AITPM Email Newsletter Volume 0907, July 2009 : President's Message

President’s Message AITPM President’s Message, July 2009 Hello fellow AITPM members, It’s now very early July so many Australians are going to experience a range of new, or increases in, fees, charges, and perhaps taxes by State and local governments. For example, Queenslanders are to be hit at the petrol pump, no longer living with the luxury of the State’s previous 8c per litre fuel subsidy, bringing general motorists’ fuel costs into line with the other States. A consolation is that they now don’t have to live with the real or perceived “price gouging” that has appeared in the past to make Queensland prices much closer than 8c to those in other States. Environmental lobbyists argue that this Government’s decision brings public transport costs closer to parity with private transport. However, my sense from sloppy petrol price elasticities is that the State’s motorists will get used to the reversal of what was a reverse tax pretty quickly, an amount which can be less than day-of-the week fluctuation. On the other hand, withholding this State revenue may help in some way the funding of the several major public transport infrastructure projects in progress; not to mention some of the cost of running the Transit Authority’s expanding service commitments. Other policy actions, such as a Federal Government review of taxation on employees’ package vehicles, which might discourage rather than encourage excess kilometres travelled, may have a greater environmental benefit. Of course, a downside is that many vehicles used so are Australian built, and discouraging fleet turnover may damage an industry which faces ever increasing uncertainty, and particularly at the present, is in need of some care and attention. I for one hope to this end that the new 4 cylinder (1.8L petrol or 2L diesel) so called “true Holden” Cruze and Toyota’s pending Camry Hybrid are both roaring successes, and will be taken up in droves as fleet and employee use vehicles. I’m not sure what drive-trains Ford and Holden plan to drop into their next full sized models but even if they’re not Australian sourced, let’s hope they coordinate the requisite performance expected by the “Aussie Battler” with suitable green credentials. I am also encouraged to see that already many Government fleet vehicles are smaller in size, but still fit for purpose. For instance, my local police station uses the Camry based Aurion as a district car. I close again in reminding everyone that AITPM’s flagship event, the 2009 AITPM National Conference, Traffic Beyond Tomorrow, is being held in Adelaide from 5 to 7 August. www.aitpm.com has all of the details about how to register, sponsor a booth, session, etc. Best regards all, Jon Bunker

AITPM Email Newsletter Volume 0911, November 2009 : President's Message

President’s Report Hello fellow AITPM members, It is interesting to follow the news at present, where transport costs are getting a significant airing. Treasury Secretary Dr Ken Henry has enunciated something Australians may have considered extremely radical just a few years back, but in the present time appears to quite a few to be a realistic alternative. That being a rethink of the way we are charged for using our vehicles. It appears that serious consideration is being given to congestion charging, perhaps in place at least to some extent, of fuel excise. As a transport professional I am pleased that the debate has elevated to the national level, and would look forward that AITPM might contribute appropriately to it. As a motorist though, I naturally have my concerns about being hit in the hip pocket. Not that I actually drive during congested periods very much. I am fortunate to live five minutes either side of two well serviced bus corridors, one of which will eventually become a busway, and work in the central business district, which is hub from all spokes in Brisbane. As such, bus and foot are my preferred commute modes. Ah but I should not gloat, as my smart card fare is about to increase by 20 percent in the New Year! And if the newspapers are to be believed, further substantial increments are proposed over the coming few years. This is reported to recoup some more of the costs of actually providing the quality public transport system that we enjoy in our region. So I expect it will be very interesting to see how transport economics will play out in reality in the coming few years, and how governments cater to Australians who either cannot afford substantial increases in transport costs or have no viable alternatives to those facilities whose costs will increase. The 2010 AITPM National Conference, “What’s New?”, still has the opportunity for authors to submit an abstract for consideration so please consider how you might contribute to the event. Best regards to all, Jon Bunker

Exposure to pesticides, ill health and averting behaviour : costs and determining the relationship

Farmers' exposure to pesticides is high in developing countries. As a result many farmers suffer from ill-health, both short and long term. Deaths are not uncommon. This paper addresses this issue. Field survey data from Sri Lanka are used to estimate farmers' expenditure on defensive behavior (DE) and to determine factors that influence DE. The avertive behavior approach is used to estimate costs. Tobit regression analysis is used to determine factors that influence DE. Field survey data show that farmers' expenditures on DE are low. This is inversely related to high incidence of ill health among farmers using pesticides.

The impact of planning delays and other holding costs on housing affordability

Housing affordability is gaining increasing prominence in the Australian socioeconomic landscape, despite strong economic growth and prosperity. It is a major consideration for any new development. However, it is multi-dimensional, has many facets, is complex and interwoven. One factor widely held to impact housing affordability is holding costs. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires clarification. It is certainly more multifarious than simple calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. For example, preliminary analysis suggests that even small shifts in the regulatory assessment period can significantly affect housing affordability. Other costs associated with “holding” also impact housing affordability, however these costs cannot always be easily identified. Nevertheless it can be said that ultimately the real impact is felt by those whom can least afford it - new home buyers whom can be relatively easily pushed into the realms of un-affordability.

Final : report assessing risk and variation in maintenance and rehabilitation costs for road network

This report presents the results of research projects conducted by The Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, RMIT University, Queensland Government Department of Main Roads and Queensland Department of Public Works. The research projects aimed at developing a methodology for assessing variation and risk in investment in road network, including the application of the method in assessing road network performance and maintenance and rehabilitation costs for short- and long-term future investment.

Report : review of the literature : maintenance and rehabilitation costs for roads (Risk-based Analysis)

Realistic estimates of short- and long-term (strategic) budgets for maintenance and rehabilitation of road assessment management should consider the stochastic characteristics of asset conditions of the road networks so that the overall variability of road asset data conditions is taken into account. The probability theory has been used for assessing life-cycle costs for bridge infrastructures by Kong and Frangopol (2003), Zayed et.al. (2002), Kong and Frangopol (2003), Liu and Frangopol (2004), Noortwijk and Frangopol (2004), Novick (1993). Salem 2003 cited the importance of the collection and analysis of existing data on total costs for all life-cycle phases of existing infrastructure, including bridges, road etc., and the use of realistic methods for calculating the probable useful life of these infrastructures (Salem et. al. 2003). Zayed et. al. (2002) reported conflicting results in life-cycle cost analysis using deterministic and stochastic methods. Frangopol et. al. 2001 suggested that additional research was required to develop better life-cycle models and tools to quantify risks, and benefits associated with infrastructures. It is evident from the review of the literature that there is very limited information on the methodology that uses the stochastic characteristics of asset condition data for assessing budgets/costs for road maintenance and rehabilitation (Abaza 2002, Salem et. al. 2003, Zhao, et. al. 2004). Due to this limited information in the research literature, this report will describe and summarise the methodologies presented by each publication and also suggest a methodology for the current research project funded under the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation CRC CI project no 2003-029-C.

Report : development of a methodology for assessing variation in maintenance and rehabilitation costs

In the previous research CRC CI 2001-010-C “Investment Decision Framework for Infrastructure Asset Management”, a method for assessing variation in cost estimates for road maintenance and rehabilitation was developed. The variability of pavement strength collected from a 92km national highway was used in the analysis to demonstrate the concept. Further analysis was conducted to identify critical input parameters that significantly affect the prediction of road deterioration. In addition to pavement strength, rut depth, annual traffic loading and initial roughness were found to be critical input parameters for road deterioration. This report presents a method developed to incorporate other critical parameters in the analysis, such as unit costs, which are suspected to contribute to a certain degree to cost estimate variation. Thus, the variability of unit costs will be incorporated in this analysis. Bruce Highway located in the tropical east coast of Queensland has been identified to be the network for the analysis. This report presents a step by step methodology for assessing variation in road maintenance and rehabilitation cost estimates.