http___www.ted.com_talks_jonas_eliasson_how_to_solve_traffic_jams_transcript_language_hr_1.xml
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.1 7.2 7.3 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 9.3 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 11.1 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.10 13.11 13.12 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.10 18.11 18.12 18.13 18.14 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 20.5
Subtitles and Transcript Transcribed by Joseph Geni Reviewed by Morton Bast I'm here to talk about congestion, namely road congestion. Road congestion is a pervasive phenomenon. It exists in basically all of the cities all around the world, which is a little bit surprising when you think about it. I mean, think about how different cities are, actually. I mean, you have the typical European cities, with a dense urban core, good public transportation mostly, not a lot of road capacity. But then, on the other hand, you have the American cities. It's moving by itself, okay. Anyway, the American cities: lots of roads dispersed over large areas, almost no public transportation. And then you have the emerging world cities, with a mixed variety of vehicles, mixed land-use patterns, also rather dispersed but often with a very dense urban core. And traffic planners all around the world have tried lots of different measures: dense cities or dispersed cities, lots of roads or lots of public transport or lots of bike lanes or more information, or lots of different things, but nothing seems to work. 1:10 But all of these attempts have one thing in common. They're basically attempts at figuring out what people should do instead of rush hour car driving. They're essentially, to a point, attempts at planning what other people should do, planning their life for them. 1:25 Now, planning a complex social system is a very hard thing to do, and let me tell you a story. Back in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell, an urban planner in London got a phone call from a colleague in Moscow saying, basically, "Hi, this is Vladimir. I'd like to know, who's in charge of London's bread supply?" 1:44 And the urban planner in London goes, "What do you mean, who's in charge of London's — I mean, no one is in charge." "Oh, but surely someone must be in charge. I mean, it's a very complicated system. Someone must control all of this." No one is in charge. I mean, it basically -- I haven't really thought of it. It basically organizes itself." 2:03 It organizes itself. That's an example of a complex social system which has the ability of self-organizing, and this is a very deep insight. When you try to solve really complex social problems, the right thing to do is most of the time to create the incentives. You don't plan the details, and people will figure out what to do, how to adapt to this new framework. 2:27 And let's now look at how we can use this insight to combat road congestion. 2:32 This is a map of Stockholm, my hometown. Now, Stockholm is a medium-sized city, roughly two million people, but Stockholm also has lots of water and lots of water means lots of bridges -- narrow bridges, old bridges -- which means lots of road congestion. And these red dots show the most congested parts, which are the bridges that lead into the inner city. And then someone came up with the idea that, apart from good public transport, apart from spending money on roads, let's try to charge drivers one or two euros at these bottlenecks. 3:04 Now, one or two euros, that isn't really a lot of money, I mean compared to parking charges and running costs, etc., so you would probably expect that car drivers wouldn't really react to this fairly small charge. You would be wrong. One or two euros was enough to make 20 percent of cars disappear from rush hours. Now, 20 percent, well, that's a fairly huge figure, you might think, but you've still got 80 percent left of the problem, right? Because you still have 80 percent of the traffic. Now, that's also wrong, because traffic happens to be a nonlinear phenomenon, meaning that once you reach above a certain capacity threshold then congestion starts to increase really, really rapidly. But fortunately, it also works the other way around. If you can reduce traffic even somewhat, then congestion will go down much faster than you might think. Now, congestion charges were introduced in Stockholm on January 3, 2006, and the first picture here is a picture of Stockholm, one of the typical streets, January 2. The first day with the congestion charges looked like this. This is what happens when you take away 20 percent of the cars from the streets. You really reduce congestion quite substantially. 4:15 But, well, as I said, I mean, car drivers adapt, right? So after a while they would all come back because they have sort of gotten used to charges. Wrong again. It's now six and a half years ago since the congestion charges were introduced in Stockholm, and we basically have the same low traffic levels still. 4:33 But you see, there's an interesting gap here in the time series in 2007. Well, the thing is that, the congestion charges, they were introduced first as a trial, so they were introduced in January and then abolished again at the end of July, followed by a referendum, and then they were reintroduced again in 2007, which of course was a wonderful scientific opportunity. I mean, this was a really fun experiment to start with, and we actually got to do it twice. And personally, I would like to do this every once a year or so, but they won't let me do that. But it was fun anyway. 5:05 So, we followed up. What happened? This is the last day with the congestion charges, July 31, and you see the same street but now it's summer, and summer in Stockholm is a very nice and light time of the year, and the first day without the congestion charges looked like this. All the cars were back again, and you even have to admire the car drivers. They adapt so extremely quickly. The first day they all came back. And this effect hanged on. So 2007 figures looked like this. 5:35 Now these traffic figures are really exciting and a little bit surprising and very useful to know, but I would say that the most surprising slide here I'm going to show you today is not this one. It's this one. This shows public support for congestion pricing of Stockholm, and you see that when congestion pricing were introduced in the beginning of Spring 2006, people were fiercely against it. Seventy percent of the population didn't want this. But what happened when the congestion charges were there is not what you would expect, that people hated it more and more. No, on the contrary, they changed, up to a point where we now have 70 percent support for keeping the charges, meaning that -- I mean, let me repeat that: 70 percent of the population in Stockholm want to keep a price for something that used to be free. So why can that be? Why is that? Well, think about it this way. Who changed? I mean, the 20 percent of the car drivers that disappeared, surely they must be discontent in a way. And where did they go? If we can understand this, then maybe we can figure out how people can be so happy with this. Well, so we did this huge interview survey with lots of travel services, and tried to figure out who changed, and where did they go? And it turned out that they don't know themselves. (Laughter) For some reason, the car drivers are -- they are confident they actually drive the same way that they used to do. And why is that? It's because that travel patterns are much less stable than you might think. Each day, people make new decisions, and people change and the world changes around them, and each day all of these decisions are sort of nudged ever so slightly away from rush hour car driving in a way that people don't even notice. They're not even aware of this themselves. 7:17 And the other question, who changed their mind? Who changed their opinion, and why? So we did another interview survey, tried to figure out why people changed their mind, and what type of group changed their minds? And after analyzing the answers, it turned out that more than half of them believe that they haven't changed their minds. They're actually confident that they have liked congestion pricing all along. Which means that we are now in a position where we have reduced traffic across this toll cordon with 20 percent, and reduced congestion by enormous numbers, and people aren't even aware that they have changed, and they honestly believe that they have liked this all along. 7:56 This is the power of nudges when trying to solve complex social problems, and when you do that, you shouldn't try to tell people how to adapt. You should just nudge them in the right direction. And if you do it right, people will actually embrace the change, and if you do it right, people will actually even like it. Thank you. (Applause)
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 8.1 8.2 8.3 9.1 9.2 9.3 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 11.1 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.10 13.11 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.10 18.11 18.12 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 20.5
Subtitles and Transcript Translated by Ivana Cho Reviewed by Danijela Rako 0:12 Pozdrav, ovdje sam da govorim o gužvi, to jest, prometnoj gužvi. Gužva u prometu je sveprisutna pojava. Praktički postoji u svim gradovima u svijetu, što je malo iznenađujuće kad razmislite o tome. Razmislite malo o tome kako su gradovi zapravo različiti. Naime, postoje tipični europski gradovi sa napučenim urbanim sredinama, većinom dobrim javnim prijevozom bez puno prostora na cestama. S druge strane, imamo i američke gradove. Kreće se samo od sebe (stranice na prezentaciji). Američki gradovi: puno cesta raspršenih po velikim područjima, gotovo da i nema javnog prijevoza. Imamo i rastuće svjetske gradove s različitim oblicima prijevoza, različitio iskorištenim područjima također jako raspršenim, ali često s gustom urbanom sredinom. Inžinjeri prometa u cijelom svijetu pokušali su s različitim modelima: napučeni gradovi ili raspršeni gradovi, mnogo cesta ili mnogo oblika javnog prijevoza ili puno biciklističkih staza ili više informacija ili mnogo različitih ostalih stvari, ali ništa nije upalilo. 1:10 Svi ovi pokušaji imaju jednu zajedničku stvar. To su zapravo pokušaji osmišljavanja što bi ljudi trebali napraviti umjesto vožnje u udarnim terminima. To su, do neke mjere, pokušaji onoga što bi ljudi trebali raditi. Planiranje njihovog života. 1:25 Planiranje složenog društvenog sustava je jako teško. Dopustite mi da vam ispričam priču. Kad je pao Berlinski zid, 1989., jedan urbanist u Londonu je zaprimio telefonski poziv kolege u Moskvi koji je rekao: "Bok, ovo je Vladimir. Želio bih znati tko je zadužen za londonsku opskrbu kruha?" 1:44 Na to će londonski urbanist - "Kako mislite tko je zadužen za londonsku ... Mislim, nije nitko zadužen." "Oh, pa zasigurno netko mora biti zadužen." Hoću reći, to je jako kompliciran sustav. Sigurno netko tim upravlja." Nitko. Zapravo -- nisam baš o tome razmišljao. Upravlja samim sobom." 2:03 Upravlja samim sobom. To je primjer složenog društvenog sustava koji ima sposobnost samoorganizacije, a ovo je jako dubok uvid u to. Kada pokušate riješiti zaista složene društvene probleme, u većini slučajeva najbolja stvar koju možete napraviti je da stvorite incijativu. Ne isplanirate detalje, a ljudi će sami osmisliti što treba napraviti i kako se prilagoditi novom okviru. 2:27 Pogledajmo kako možete iskoristiti ovaj uvid u borbi protiv prometnih gužvi. 2:32 Ovo je karta Stockholma, mog rodnog grada. Stockholm je grad srednje veličine sa otprilike 2 milijuna građana, ali Stockholm također ima mnogo vode, što znači ima mnogo mostova -- uskih mostova, starih mostova -- što znači mnogo prometnih gužvi. Crvene točke pokazuju najzagušenije dijelove - mostove koji vode u unutarnji dio grada. Onda je netko došao na ideju da, osim dobrog javnog prijevoza i trošenja novca na ceste, pokuša naplatiti vozačima euro ili dva na mjestima uskog grla. 3:04 Jedan ili dva eura, to zbilja nije puno novca, pogotovo kad to uspoređujemo sa cijenama parkinga, goriva, itd. vjerojatno ne bi očekivali nikakvu reakciju vozača na ovako sitne naplate. Bili bi u krivu. Jedan ili dva eura su bila dovoljna da razrijede promet za 20% u udarnim terminima na cestama. Mislili bi da je 20% velika brojka, ali opet imate ostalih 80% problema, zar ne? Zato što još uvijek postoji 80% prometa. To je isto pogrešno zato što je promet nelinearna pojava, što znači da jednom kad pređete prag nekog kapaciteta, zagušenost se onda počinje naglo povećavati. Na sreću, ovo također ima suprotan efekt Ako barem malo reducirate promet, onda će se zagušenost smanjiti još brže nego što to očekivate. Naknade na zagušenost su po prvi put uvedene u Stockholmu, 3. siječnja 2006. godine, a ovo je prva slika Stockholma, tj. jedna od tamošnjih tipičnih ulica, 2. siječnja. Prvi dan uvođenja naknada na zagušenost prometa izgledalo je ovako. Ovo se dogodi kad reducirate 20% vozila s ulica. U velikoj mjeri se reducira i zagušenost prometa. 4:15 Ali, kako sam i rekao, vozači automobila se prilagode, zar ne? I nakon nekog vremena se vrate zato što su se na neki način navikli na ove naknade. Opet pogrešno. Prošlo je 6 i pol godina otkako su naknade na zagušenost prometa uvedene u Stockholm, i mi još uvijek imamo niske stope cestovnog prometa. 4:33 Postoji zanimljiv jaz u vremenskim okvirima u 2007. godini. Naknade na zagušenost prometa su prvotno uvedene kao pokus u siječnju, a poslije ukinute u srpnju referendumom, pa opet uvedene 2007. Naravno, to je bila divna prilika za znanstvenike. Naime, bilo je jako zabavno započeti s takvim pokusom i mi smo ga čak uspjeli izvesti dva puta. Osobno, volio bih ga izvesti barem jednom godišnje, ali neki mi to ne dopuštaju. Ali svejedno je bilo zabavno. 5:05 No, što se dogodilo? Ovo je posljednji dan naknada za zagušenost, 31. srpnja, vidite istu ulicu, samo što je sad ljeto, a ljeto u Stockholmu je jako ugodno i vedro doba godine, i prvoga dana ukinutih naknada grad je izgledao ovako. Sva vozila su se vratila, morate se čak diviti i vozačima. Oni su se prilagodili jako brzo. Prvi dan su se svi vratili. Ovaj efekt se nastavio. U 2007. brojke su izgledale ovako. 5:35 Ove brojke u prometu su poprilično uzbuđujuće, pomalo iznenađujuće i jako korisne, ali rekao bih da je najiznenađujući slide kojega ću vam danas pokazati nije ovaj, nego ovaj. Ovo pokazuje javnu podršku za naknade na zagušenje u Stockholmu, i kad su se naknade uvele početkom proljeća 2006. ljudi su se tome žestoko protivili. 70% stanovništva ovo nije željelo. Ono što se dogodilo dok su naknade još bile na snazi nije ono što biste očekivali, da će ih ljudi mrziti sve više i više. Baš suprotno, brojke su se promijenile do točke gdje imamo 70% podrške građana za naknade, što znači -- želim reći. ponovit ću: 70% stanovništva u Stockholmu želi sačuvati cijenu nečega što je prije bilo besplatno. 6:21 U redu ali zašto je to tako? Promislite na ovaj način, tko se promijenio? Onih 20% nestalih vozača su zasigurno bili nezadovoljni. Gdje su oni otišli? Ako možemo ovo razumjeti, onda možda možemo shvatiti kako ljudi mogu biti sretni ovime. Napravili smo ogromnu anketu s puno prometnih službi i pokušali shvatiti tko se promijenio i gdje su oni otišli? Ispalo je tako da ni oni sami ne znaju. (Smijeh) Zbog nekog razlog, vozači -- su uvjereni da voze istim načinom kako su i prije vozili. Zašto je to tako? Zato što načini putovanja su manje-više stabilni nego što to možete zamisliti. Svakim danom ljudi donose nove odluke i mijenjaju se, mijenja se svijet oko njih i svakim danom sve te odluke se polako guraju po strani daleko od vožnje u udarnim terminima na način na koji ljudi to ne zamijete. Čak ni oni sami toga nisu svjesni. 7:17 Drugo pitanje, tko je promijenio njihovo razmišljanje? Tko je promijenio njihovo mišljenje i zašto? Ponovno smo napravili anketu i pokušali shvatiti zašto su ljudi promijenili svoje razmišljanje i koje su to bile grupe? Nakon analiziranja odgovora, ispalo je da je više od pola njih vjerovalo da nisu promijenili razmišljanje. Zapravo su uvjereni da im se čitavo vrijeme sviđala ideja uspostavljanja naknada. To znači da smo mi sad u položaju gdje smo reducirali promet preko naplatnih lanaca za 20% i reducirali zagušenost za ogromne brojke, i ljudi čak nisu svjesni da su se promijenili i uistinu su vjerovali da im se to čitavo vrijeme svidjelo. 7:56 Ovo je moć "gurkanja" u pokušaju rješavanja složenih društvenih problema, a kad to napravite, ne biste trebali ljudima govoriti kako se prilagoditi. Trebate ih samo pogurati u pravom smjeru. Ako to učinite kako treba, ljudi će prihvatiti promjenu, i ako to učinite dobro, ljudima će se to čak i svidjeti. Hvala. (Pljesak)