Harking back to my days as a consultant when I dabbled with transport economics (or at least interacted with very clever people who were proper transport economists) I recall many conversations about quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits. This was when we were evaluating schemes and ranking them in order of benefit-to-cost ratio or in everyday parlance ‘which scheme gets the best bang for the buck.’
Time savings were always key and what my colleagues were the most comfortable with. Monetary values of time were attributed to users of the transport network (predetermined by a Government manual) and then transport models forecast the number of users of a new piece of infrastructure. Multiply the number of forecast users by the monetised time saving and, hey presto, the value compared with the cost could be calculated. alt=”” src=”https://www.route-one.net/wp-content/uploads/PICT0297.jpg” style=”float:right” />
The movement towards multi-modal studies in the late ‘nineties led to a flowering of evaluation of non-quantifiable benefits. For example, reducing social isolation and the methodology for evaluating schemes required quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits to be measured equally side by side. But there was always a backdrop from the economists that the quantifiable benefits should be weighted more heavily because they were ‘proper’ measures.
Why delve into this now? Because it feels as though this ‘prejudice’ is one of the reasons local authorities have been so quick to cut support for local bus services when faced with funding cuts, as it is difficult to quantify the benefits (and there is no requirement to on a statutory basis).
But there is also a sense that the cuts have gone too deep and local communities and politicians are starting to realise the value of good connectivity. This backdrop is also linked to the growing understanding that something needs to be done about loneliness that can affect all groups, but is a particular problem for our ageing population.
When Greener Journeys did some work on the social benefits of buses to communities a couple of years ago, a case study in Shropshire found that some older bus users shopped on a daily basis. They did so in preference to a weekly shop because it was a good reason to get out of the house and the interaction with the bus driver and fellow bus users was the only contact they were likely to have on a regular basis.
That’s not a reason in itself to put money into supported bus services but a degree of lateral thinking would indicate that a clever economist would calculate that the small investment in supporting bus services, for the huge return in terms of better mental health and general wellbeing of the population at large, is a small price worth paying.
Faced with pressure from the communities they serve, politicians in places like Norfolk and Derbyshire have reversed planned bus cuts, which is why it feels like the tide is turning ever so slightly.
And, the current regulatory framework works in favour of quantifying the costs with the emphasis on route-by-route tenders compared with the old-fashioned chaotic ‘block grant’ type subsidies so favoured in the 1970s.
Everybody with an interest in bus networks that make a proper contribution just needs to combine to convince our stakeholders that these rather ‘difficult to measure’ benefits are substantial and not to be neglected just because they are difficult to measure.
