Sustainable International Transport:
Structure and Practice in High -Speed Rail
Versus Air Travel
Research Project: Global Environmental Politics and Governance in Theory and Practice
MSc Political Science, International Relations
University of Amsterdam
Supervisor: Dr. Robin Pistorius
Second Reader: Dr. Benno Netelenbos
Max de With, 10783393
Abstract
Aviation has been growing strongly since the 1970s and is expected to continue doing so in the near future. As it is one of the most polluting means of transportation—which is enhanced by the effect emitting greenhouse gases at high altitude—it is important that alternatives be sought to mitigate global heating. High-speed rail (HSR) is often seen as such an alternative, as it is fast and able to run on green electricity. Comparisons between HSR and air travel have therefore often been made, but have always focused on a single aspect, e.g. environmental or economic impacts, or the actors behind the two modes.
This research attempts to compare the two modes of transportation based on multiple grounds—environmental, economic and social—whilst also providing an overview of why the system currently is not sustainable and how this could change. The possibility of a transition to a sustainable international transport system is researched, by questioning several experts from within the field. These experts have described the technical challenges, but also the problems of cooperating in an international field, with many conflicting national interests.
This goal of this thesis was to answer the research question: How is the international
transport of people in the Netherlands influenced by regime and individual practice elements and how does this enhance or impede a sustainable transition? The analysis showed that
national governments do not act in a coordinated way to address the issue of international transport, which creates a fragmented network. As airlines are able to operate independently, these can create a network of flights much more easily. Individuals are also hesitant in taking sustainability into account when travelling, especially when going on a holiday. This is seen as a moment to relax; not to worry about issues such as climate change. Thus, the international transport of people is impeded by a negative view on change and a lack of cooperation among regime actors.
Keywords: transition, multi-level perspective, high-speed rail, air travel, sustainable
Preface
The place of sustainability in political science has been steadily growing since I started my bachelor’s in 2014. The large influence of the Paris Climate Change Agreement in 2015 and the growing importance of climate change and sustainability in local, national and supra-national elections has therefore ensured that it had a prominent place during my studies. Even though sustainable development is not an under-researched topic, it is still very much contested, especially because it can be interpreted in so many ways. With this thesis I therefore wanted to give an additional interpretation of the term, looking at how a transition to a more sustainable future could look like.
When I was in the train from Amsterdam to Brussels, I was wondering why I had paid 60 euros for a single way, whilst I could also fly to Eastern Europe for only 20. The ratio of price to distance and carbon emissions seemed out of proportion and I wondered how this was possible. Much more than just a technical problem, I realised that this was especially a political problem. I wondered which actors currently upheld the status quo and who would be able to counter this with a sustainable alternative.
I would especially like to thank my supervisor Robin Pistorius for giving me the theoretical and methodological means to undertake this research. After previously having learned about transitions and sustainability in Robin Pistorius’ course in the first half of the year, I am grateful to continue having learned many new insights in this thesis group. Furthermore I would like to thank all the people whom I have interviewed, as they were able to guide me through the technicalities and governance problems that riddle international travel. Lastly, I also want to thank my girlfriend, friends and family for supporting me and suggesting interesting articles or people to speak with, which greatly helped me through this solitary process of research.
Max de With
Table of Contents
Abstract...ii
Preface ... iii
Table of Contents ... iv
List of Tables and Figures ... viii
List of Tables ... viii
List of Figures ... viii
List of Abbreviations ... ix
1 Introduction ... 1
1.1
International Travel: Unsustainable in Every Way? ... 1
1.2
Research Question ... 3
1.3
Societal and Academic Relevance... 3
1.4
Thesis Outline ... 4
2 Structural and Individual Factors: A Theoretical Review ... 6
2.1
Multi-Level Perspective ... 6
2.1.1
Niches ... 7
2.1.2
Socio-Technical Regime... 7
2.1.3
Socio-Technical Landscape ... 8
2.1.4
Transitions and Power ... 9
2.2
Social Practice Theory ...11
2.2.1
Practices...11
3 Methodology ...19
3.1
Case Selection ...19
3.2
Operationalisation ...21
3.2.1
Interviews ...21
3.2.2
Questionnaire ...21
4 Sustainable International Travel: The Environmental, Economic, and Social Impacts ...23
4.1
Environmental Impacts...24
4.1.1
Calculating Emissions ...25
4.1.2
Including Infrastructure ...26
4.1.3
Additional Impacts ...28
4.2
Economic Impacts...29
4.2.1
Two Different Business Models ...30
4.2.2
Cost-Benefit Analyses ...31
4.3
Social Impacts ...31
4.4
Conclusions ...33
5 The MLP in International Transport ...34
5.1
HSR in the International Transport Regime ...35
5.1.1
Nation-States Decide ...35
5.2
The International Air Travel Regime ...36
5.2.1
High Competition, Low Margins ...36
5.2.2
Change from Within the Sector ...38
5.3
A Transition from Air to HSR?...39
5.3.1
Ticketing and Services ...40
5.3.3
Creation of an EU-wide HSR Network ...42
5.3.4
Economic Measures: Discouraging Aeroplane Travel ...43
5.4
Conclusions ...45
6 Social Practices in International Transport ...46
6.1
Social Practice in Travel...46
6.2
Questionnaire outcomes ...49
6.3
Conclusions ...51
7 Conclusions ...53
7.1
Reflection on Research Questions ...53
7.1.1
Comparison of Air and HSR Travel ...53
7.1.2
The International Transport Regime ...54
7.1.3
A Transition to Sustainable International Transport ...54
7.1.4
Social Practice...55
7.2
Generalising Outcomes ...55
7.3
Discussion and Suggestions for Further Research ...56
7.4
Policy Recommendations ...57
8 References...58
Appendices ...70
I.
Interview Participants ...70
II.
Interview Guide ...72
List of Tables and Figures
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Typology of the exercise of power ... 10
Table 3.1: Interviewees ... 21
Table 4.1: Average emission factors of high-speed train and aeroplane ... 26
Table 4.2: Carbon Footprint per passenger kilometre per year of traffic modes on route Valence—Marseille in France ... 27
Table 5.1: Environmental Effectiveness of Various Options for Aviation Taxes ... 44
Table 6.1: Reasons for travel mode choice... 50
Table 6.2: Respondents’ attitude towards climate change and travel... 50
Table 6.3: Proposed measures to transition to a more sustainable international travel ... 51
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Air transport passengers carried worldwide annually (in billions). Source: (The World Bank, 2019) ... 1Figure 2.1: Multiple levels as nested hierarchy (Geels, 2012, p. 473)... 7
Figure 2.2: Multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transitions (Geels, 2018, p. 226)... 9
Figure 2.3: Globalising modes of provision and the appropriation of socio-technical innovations (STI) within social practices (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1901) ... 12
Figure 2.4: The three ideal-type forms of engagement for Citizen-Consumers (CCs) with respect to (environmental) change in reflexive modernity (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1890). 14 Figure 2.5: Relative power of consumers and providers in influencing the (in)direct environmental impacts within globalizing production-consumption chains and networks (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1894). ... 16
Figure 3.1: High-speed rail network in the EU (UIC, 2016) ... 20
Figure 5.1: Current European HSR network (Royal Haskoning DHV, 2018, p. 26)... 42
Figure 5.2: Proposed European HSR network from Amsterdam by Royal Haskoning DHV (2018, p. 26) (light green existing, dark green new) ... 43
List of Abbreviations
CBA Cost-Benefit Analysis CO2-eq Carbon dioxide equivalent
CORSIA
Carbon Offsetting and
Reduction Scheme for
International Aviation
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility ERA European Rail Agency
ERAA European Regions Airline Association
ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System
EU European Union GHG Greenhouse Gas HSR High-Speed Rail
ICAO
International Civil Aviation
Organisation
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines LCA Life-Cycle Analysis LCC Low-Cost Carrier
LTO Landing and Take-Off (Emissions) MLP Multi-Level Perspective
NOx Nitrous oxide
NS Dutch National Railways PM10 Particles smaller than 10
micrometres, also known as particulate matter
PMb Particulate matter caused by burning
PMw Particulate matter caused by wear SOx Sulphur dioxide
TEN-T Trans-European Transport Network
TTW Tank-To-Wheel
UIC International Union of Railways
(Union Internationale des Chemins de fer)
VOC Volatile organic compound: contributes to the forming of ozone, which has a detrimental effect on health
WTT Well-To-Tank WTW Well-To-Wheel
1
Introduction
1.1 International Travel: Unsustainable in Every Way?
As with many other products, travelling internationally has become increasingly easy for many people, especially through the onset of ever cheaper aeroplane flights. As can be seen in Figure 1.1, the number of passengers carried on civil flights has grown by more than eight times since the 1970s (The World Bank, 2019). Even though air travel only accounted for 20% of international trips throughout Europe in 2000, following Stefan Gössling and Paul Peeters (2007), this was good for almost 60% of the total distance travelled and almost 80% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This is a number that is only expected to grow, as the number of passengers flying worldwide has already more than doubled since 2000.
Figure 1.1: Air transport passengers carried worldwide annually (in billions). Source: (The World Bank, 2019)
The aviation sector is still growing rapidly and is not bound by the Paris Climate Change Agreement to reduce its emissions (Murphy, 2016). More and more attention has recently been given to the unsustainability of aviation, with many different parties arguing for
high-0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Pa ss en ge rs car rie d (in bi llio ns ) Year
speed rail (HSR) as a possible alternative for travelling internationally (see e.g. Eickhout & Kröger, 2019; Greenpeace Nederland, 2019; Saner, 2019). The question is, however, whether HSR can indeed (partially) substitute air travel for international transport and, if so, whether it would be more sustainable.
Sustainability is potentially able ‘to mean everything’ (Priemus, 2005, p. 5), as it is very difficult to adequately define which aspects of international transport to focus on. This paper attempts to do so by looking at the environmental, economic and social impacts of both air and HSR transport, to compare the positive and negative aspects of the two modalities.
More than a comparison of air and HSR travel, however, this thesis is written from a political science perspective and attempts to uncover the actors and discourses that encourage international transport to remain unsustainable. This thesis thus attempts to understand why international travel is not sustainable yet and whether HSR could be used to ensure such a transition to sustainability.
The thesis is written with the theories of the multi-level perspective (MLP) and social practice in mind. The MLP gives structure to a society and shows how the different actors within this structure are able to shape or stop a transition through the power that they wield. This structure also shapes and is shaped by the actions of individual human agents, which form routine behaviours or ‘practices’. International travel is such a practice, as many people travel in similar ways, which is dictated by the available modes of transportation, but also by people’s individual needs and wants. The call for more sustainability in the transport sector by several activists and politicians, for example, is likely to change this practice as more people will question whether travelling by aeroplane is the best option.
The main argument in this thesis is that both the ‘regime actors’, who influence the business-as-usual structure within the MLP, and individual actors need to change and can change to ensure a more sustainable form of international travel. For example, there is currently no HSR network in the EU, as nation-states are putting their own national interests before adequate international connectivity. The HSR network, in other words, is ‘only a patchwork of national high-speed lines, planned and built by the Member States in isolation’ (Bode et al., 2018, p. 7). A truly international vision must be taken for HSR to be an alternative to air travel. For international travel to become more sustainable, however, individuals must change their travel behaviour as well, by flying less and using more sustainable modes of transportation instead.
1.2 Research Question
To establish a framework for the research question, the objectives of this research are threefold. First, the objective is to compare the sustainability of air and HSR transport of people. The second objective is to identify the regime of the international transport of people and how this might lead to a transition towards a more sustainable alternative. The third objective is to identify individual practices and how these influence international transport modal choice. Overall, the goal is to see whether choosing HSR over air transport can lead to a more sustainable international transportation of people and in what way this transition would be possible. The research question stemming from this is therefore:
How is the international transport of people in the Netherlands influenced by regime and individual practice elements and how does this enhance or impede a sustainable transition?
From this, several subquestions arise:
1. How sustainable are the two modes of international transport, air and HSR travel, when taking a holistic view of their environmental, economic and social impacts? 2. How is the international transport regime made up and what power do these
different actors have?
3. How could a transition occur in the international transport regime towards more sustainability?
4. What does it take for individual passengers to choose a different mode of transport?
1.3 Societal and Academ ic Relevance
There is currently a wave of news articles on the topic of international travel, in which HSR is often brought up as an alternative to the unsustainable aeroplane. In an article in the Guardian by Emine Saner (2019), for example, the ‘no-fly movement’ is brought to the attention, a community of people who consciously reconsider flying due to its environmental impact. This has especially been given attention in Sweden, where ‘flygskam’, or flight shame, is pressuring people to fly much less. This movement became known amongst the general public especially due to the young climate activist Greta Thurnberg, who travelled throughout Europe to give several speeches at high-level and activist meetings (Orange, 2019).
In the Netherlands, actors from within the transport sector are also calling for the expansion of HSR travel, to ease the high pressure currently felt at international airports such as Schiphol. The CEOs of the Dutch National Railways (NS) and the Royal Dutch Airlines (KLM) wrote a joint opinion article in the Dutch NRC newspaper, urging the investment in better train mobility (Van Boxtel & Elbers, 2018). This is further supported by two petitions by GroenLinks, the Dutch Green Left party, and Greenpeace, which both demand more
investment in international railways to alleviate the burden of flying on the climate (Eickhout & Kröger, 2019; Greenpeace Nederland, 2019).
Academically, there has been much research on tourism and how tourists think about sustainability, and there have also been comparisons between HSR and air travel. The research on tourism, however, has focussed only very little on the role that transport plays in tourists’ decision-making process (Gössling & Peeters, 2007). Some research has already integrated the MLP in transport (see e.g. Geels, 2012) and social practice theory in international transport (e.g. Verbeek & Mommaas, 2008), but most of this research ‘represents a rather neat actor– structure dualism’ (Verbeek & Mommaas, 2008, p. 632). This thesis attempts to fill this gap, by researching the ambitions and status quo within the structure and within human agents.
1.4 Thesis Outline
This thesis will start by explaining the theoretical framework in chapter 2, within which the research questions are framed. The case of international transport will be given structure by explaining the various levels of the MLP, and the different forms of power that actors have in this structure. This will enable the research to answer the question of influence as mentioned in the research question. Second, social practice theory will be explained, with the goal to bridge the agent-structure debate. Practices happen through a conjunction of structural stability and choices and lifestyles made by individuals. The theoretical chapter will explain how practices often follow a business-as-usual route and how this might be broken to create a transition to an alternative practice.
Chapter 3 will follow by explaining the methods used in this thesis and how the theoretical concepts connect with the empirical data. The data-gathering process itself is also shown, outlining the experts who have been interviewed and how the survey data has been gathered. For more background information on the interviewees and an outline of the interview guide and questionnaire, please consult Appendices I through III.
The various subquestions will be answered in the next three chapters. Chapter 4 will firstly give substance to the question how a fair comparison between air and HSR might look like. Based on reports and literature the environmental, economic and social impacts of the two modalities will be shown, with the aim of giving an overview that covers all these elements that make up sustainability. This overview of these impacts will also give a first look at the various landscape elements within the international transport structure.
In chapter 5, the other elements comprising the international transport structure will be delved into. The power structures and differences between air and HSR travel within the regime will be presented, based on literature and expert interviews. Moreover, several possibilities for transitioning from air to HSR are shown, as well as a discussion of whether
Chapter 6, subsequently, will delve into how the social practice of international transport is seen by travellers. Firstly, the findings of other researchers will be shown, to place the results of this research in context. Secondly, the thesis will present the results from a survey that aimed to understand how individual actors viewed the question of sustainability within international transport and whether and how they believed more sustainability was to be achieved in this practice.
The conclusions as well as a discussion will be presented in chapter 7. Here, the thesis will return to the research questions and attempt to generalise the outcomes. The discussion and suggestions for further research will delve on the shortcomings of this research and where and how more research can be done. This chapter will conclude with several policy recommendations that follow from the research.
2
Structural and Individual Factors:
A Theoretical Review
To understand the environmental and economic costs of air and rail travel, it is useful to look at several different types of theory. As shown by Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010), social practices are influenced on the one hand by individual actors’ lifestyles and, on the other, by societal structure. Therefore, the reason people choose to travel by air or HSR are twofold, firstly they are directed by elements embedded systematically in society, secondly they are due to the choices made by individuals. To explain these systemic elements in society, I have chosen to use the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP), based on the works of Geels and others (Avelino & Rotmans, 2009; Geels, 2002, 2012, 2018; Loorbach & Rotmans, 2006; Rotmans, Kemp, & Van Asselt, 2001). For the behaviour of individuals, I will use social practice theory, based on the literature by Watson (2012), Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010) and others.
2.1 Multi-Lev el Perspectiv e
As explained by Whitmarsh (2012):the MLP is so called because it identifies three levels within societal systems (e.g., the transport system): niches, in which radical innovation emerges; the regime, which comprises dominant institutions and technologies; and the landscape, which represents macro-level trends and contextual drivers and barriers to change (p. 483)
These three levels are all in place in the societal system in which transitions take place. The developments at all these levels and the interplay between them ensure that transitions are ‘non-linear processes’ (Geels, 2012, p. 472), in which there may be many small changes going on at the niche level, but there is relative stability at the higher regime level. This social system is visualised by Geels (2012) in Figure 2.1 on the following page.
Figure 2.1: Multiple levels as nested hierarchy (Geels, 2012, p. 473)
2.1.1 Niches
Niches, first of all, are those areas from which novelties emerge into the system. In the system of international transport, one could think of new innovative projects such as the electric cars by Tesla, the Hyperloop or electric flight. Some of these innovations are able to break through into the regime and radically change these, in some cases even taking over the previous regime. This is what happened with the introduction of cars vis-à-vis horse carriages, and which might be able to happen with electric cars vis-à-vis their internal combustion counterparts. As Geels (2012) shows, these breakthroughs are not easy to achieve, as the regime has many lock-in mechanisms that prefer the status-quo. In the case of international travel, many of these niches are still in very early development or merely theoretical. Nevertheless, ‘niches are crucial for transitions, because they provide the seeds for systemic change’ (Geels, 2012, p. 472).
The new technologies that emerge in these niches often do not work well yet, but are ‘hopeful monstrosities’ (Geels, 2002, p. 1261). As these novelties can pan out in the safer niches, they act as testing grounds and provide three social processes as adapted by Geels (2012, p. 472). Firstly, they provide learning processes on several dimensions, such as technological or organisational issues, but also market demand, user behaviour, infrastructure requirements, policy instruments and symbolic meanings. Secondly, niches are able to articulate and adjust expectations or visions, which guide internal niche innovation, but also aim to attract attention and external funding. Thirdly, they build social networks and aim to attract more actors within the niche, which expands the niche’s social and resource base.
2.1.2 Socio-Technical Regime
The socio-technical regime, in contrast to niches, is the area where ‘the deep-structural rules […] coordinate and guide actor’s perceptions and actions (Giddens, 1984)’ (cited in Geels,
2012, p. 473). The actions that happen here follow much more conventional patterns, where ‘business-as-usual’ is the norm. Innovation, therefore, takes place at a much slower, less radical and more predictable pace, due to ‘lock-in mechanisms and path-dependence’ (Geels, 2012, p. 473). The structural rules and norms are not challenged, and the high costs of radical new ideas are feared, leading the actors to follow the cheap and easy route.
The actors, indeed, play an important role in the socio-technical regime. As the name itself says, socio-technical regimes are made up from technical actors, such as firms and engineers, but also other, social groups such as policy makers, consumers, civil society and interest groups (Geels, 2012). The deep-structural rules, therefore, are not only technicalities, but also include consumer behaviour, symbolism and the need for a certain vision or frame to be held in place. These are similar elements to those that still need to be shaped in the niche areas, but still need constant adjustment in the regime to ensure its survival against competing views that come up from niches. This competition between different levels will be explained more in Section 2.1.4 on transitions.
The regime level itself, as can be seen in Figure 2.1, does not consist of one single regime. Instead, it is a patchwork of regimes, which overlap or are nested within each other. There are also differences between these regimes in that some are more or less dominant. In the case of international transport of people, for example, the dominant regimes are those of aerial and road transport. Less dominant, subaltern regimes encompass conventional rail, HSR, bus and maritime travel. These subaltern regimes cannot be counted as niches, as they are no radically new innovations, but are well-developed over a long period of time. The main difference with the dominant regime, however, is that the subaltern regimes not have the large backing, in this case of passengers of passengers, these dominant regimes have. However, top-down changes in the landscape factors or bottom-up innovations from the niche level may give a new boost to these subaltern regimes to change the dominant regime. The invention of a radically new and cheaper possibility for rail travel, as happened in the last century with HSR (UIC, 2018, p. 6), might mean a large boost for the overall rail travel regime.
2.1.3 Socio-Technical Landscape
The last element of the societal system is the socio-technical landscape. This encompasses all background factors, which are at the foundation of both regimes and niches. As Figure 2.1 shows, the landscape level offers the most structuration of activities in local practices, which means it is beyond any individual’s ability to change. Again, as this model is socio-technical, the landscape is made up of physical and technical elements—such as urban layouts, climate, the actual geographic landscape—or social elements—such as political ideologies, societal values, or macro-economic trends (Geels, 2012).
2.1.4 Transitions and Power
Taken together, the three levels create possibilities and obstacles for transitions to occur. As illustrated in Figure 2.2, the journey from a niche to a transition and regime change goes through four different phases. These are described as follows by Avelino and Rotmans (2009, p. 545):
• The pre-development phase: changes occur in the ‘background’ at landscape and niche level, which are resisted by the regime
• The take-off phase: structural change picks up momentum, slowly breaking down the regime level
• The acceleration phase: structural changes become visible and new structures replace old regimes
• The stabilisation phase: a new dynamic state of equilibrium is achieved, replacing the old regime.
Figure 2.2: Multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transitions (Geels, 2018, p. 226)
Many niches, of course, never come to fruition and will thus not lead to such a transition. Also, as stated in section 2.1.2, there are subaltern regimes within the regime complex that may also lead the way to a transition, albeit in a much less radical fashion, and often supported by niche developments.
Such a view of transitions and MLP misses certain elements, however. Implicitly, these struggles between niches and regimes point to a certain power struggle, but this is never mentioned explicitly (Avelino & Rotmans, 2009). Avelino and Rotmans (2009) therefore introduce the aspect of power to regime change, enabling to use the ‘concept of power to understand both the internal dynamics of the “regime”, as well as how this “regime” interacts with other forms of power that exist within society’ (Avelino & Rotmans, 2009, p. 545).
Moving beyond the structure-agency debate on whether power is determined by individual agents, material or social structures, Avelino and Rotmans (2009) have created a typology of five different types of power. Rather than focussing on what resources mobilised, or who is doing the mobilising, they distinguish how things are mobilised (Avelino & Rotmans, 2009, p. 552). This, they found, can be done through: innovative, destructive, constitutive, transformative and systemic power, which are explained further below (following the descriptions in: Avelino & Rotmans, 2009, p. 552).
• Innovative power: the capacity of actors to create or discover new resources. This contrasts with the focus that is often on the access to existing resources.
• Destructive power: the ability to destroy or annihilate existing resources.
• Constitutive power: the ability to ‘constitute’—to establish, institute or enact—a distribution of resources. Through a distribution of resources, e.g. through institutions or structures, a stable social order can be guaranteed. Institutions and structures, in turn, create and are created by this constitutive power.
• Transformative power: the ability to transform the distribution of resources, either by redistributing resources or replacing old with new resources. An interesting note made by the authors is that this power does not have to last long or be implemented on a large scale for it to have an effect.
• Systemic power: the combined capacity of actors to mobilise resources for the survival of a societal system. All previous forms of power, thus, are embedded in systemic power, as the collective mobilisation of resources.
This typology is visualised in the table below, which makes use of two axes; the level and nature of mobilisation. As all these different types of power are embedded in systemic power, this last option is placed outside of the axes.
Table 2.1: Typology of the exercise of power
Level of mobilisation
Systemic power Resources Distribution of resources
Nature of mobilisation
Constructive Innovative power Constitutive power
All these types of power can be found in each of the four phases in transition theory. Innovative power is exercised in the pre-development and take-off phases, and transformative power is exercised during the following acceleration phase, for example. The terms are very useful to classify power struggles within and between the landscape, regime and niche levels. More so, the different types of power show the relations between actors within the regime. Uncovering which actor has power, will enable to answer the question which actor is able to influence the sustainability of international transport. The different types of power used by actors in the HSR and air travel regimes, will be shown in chapter 5. Showing which types of power are used, enables answering the part of the research question on the ‘influence’ of the regime actors on making international travel sustainable.
Indeed, these various forms of power are exercised by actors, who, as will be shown in the next section, act through routinised behaviour, or ‘practices’. Transitions and the break-through of niche innovations into the regime happen when these practices are broken or ‘de-routinised’, as argued by Hoffman and Loeber (2015). The innovative power of niche actors by creating new resources or practices, must adequately use their constitutive power to shape new relations within the regime, thus de-routinising the practice for all these actors and making it the new norm. To better understand the place of individuals on the one hand and social structures, as explained by the MLP, on the other, the next chapter will further explain how these two come together in the form of ‘social practices’.
2.2 Social Practice Theory
Not taken into account in the MLP model are the individuals who are affected by the transitions and other actions taking place within the landscape, regime and niches. These individuals also play a large role in how and whether these transitions pan out due to their choices and behaviour. The theory explained in this section—social practice theory—states that these choices and behaviours are not made in isolation, but are a part of shared ‘practices’. In turn, these individuals can be aware of their climatic impact and use not only their political power, but also their buying power to lead a more sustainable life and put pressure on politicians and non-governmental actors, such as firms and interest groups, to make society more sustainable. This is where these actors influence niche and regime actors and shape the landscape into one that demands more sustainability.
2.2.1 Practices
Not only is it important to showcase the structure within which socio-technical transitions take place, the behaviour or practices of individuals also have a large effect. In the words of Watson (2012), ‘transitions only happen if enough people do enough things differently enough’ (p. 488). As explained by Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010) and visualised in Figure
2.3 below, these social practices come about by the actions within social structures, as explained by the MLP in section 2.1, and by human agents taken together. Thus, this theory bridges the gap in the agent-structure debate, by uniting the two worlds. Social practices exist in the middle, where human agents and social structures meet each other (see Figure 2.3, Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Through various types of lifestyles, which will be explained in the next section 2.2.2, citizens have a large impact on the execution of social practices.
Figure 2.3: Globalising modes of provision and the appropriation of socio-technical innovations (STI) within social practices (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1901)
As described by Reckwitz (2002):
[a] ‘practice’ (Praktik) is a routinized type of behaviour which consists of several elements, interconnected to one other: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, ‘things’ and their use, a background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion and motivational knowledge. (p. 249)
Watson finds that this goes beyond simply ‘what people do, the habits of an individual. . . . Instead, practices are at centre stage, the location of the social (Reckwitz, 2002), with implications for understanding agency and social order, stability and change.’ (Watson, 2012, p. 489). As it is a ‘routinised’ type of behaviour, these practices, such as cycling or driving a car, ‘exist as an entity . . . [, which] have their social meanings, norms and rules’ (Watson, 2012, p. 489). These routinised behaviours are made up of several different, interconnected elements that together make up this ‘entity’ of the practice.
Watson (2012) continues that ‘the practices of cycling or of driving exist as an entity only in and through its performance by practitioners’ (p. 489). A practice is social in the sense that it has a history and is shared between people, but it does not presuppose an interaction between individuals (Reckwitz, 2002). Practices are thus always shared between multiple actors, in which individual practitioners are merely the ‘“carriers” or “hosts” of the practice’ (Watson, 2012, p. 490). The execution of each practice is thus different, both between individuals as over time. Watson (2012) shows personal hygiene as an example, which is a practice that has been carried out by individuals over a very long period of time, and that has shown large shifts over this period. Where people used to take a weekly bath, this practice has evolved into people taking daily showers. The practices of an individual, therefore, fit into the much longer evolution of that practice until now.
Indeed, a practice only exists through the ‘succession of performances that it structures, but those performances are always potentially unique’ (Watson, 2012, p. 490). The practice can therefore be subject to change very rapidly or very slowly, depending on several factors (following Watson, 2012):
• the elements comprising a practice can change;
• the population of ‘carriers’ of the practice – people who perform it – can change; • the way in which one practice bundles together with others is significant for changes
to both the elements of practices and processes of recruitment.
In other words, a practice can change when it is viewed differently, when other people start doing that practice, or when other practices become (un-)related to it.
2.2.2 Citizen-Consumers’ Lifestyles
Watson’s (2012) second factor that can lead to change, relating to change of the population of carriers, is clearly explained by Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010). The conventional mode of citizenship, exercised through the nation-state, is no longer the only one that is valid. Power is now dispersed in many different areas, above and below the nation-state level, that provide new opportunities for citizens (Barr, Gilg, & Shaw, 2011). Simultaneously, individuals also consume and exercise social practices in these areas, which leads authors to label these individuals ‘citizen-consumers’ (Barr et al., 2011; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Indeed, sustainable development is not only a political goal, but companies eagerly take up the challenge to promote sustainable development as well, to serve a small, but growing body of sustainably-conscious individuals (Barr et al., 2011; Spaargaren & Mol, 2008).
Individuals act as ‘citizen-consumers’, as they are able to exercise power through both political action and consumption patterns. It is, for example, possible to vote for a party that aims to transition from air travel to HSR travel, or to actively choose to no longer take the aeroplane, but buy HSR tickets instead. Voting for a green party, but not acting on it, by
continuing to take the aeroplane for example, is currently becoming to be seen as hypocritical, leading to ‘flying shame’ (see e.g.: NOS, 2019; Saner, 2019).
Following Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010), the lifestyles of these citizen-consumers— which are configurations of their various practices—come in three ideal-typical forms in which they can have a sustainable impact: ecological citizenship, political consumerism, and life (style) politics. Each of these ideal-types refer to a different form of authority, as shown in Figure 2.4 below. Globalisation, all the while, is the key factor that shapes reflexive modernity and thus citizen-consumers.
Reflexive modernity is characterised by three changes due to globalisation. As mentioned earlier, the ‘distinction between “citizens” versus “consumers” has been dissolved’ (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1889), creating citizen-consumers, as globalisation changed the links between politics, the economy and civil society. Second, the roles of nation-states have changed, as they no longer have the same authority, nor the ability to manage flows of people, ideas and risks as just after the Second World War (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Third and last, rather than providing public goods, states are more occupied with the distribution and minimisation of ‘public bads’ (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010).
Figure 2.4: The three ideal-type forms of engagement for Citizen-Consumers (CCs) with respect to (environmental) change in reflexive modernity (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1890).
The globalisation of markets took place relatively easy, with the creation of several large economic institutions (e.g. the International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organisation, World Bank) being the pinnacle of this stream. The globalisation of politics, and thus state authority is being resisted more, with the shift from government to governance being an ongoing issue. Lastly, the globalisation of moral authority has enabled an environmental
authority that emerges ‘next to, and partly beyond, the traditional forms of state authority’ (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1890).
Firstly, ecological citizenship refers to the citizen-consumer who uses the political sphere to enact ecological commitments, for example by expressing his views publicly or voting for a political party that strives for those commitments. As further explained by Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010, p. 1891), ‘Citizenship refers to the set of elementary membership rights of the (state) community, which are equal for all individual members’. Citizens thus call on their rights ‘to be free from the environmental risks inflicted on them by others’ (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1891), which must be safeguarded by a nation-state or other governing body, similar to the regular call for national security.
Ecological problems are inherently transnational and are also perceived in this way by citizens. Nevertheless, actual ‘transnational ecological citizenship rights and responsibilities’ are not perceived as such, due to the general neglect of post-national or cosmopolitan citizenship and a continued focus on the nation-state (Beck, 2005; Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Instead of a feeling of empowerment by the transnationalisation of (climate) politics, citizens instead feel disillusioned by their own national governments. This can partially explain the surge in nationalist parties and anti-EU parties across the EU and the Brexit. This last example especially was a vote against the general economic interest of all citizens, but that ‘voters consider the constraints their governments face due to globalisation. . . . [and] shift their focus from economic issues to more ideological or social issues’ (Farrell & Newman, 2017, p. 236). Spaargaren and Oosterveer (2010) argue that post-national forms of ecological citizenship will become more important, however, due to the increasing attention to governance and increasing role of environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs), such as GreenPeace.
Political consumerism, secondly, derives its authority not from the public domain,
but from individual consumption and the market. Individuals are ‘agents of change . . . [through their] buying power’ (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1892). Through consumptive behaviour, such as access, use and disposal, consumers have direct influence on the environmental impacts of certain products. Providers play the additional role of designing, producing and provisioning the product, which have a more indirect effect on the environment (see Figure 2.5 below). Consumers can thus force providers to stop with the design, production and provisioning of products that are deemed unsustainable.
Figure 2.5: Relative power of consumers and providers in influencing the (in)direct environmental impacts within globalizing production-consumption chains and networks (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010, p. 1894).
Lifestyle politics, lastly, go beyond states and markets, but focus on civil society actors
and dynamics of change (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). Lifestyles are heavily intertwined with an individual’s consumption behaviour. Thus, this is where political consumerism is connected to an individual’s morals and choices, actively choosing to consume in a certain way. These choices are embedded in the social practices described in section 2.2.1. The unique combination of those practices in each individual reflect these morals and choices and, concomitantly, ensure that these practices are able to change.
How these lifestyles and practices pan out for individuals is based on two dimensions; the general dispositional dimension and the conjunctural, specific dimension (Spaargaren & Oosterveer, 2010). The general dispositional dimension or habitus refers to the ‘attitude’ of an individual or the foundational principles that an actor adheres to. These are actions that are ‘drawn on “naturally”, without thinking, in the majority of the actions that agents engage in’ (Stones, 2005, p. 88). The conjunctural, specific dimension refers to those practices that actors carry out in everyday life.
As citizen-consumers grow more conscious of environmental problems and the impact their consumption has on this, they are expected to carry out certain elements from these three ideal-types. Citizen-consumers who are not conscious of their actions, thus drawing mainly on the ‘general dispositional dimension’, Whether this is also to be seen in the case of international travellers, either using HSR or the aeroplane will be discussed in chapter 6.
2.2.3 Practices in Transitions
Sustainable transitions, as discussed in chapter 2.1, thus receive an additional layer to them. Beyond the regime elements and powerplay that drive change, individuals’ practices eventually determine whether these changes hit home. A transition from aeroplanes to HSR, in other words, will only succeed if individual actors change their practices. Currently, ‘most faith is placed in technological change to deliver low carbon transport with minimal
practices themselves, therefore, are not challenged, as technology must ensure a ‘minimal intervention’, changing the practice as little as possible. This is why we see the large focus on further increasing the speed of HSR trains, as this is the only way trains are perceived to be able to ‘compete’ with conventional air transport. This does not take into account that other aspects of the practice can also be important, apart from speed.
Current interventions mostly follow an ‘ABC model, in which attitudes (A) are thought to drive behaviours (B) which individuals choose (C)’ (emphasis added, Watson, 2012, p. 493). This means that many current interventions focus on ways to influence individual’s behaviour and ‘helping individuals make better choices’ (Watson, 2012, p. 493), such as through education, persuasion or economic incentives. That awareness raising alone is no adequate solution to ensuring behaviour change, is shown clearly in the review on sustainable tourism by Miller, Rathouse, Scarles, Holmes, and Tribe (2010). One study testing the effect of a 10-year awareness raising programme in South East Australia for ecological sustainable tourism, for example, showed almost no effect. They find that ‘information alone does not necessarily lead to increased awareness and increased awareness does not necessarily lead to action’ (Miller et al., 2010, p. 629). These types of interventions do not adequately take into consideration the much broader potential elements that a practice consists of. Following Watson (2012), there are three aspects with which practices can help understand transition beyond this simple understanding of individual’s behaviour.
Firstly, it is important to realise that:
all existing interventions for the decarbonisation of transport are interventions into practice, even though they are not conceived as such. Dominant forms of intervention – such as into infrastructure, transport technologies or pricing structures – are effective only in so far as they initiate changes in practice. (Watson, 2012, p. 493)
Thus, for a transition to be effective, it must take into account the various elements that make up the larger entity of a practice. In the case of international travel, infrastructure, technologies and pricing are only one part of this practice. Other elements may be socially inferred, such as luxury, comfort and tax-free shopping at the airport. Complete opposite elements to international travel may also be adventure, exploration and being away from the daily grind. All these elements are associated with the practice of travel, but offer different insights for a transition.
Secondly, a practice approach can illuminate the way in which different practices influence one another. The practice of international travel, for example, goes together with the practice of going on vacation and having fun, but also making business trips, having meetings, and spending valuable face-to-face time with foreign colleagues or clients. This understanding means that changing these secondary practices, for example through improved video-meeting tools such as Skype, will have an effect on the practice of travelling as well. The necessity to
travel is no longer as high, when it is also possible to have a video call. The changes to these secondary practices are not only technical, however, but also social. Promoting adventurous get-aways that are much closer to home, may lead to less people travelling internationally for their vacations. The ‘need’ that may exist to travel to far and exotic holiday destinations, can thus be questioned and shape a different practice of holiday-making (Watson, 2012).
Lastly, Watson (2012) points out the systematic level, which influences and is influenced by practice. This is visible in the MLP, in which changes in each of the levels influence the others. Changes in practices form changes at the regime level, which will thus influence the socio-technical landscape and the niche levels.
3
Methodology
3.1 Case Selection
Rail and air transport have a long history in Europe and continue to be prominent examples in today’s globalised world. Especially Germany, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom are relatively well-connected through an international high-speed rail (HSR) network. As can be seen in Figure 3.1 below, the connections beyond these four countries are either under construction, planned, or otherwise not (yet) present. HSR, therefore, should present a viable alternative to air travel when travelling between these four countries. Previous studies on the substitutability of HSR for air travel from Amsterdam identified a similar geographical range (Royal Haskoning DHV, 2018; Savelberg & de Lange, 2018). Royal Haskoning DHV (2018), for example, made a selection of 45 cities, based on size and a maximum distance of around 750 kilometres, as the crow flies. The same radius is also added to Figure 3.1 below, to show the different cities that are in range of both HSR and aeroplanes from Amsterdam.
The research will therefore stay within these geographical limits, to ensure that the consideration between air and HSR travel was actually possible in the observed cases. A trip to the United States of America, but also to Spain or Italy is going to take significantly longer by alternative modes or is not even possible. One way countries beyond the 800 kilometre barrier might be reached efficiently, is through reinstating an EU-wide network of night trains, which several parties are currently aiming for (Noord West Express, 2018; Royal Haskoning DHV, 2018, p. 10). As this is not yet a reality, nor seems to be in the near future, the maximum distance travelled will be set at 800 kilometres. The aim of this limitation was to show the markets that can effectively be reached by HSR from Amsterdam and thus which actors to approach and about which routes to interview them.
3.2 Operationalisation
3.2.1 Interviews
To answer the first, second and third subquestions, concerning the sustainability of international transport, the regime and embedded powerplay of the international transport of people and the possibility of a transition to sustainable international travel, I will use academic literature and will be interviewing several people from within the regime. The initial list contained people from the large air and railway firms, such as KLM and NS, civil society actors, such as GreenPeace, and political actors, such as GroenLinks and potentially someone at the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water. Several additional experts have been chosen as they have in-depth knowledge about the two regimes and also comparing the sustainability of HSR and air travel. Many of these actors did not respond to continued emails, and with others it was not possible to set an interview date within the necessary time to complete this thesis.
The experts consulted with are shown in Table 3.1 below, including the position they hold and the dates on which they were interviewed. Appendix I gives a further overview of the background of the interviewees and the reason they have been interviewed.
Table 3.1: Interviewees
Interviewee Company and Position Interview Date
Robert-Jan Roos Senior Consultant Traffic and Public Transport, Arcadis
08 May 2019 Goedele van Goolen Route Manager International Rail
Market, NMBS/SNCB (Belgian Railways)
10 May 2019
Hildebrand van Kuyeren Owner, Treinreiziger.nl 14 May 2019 Jesse Schoenmakers Sustainability Consultant,
Transavia
28 May 2019 Suzanne Kröger Member of the Dutch
Parliament, GroenLinks
05 June 2019
The interviews will be referred to in text in APA style, with their last name, ‘pers. comm.’ (abbreviation for ‘personal communication’) and the date of the interview (e.g. (Roos, pers. comm., 8 May 2019)). All interviews have been held in Dutch, which means that quotes are translated by the author and are used as paraphrases.
3.2.2 Questionnaire
Apart from the interviews for an understanding of the international transport regime, this thesis also aims to receive an understanding of the practices of individual human agents. This will be done by approaching international travellers and asking them questions through a questionnaire. The respondents have been approached in large groups via social media, and
have been divided into two groups based off the question whether they travelled by HSR or aeroplane on their most recent trip. The complete questionnaire can be found in Appendix III, contains a total of 11 questions, and is focused on gaining qualitative information on why the respondents chose the specific mode of transport, and in what cases the other would be chosen. These hypotheticals could also include future infrastructure, rules or other aspects of travel that are not yet in place.
The initial plan of approaching travellers at their place of departure, either at Amsterdam Central Station or Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, was unsuccessful as it generated too little response. People were often in a rush, and not able or willing to speak. Due to time constraints and additional bureaucracy to get support, questioning people inside the train or aeroplane proved too difficult as well.
The questionnaire generated a response from 105 people, of which the majority had travelled by aeroplane on their last trip. This reflected the tendency that aeroplane was the most-used mode of transportation for international trips. The outcomes of the questionnaire will be further explained in section 6.2.
4
Sustainable International Travel:
The Environm ental, Econom ic, and
Social Im pacts
International travel is part of the question that has been addressed in the academic literature on ‘sustainable tourism’, as travel is the most critical element to be addressed to arrive at the possibility of tourism becoming sustainable (Verbeek & Mommaas, 2008). Tourism is a very fast-growing industry, and tourists tend to choose further destinations, which are especially serviced by energy-inefficient modes such as aeroplane and car (van Goeverden, 2009, p. 21). Ensuring that more sustainable travel modes are available could potentially solve this issue, but first we must understand what sustainability means in the context of HSR and air travel.
Many corporations and governments have dedicated themselves to ensuring more sustainability, which is a trend that is also visible in the tourism industry (Budeanu, Miller, Moscardo, & Ooi, 2015). This sustainable tourism has been merged by some with ‘responsible tourism’, which focuses on how actions are actually being taken to ensure sustainability (Mihalic, 2016). Thus, responsible tourism focuses on how public and private actors take responsibility for the challenges of tourism and which aspects they pay attention to. For private firms, this might mean that they mainly focus on those areas that customers are interested in, glossing over many (perhaps more important) issue areas (Caruana, Glozer, Crane, & McCabe, 2014; Mihalic, 2016). As shown by a meta-review by Buckley (2012) ‘[p]rivate-sector approaches to sustainability such as self-regulation, corporate social responsibility, ecocertification, and destination marketing and demarketing have been promoted widely, but proved largely ineffective’ (p. 532).
The reasons for pursuing sustainability can be very diverse, as David MacKay (2009) also shows. First, it can be since current fuels and resources are finite, which means we need alternatives that can be restocked. Second, sustainability can be viewed as necessary from an energy-security viewpoint, in which it is necessary that a nation, company or individual is not dependent on outside factors. Thirdly and most altruistically, sustainability can be seen as necessary to stall the effects that current non-sustainable practices are having on climatic
change, of which transport is one of the main culprits (Chapman, 2007; IEA, 2018; Scott, Hall, & Gössling, 2016). This last aspect has especially been the main focus of many large international agreements, such as the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Tourism has high emissions, of which those from air transport and accommodation are expected to triple between 2005 and 2035 in a business-as-usual scenario (Scott et al., 2016). These different views on sustainability can be divided into three categories, which will be pursued in the rest of this chapter: environmental, economic, and social aspects of sustainability. Each of these aspects will be evaluated in the case of both international high-speed train and air travel.
These three factors give a clear picture of the long- and short-term landscape factors on which the air and HSR transport regimes are built. The landscape, as mentioned in section 2.1.3, shapes how the different regimes act and, in this case, how sustainable these regimes are or can be. The inherent environmental, economic and social merits and shortcomings of these two modes of transportation shape how sustainable the two regimes can be. Thus, these three factors influence the overall sustainability of an action and overlap each other to a large extent (Litman & Burwell, 2006). The topics below overlap heavily with each other as well; environmental issues often have economic costs ascribed to them and economic calculations attempt to calculate social welfare, although this is very difficult. Sustainability means to sustain a certain practice over a long period of time, which requires that all different impacts must be able to hold out in the long run. A definition of sustainability that is too narrow will overlook many other, positive influences. Taking all these factors into account, therefore, will lead to ‘no regrets solutions, which help achieve multiple objectives and are therefore justified regardless of the value assigned to costs such as global warming’ (Litman & Burwell, 2006, p. 334).
4.1 Environm ental Im pacts
As stated before, the main focus of sustainable and responsible tourism, especially in the case of travel, has been on the environmental effects and GHG emissions (Scott et al., 2016). A national debate has recently emerged in the Netherlands, as even the CEO of the Royal Dutch Airlines (KLM), together with the CEO of the Dutch National Railways (NS) argued for the prioritisation of train travel within the EU (Van Boxtel & Elbers, 2018). This led to several more articles that especially focused on the environmental sustainability of the train. Dion Mebius (2018), for example, claimed in the Dutch newspaper ‘de Volkskrant’ that taking the train would lead to between 7 and 11 times less emissions than taking the aeroplane. In another Dutch newspaper, the ‘NRC Handelsblad’, a different journalist was quick to claim that this was not the case at all, and that there were little environmental gains to be made when taking the train instead of the aeroplane (Knip, 2018). This was due to the additional effects of
detail in which such an LCA must be prepared, however, is very unclear, as a reaction by Dorine Schenk (2018) to Knip’s (2018) article made clear.
4.1.1 Calculating Emissions
The true environmental sustainability of one mode or another, based on the true total emissions, seems to be easy to define. All you need is the emissions that a train or an aeroplane emits per kilometre, which is then multiplied by distance and divided by the number of passengers. As the debate amongst several journalists above shows, however, environmental sustainability is not as straightforward. Following Chester and Horvath (2009) an adequate LCA takes into account many more aspects of environmental pollution for each mode of transport. Not only does an aeroplane or train pollute when in use or while idling, all those factors that happen before travel is possible, must also be taken into account. This includes the installation and manufacturing of infrastructure (e.g. rails, concrete, asphalt), the manufacturing of the vehicles, and the production of fuels (Chester & Horvath, 2009, p. 3). It is very difficult, however, to adequately state how far to go. If the person cleaning the train comes to work with a heavily polluting scooter, this could lead to the train being slightly more polluting than the aeroplane, whose cleaner comes to work by bicycle (Knip, 2018).
Following a model by three researchers from the research group CE Delft, the difference between emissions of a high-speed train and an aeroplane are very large (Otten, ´t Hoen, & den Boer, 2015). The emission factors the researchers used were ‘well-to-wheel’ (WTW), made up of ‘well-to-tank’ (WTT) and ‘tank-to wheel’ (TTW). Well-to-tank emissions are those emissions that are produced during the extraction, transport and refining of fuels or during the production and transport of electricity. Tank-to-wheel emissions are the emissions that are produced during the actual operation of the vehicle. These include the burning of fuels, but also particulate matter that is produced through wear and tear of the vehicle.
The average well-to-wheel emissions for high-speed trains and aeroplanes are reproduced in Table 4.1 below. For aeroplanes, the study compares three different types of aircraft; the Embraer 190 for short distances, the Boeing 737-800 for medium distances, and the Boeing 777-300ER for long distances. Moreover, they give an average including and excluding the polluting effect due to the high altitude at which the aeroplanes fly.As can be seen in Table 4.1, short-distance aeroplanes emit significantly more CO2 equivalent per
passenger kilometre, due to the higher influence of landing and take-off emissions (LTO). For longer distances, the very high levels of fuel needed to get up in the air are offset by the longer time the aircraft is travelling more efficiently.
Table 4.1: Average emission factors of high-speed train and aeroplane
Average emission factors, 2011 Occupation pkm COWTW TTW
2-eq.d CO2-eq. d NOx d PMb d PMw d VOC d SO2 d
Level 1 Level 2 or % g/pkm g/pkm pkm mg/ pkm mg/ pkm mg/ pkm mg/ pkm mg/
Train HSR 57% 26 0 0 0 13 0 0
Aeroplane Embraer 190 (short distance) 67 158297ab
139a 278b 51c 0.32c 16.1c 6.97c Boeing 737-800 (medium distance) 124 106 a 200b 94a 197b 54c 0.37c 3.0c 3.52c Boeing 777-300ER (long distance) 327 78 a 147b 69a 137b 18c 0.03c 0.4c 0.59c
a excluding the polluting effect due to the high altitude at which aeroplanes fly b including the polluting effect due to the high altitude at which aeroplanes fly c landing and take-off (LTO) emissions
d from left to right: carbon dioxide equivalent; nitrous oxide; particulate matter caused by burning; particulate matter caused by
wear; volatile organic compound; sulphur dioxide Source: (Otten et al., 2015, p. 14)
4.1.2 Including Infrastructure
The calculations above, however, do not take into account the many more non-operational components as identified by Chester and Horvath (2009) relating to the manufacturing process of the vehicles and infrastructure. Federici, Ulgiati and Basosi (2009) have attempted to compare the two modalities on these additional factors, such as infrastructure. The findings are not expressed in CO2-equivalent, but nevertheless the comparison shows a different view.
Depending on the total distance travelled, high-speed rail needs between two and five times as much kilograms of material input per passenger kilometre (Federici et al., 2009, p. 1498). In energy efficiency during the trip itself, however, high-speed rail consumes much less energy in a trip up to 750 kilometres.
As Federici et al. (2009) conclude, they do not aim to suggest that between aeroplanes and high-speed trains one of the two is necessarily better or worse than alternatives. On points, both aeroplanes and high-speed trains perform better, or more ‘environmentally friendly’. Perhaps, the best way forward for a true sustainable travel lies in a very different modal shift altogether, not promoting high-, but low-speed travel.
As a consequence of the high absolute thermodynamic and environmental costs of such modalities as well as the high relative cost of infrastructures compared to total costs, policies aimed at implementing sustainable transport patterns should favor local products, short-distance/low-speed commuting, and light-infrastructure transportation services. (Federici et al., 2009, p. 1502)
Two years after Federici et al.’s (2009) and Chester and Horvath’s (2009) papers, a report has been published by the International Union of Railways (UIC), in which the authors create an LCA that also includes the construction phases, comparing HSR and air travel in
