Think Local: Transit Initiatives to Curb Climate Change (and Increase Local Revenue)
In 2015, tens of thousands of world leaders convened in Paris, France for a United Nations conference. The result was a climate agreement that established an intended reduction of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, limiting global warming to below 2°C. This meeting brought forth mobilization, collaboration and a staunch commitment to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Data show that, presently, nations globally have failed to reach their reduced emissions goals. In fact, collectively they are far from it. These findings bring to light a convoluted issue: how can governments actually enforce policies and regulations in keeping with climate commitments?
The science has made it clear that the biggest driver of climate change is carbon emissions, comprising a large majority of emissions worldwide. In theory, we have the technology and tools to mitigate this issue and reach our climate promise. In reality, a lack of progress exists due to economic, political and behavioral barriers.
In the U.S., where the denial of climate change has pervaded federal government, funding for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other major research bodies has been slashed drastically. This has stifled efforts in climate science research and inhibited the passage of sustainability-driven laws. Not to mention the dozens of regulatory rollbacks since 2017, leaving American environmental policy in an extremely regressive state. In contrast, nations such as the U.K. and Sweden have passed a carbon tax, incentivizing those from fuel producers to homeowners to decrease their consumption.
Transportation is a major source of carbon output in virtually all of the world’s large economies. This can be remedied with accessible low-carbon and carbon-free alternatives, and in an ideal world, the enforcement of such. While top-down approaches, such as passing national environmental laws, have groundbreaking potential, the legislative process is typically a lengthy one. Making no progress elsewhere while waiting for bills to — possibly — pass is not a proactive option.
A fundamental change in the utilization of tax revenue for transportation and infrastructure on the local level must be made. Local governments have the power to decide how funds for infrastructure are spent in their localities. Yet, roadblocks arise from a lack of national funds funneled into localities. In the U.S., the burden of infrastructure funding mainly falls on the shoulders of state and local governments, who cover about 75 percent of infrastructure costs. Despite dominating ownership of infrastructure assets in the nation, when it comes to funding for infrastructure improvement, local governments make do with modest to minimal existing fiscal resources and borrowing means.
A bottom-up approach, localities have the power to drive change in how their residents travel about. In major cities like New York, London and Tokyo, the diminished need to drive leads residents to myriad public transit options. Besides rail transit, electric buses add great convenience to a community. Despite a currently higher purchase price, low fuel costs and less required maintenance make electric buses less expensive over their lifetime than their diesel counterparts. The capital costs of U.S. public buses, e.g. bus purchase costs, are partly subsidized on the federal level, while local governments are almost entirely responsible for operating costs.
Many bus and other public transit services are stifled by a lack of national and local funding. One approach to help bridge funding shortfalls is to put a price on parking, additionally incentivizing residents to use alternative modes of transport. Public parking is free in many cities, though cities have the ability to charge for it. Essentially, free parking is parking subsidized by a city, as the money needed to maintain parking spaces is derived from government funds. With parking fees, city governments have more revenue to use for energy-efficient transportation and infrastructure improvement projects.
For communities that lack the ability to invest in mass transit, they can still take efforts to promote walkability. These include building pedestrian bridges, adding safe bicycle lanes to roadways and implementing municipal bike share programs. Cities worldwide have followed Europe’s lead in developing their own bike share programs, which facilitate sustainable travel without the burden of bike ownership. This is most effective when localities ensure sufficient bike accessibility. Furthermore, a walkable city can boost a local economy by increasing retail sales, bringing in more revenue.
Some decry climate-conscious tax proposals as economically threatening. These local approaches do not necessitate a change to inherent tax structures. Existing fiscal resources and potential bonds and grants simply need to be spent sustainably, and new revenue streams such as paid parking leveraged. In nations with an abundance of national government support for carbon restrictions, local green decisions serve to strengthen existing initiatives. Where national support is lacking, local practices will drive much-needed change and influence constituents’ transportation habits.
However, neither national nor local government can be solely relied upon to fight climate change. Local initiatives must be reinforced by extended bottom-up efforts in the corporate leveraging of consumer technology and individual accountability.
In this highly connected world, the internet brings together individuals from all corners of the Earth. Remote working is growing in popularity, and helps reduce the usage of building energy resources and eliminate oil-fueled commutes. Among some companies and organizations, business travel has been rendered unnecessary and is being replaced by virtual meetings. One roundtrip New York-to-London flight leaves behind a major carbon footprint — equivalent to nearly two metric tons of CO2 per passenger. Leveraging technology to limit our carbon footprint is a critical forward move.
In order for change to ripple, individuals must hold themselves accountable. People need to examine how they contribute to their own carbon footprint. Whether it’s walking to the grocery store instead of driving or choosing to travel closer to home during the summer, every choice makes an ecological impact.
Forging change locally, by making aggressive forward-looking shifts in the ways local revenues are utilized for infrastructure and transportation, is an effective and economically feasible way to combat climate change. With a public health issue that is threatening our very existence, acting aggressively from the ground up is the most viable option.
