important part of the case.

I am disappointed that someone who has sat on the HS2 analytical challenge panel has not made some more fundamental challenges. In a stable economy we might choose to invest in transport to save people time, or to give them more pleasant journeys. When the economy needs to change and grow, we are investing for quite different purposes – to make it possible for cities to reinvent themselves and reach new markets. So we cannot compare ‘small’ projects designed for the former purpose, with large projects designed to foster growth.

The Jubilee Line Extension did not pass the cost benefit test. But Mrs Thatcher decided to build it anyway, and now it is full and has been essential to getting Docklands regeneration off the ground. Growth, anyone?

Sorry Henry – get more challenging.

Bridget Rosewell, Managing Partner Volterra

Thursday, 12 January 2012

HS2 gets Traction


Justine Greening has announced this week that HS2 will go ahead – which is enormously welcome. It is still surprising how many people have fallen for the proposition that is will be an expensive white elephant. Even the leader writers of the Financial Times have been captured by the Nimbys and the naysayers.
The fact remains that the long distance rail system is creaking at the seams. The West Coast Main Line is one of the busiest railways in Europe and managing its maintenance, even after its refurbishment, is a nightmare. The southern end, with massive commuter use, already needs more capacity. So we don’t just need HS2 to meet projected growth – we need it here and now.
Running infrastructure too close to capacity is risky, just as we see at Heathrow. This has to operate at 98% capacity, so that the slightest thing that goes wrong means lengthy trouble and hours to get the system back into normal running.
But the extra capacity will generate additional benefits. Accessibility is crucial to modern economies. With globalisation and the fact that cities are the focus of growth, intercity connectivity will be a key element in maintaining the UK’s economic performance. Our work for the Core Cities has shown that city centre growth will both generate and be generated by extra trips.

Bridget Rosewell

Monday, 27 June 2011

Volterra supports HSR in the UK

The Transport Select Committee is currently taking evidence at the inquiry into High Speed Rail (HSR) in the UK. Volterra supports the development of an HSR network in the UK. With only 70 miles of high speed track, the UK lags behind countries such as Morocco with 422 miles and Saudi Arabia with 342. By 2025 Network Rail predicts that Japan, the first country to introduce HSR and with a similar geography to the UK, will have over 3,750 miles of track. International examples show us that HSR typically pays for itself through fares, quickly exceeds demand forecasts, delivers significant economic and regeneration benefits and reduces the demand for car and aviation trips.

The UK has historically underinvested in infrastructure – specifically transport – and it is vital that this is rectified if we are to continue to be globally competitive and to grow our way out of the recession. Volterra has long argued that cities are crucial to the UK’s economy, they are places where innovation and knowledge transfer can take place. We argued the concept of agglomeration in the context of Crossrail, this resulted in changes to the way transport investment is evaluated in the UK. Yet the evaluation methods still don’t capture everything, effectively assuming that the economy is a zero sum game – benefits in one place must be at the expense of somewhere else. The government’s case for HSR, even using the existing guidance along with conservative demand forecasts, still result in a strong case with a good return on the proposed investment. Investing in transport which can relieve capacity constraints on routes that are already creaking is crucial to maintaining the future competitiveness of the UK and its cities.

By Ellie Evans