Greater Growth Scenarios - Economic Model

The economic model used information from the travel demand model to interpret how the scenarios affect regional trip efficiency and what the improvement or decline in efficiency might mean in terms of societal and economic costs.

The evaluation of societal costs relies on measures that reflect the time and expense of travel, such as congestion and reliability, and measures of safety and air quality that affect everyone. The model includes assumptions about how future technologies, such as electric vehicles and CAVs, will impact these measures.

Economic Model Conclusions

The table below indicates that, compared to the 2045 baseline societal costs, the Greater Growth on the Water scenario raises costs related to crashes and congestion, and the Greater Growth in Suburban/Greenfield scenario raises both congestion and freight-related costs. In total, only the Greater Growth on the Water scenario yields a net increase in societal costs

The Greater Growth in Urban Centers and Greater Suburban/Greenfield Growth scenarios reduce societal costs compared to the Baseline scenario. The summary shows meaningful differences between the scenarios, and the reasons behind the differences align with the scenario narratives. For example, the high implementation of CAVs (expected to be electric and create safer travel conditions) reduces the societal costs of emissions and crashes in the Greater Suburban/Greenfield Growth scenario.

Similarly, improvements in travel speeds and reductions in congestion in the Greater Growth in Urban Centers scenario results in significant travel time and reliability savings.

Economic Model Conclusions

• The Greater Growth on the Water scenario is the most inefficient overall. In this scenario, overall societal costs of travel increase because of more crashes and congestion.
• The Greater Growth in Urban Centers scenario has the most efficient travel patterns, resulting in the strongest societal cost reductions.
• The Greater Suburban/Greenfield Growth scenario has mixed results with notable improvements in safety and emissions that offset its negative effects related to congestion and goods movement.