0:02

Page 1IMPLEMENTINGSUSTAINABLE
URBAN TRAVELPOLICIES

CONFERENCEOFMINISTERSOFTRANSPORT

2/02/01

EUROPEAN

prepaFull urb

National Peer Review:
The Netherlands© OECD, 2001.
© Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE.
All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only.
Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is
prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any othercopyrighted material.
All requests should be made to:
Head of Publications Service,
OECD Publications Service,
2, rue André-Pascal,
75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.

752001021FT 24/01/01 11:14 Page 1

IMPLEMENTINGSUSTAINABLE
URBAN TRAVELPOLICIES

National Peer Review:
The Netherlands

EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORTEUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS
OF TRANSPORT (ECMT)The European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) is an inter-governmental organisation
established by a Protocol signed in Brussels on 17 October 1953. It is a forum in which Ministers
responsible for transport, and more specifically the inland transport sector, can co-operate on policy.
Within this forum, Ministers can openly discuss current problems and agree upon joint approaches
aimed at improving the utilisation and at ensuring the rational development of European transportsystems of international importance.
At present, the ECMT’s role primarily consists of:– helping to create an integrated transport system throughout Europe that is economically andtechnically efficient, meets the highest possible safety and environmental standards and takes
full account of the social dimension;– helping also to build a bridge between the European Union and the rest of the continent at apolitical level.
The Council of the Conference comprises the Ministers of Transport of 40 full Member countries:
Albania, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, FYR Macedonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,
Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, the Russian Federation, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey,
Ukraine and the United Kingdom. There are six Associate member countries (Australia, Canada, Japan,
New Zealand, Republic of Korea and the United States) and two Observer countries (Armenia andMorocco).
A Committee of Deputies, composed of senior civil servants representing Ministers, prepares
proposals for consideration by the Council of Ministers. The Committee is assisted by working groups,
each of which has a specific mandate.
The issues currently being studied – on which policy decisions by Ministers will be required –include the development and implementation of a pan-European transport policy; the integration ofCentral and Eastern European Countries into the European transport market; specific issues relating totransport by rail, road and waterway; combined transport; transport and the environment; the social
costs of transport; trends in international transport and infrastructure needs; transport for people withmobility handicaps; road safety; traffic management; road traffic information and new communications
technologies.
Statistical analyses of trends in traffic and investment are published regularly by the ECMT andprovide a clear indication of the situation, on a trimestrial or annual basis, in the transport sector indifferent European countries.
As part of its research activities, the ECMT holds regular Symposia, Seminars and Round Tables ontransport economics issues. Their conclusions serve as a basis for formulating proposals for policy decisions
to be submitted to Ministers.
The ECMT’s Documentation Service has extensive information available concerning the transport
sector. This information is accessible on the ECMT Internet site.
For administrative purposes the ECMT’s Secretariat is attached to the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Further information about the ECMT is available on Internet at the following address:
www.oecd.org/cem© ECMT 2001 – ECMT Publications are distributed by: OECD Publications Service,
2, rue André Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16, France.

Foreword
In June 1999, a team of urban travel experts along with representatives of theEuropean Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) carried out an in-depth
review of urban travel policy in the Netherlands including a three-day visit to theNetherlands.
The review was organised upon invitation of the Ministry of Transport, Public
Works and Water Management (V&W) in the context of a project carried out by the
ECMT in association with the OECD focusing on implementation of sustainableurban travel policies. Launched in 1998, this project is comprised of three principal parts: a series of workshops on particular topics; a survey of cities; and a series
of in-depth national reviews of urban travel policy.1
The review took place at a time when the Government of the Netherlands was
preparing its National Traffic and Transport Plan (NVVP), scheduled for completionin 2000. Three peer experts, representing the governments of Switzerland,
Sweden and the United Kingdom carried out the review. Two members of the
ECMT secretariat also participated in the three-day visit.2
During the review visit, meetings were held with both the ministries of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, and Housing, Spatial Planning andEnvironment, as well as with municipal, regional and provincial representatives.
The team also met with members of several stakeholder organisations. The scopeof the review included traffic and transport, land-use and spatial planning andenvironmental issues.
This report brings together information on the policies and policy-making
structures with the analysis of this team of experts to provide a picture of how
urban travel policymaking is carried out in the Netherlands. The report attempts
to point out where the Netherlands has demonstrated real leadership in pushing
forward policies and practices to ensure sustainability in urban travel, and where
policymaking could benefit from new organisation and approaches.
1. This project comes as a follow-up to previous joint work carried out in the early 1990s,
which resulted in a report entitled Urban Travel and Sustainable Development. Following the
publication of this report, Ministers of Transport asked the ECMT to go back to cities inseveral years time to review implementation of urban travel policies in light of the recommendations of the report. The current project responds to that Ministerial mandate.
2. These countries were selected by the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works andWater Management based on their experience with urban transport issues of priority to
the Ministry. A list of review team members is found in the Annex.

© ECMT 2001

3

Acknowledgements
ECMT would like to express its sincere appreciation to the team of experts
who participated in this in-depth peer review and contributed their expertise to
the analysis of the study. Team members included Mr Peter McCarthy, DETR, UK;
Mr Peter Güller, SYNERGO, Switzerland; and Mr Bo Peterson, Lund University,
Sweden. ECMT extends as well its gratitude to the Governments of the three
countries represented on the team for facilitating the participation of the experts.
ECMT is grateful to the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management of the Netherlands for their invitation to carry out this in-depth peer review.
In particular, ECMT would like to thank Mr Pieter Boot, Director of the Mobility
Management Unit of the Directorate General for Passenger Transport, and his
team, notably Mr Bert Zinn and Mr Mark Driessen, for their preparation of thereview visit in the Netherlands.
ECMT also wishes to thank Mr. Guido Kwikkers of Communicatie and Management Kwikkers in the Netherlands for assembling much of the very helpful
background material for the review.
Mary Crass, consultant on environmental and urban issues to the ECMT, wasthe principal author of the review under the supervision of the ECMT Secretariat
and the ECMT-OECD Steering Group on Sustainable Urban Travel.

4© ECMT 2001

Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction .............................................................................................

7

Chapter 2. Context......................................................................................................
2.1. Physical and human contexts .....................................................................
2.2. Economic context.........................................................................................
2.3. General trends in transport........................................................................

9
9
12
13

Chapter 3. Key Trends and Sustainability Issues in Urban Travel....................
3.1. Urban travel..................................................................................................
3.2. Land use .......................................................................................................
3.3. Environment.................................................................................................
3.4. Safety.............................................................................................................

19
19
20
22
24

Chapter 4. Institutional Context for Sustainable Urban Travel .........................
4.1. General administrative structure of the Netherlands.............................
4.2. Transport planning ......................................................................................
4.3. Land-use planning.......................................................................................
4.4. Environment planning.................................................................................

27
27
28
32
33

Chapter 5. Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel ....................................
5.1. Urban transport policy ................................................................................
5.2. Spatial planning and land-use ...................................................................
5.3. Environment policy .....................................................................................
5.4. Safety policy .................................................................................................

35
35
51
54
56

Chapter 6. Analysis of Review Team .......................................................................
6.1. Context ..........................................................................................................
6.2. Strategic plans for urban travel, land use and the environment...........
6.3. Administrative structure of transport policymaking and decentralisation
6.4. Urban traffic and transport policies and measures .................................
6.5. Spatial planning and land use ...................................................................
6.6. Environment and Safety .............................................................................
6.7. Conclusions ..................................................................................................

59
59
59
60
63
71
74
75

Notes.............................................................................................................................

77

Bibliography.................................................................................................................

79

Annex: The Peer Review Team ...................................................................................

83© ECMT 2001

5

Chapter 1. Introduction
Transport specialists around the world have for many years looked to the urban
transport experience of the Netherlands as exemplary. The Dutch have demonstrated strong and sustained commitment to integrating transport and land-use
planning and policies to maximise use of public transport and cycling. Bolstered bya long-standing and highly respected planning culture, they have undertaken this in
an institutional environment that favours consultation and consensus seeking
among different sectors and stakeholders. Many early achievements have served asa model for other countries; to cite only a few: highly developed transport networks
including an extensive railway system to serve the densely populated agglomeration of the Randstad; investment in urban public transportation with integrated
ticketing; policies to maintain and improve upon the already highly integrated
cycling culture, and the adoption of environmental standards to bring air quality
problems due to transportation activity under control.
As in most countries around the world, however, the Netherlands has experienced increasing pressure from transport on the environment, with rising congestion in and around the urban areas – notably in the Randstad – noise disturbanceand air pollution, and difficult issues related to international transit traffic. While
strategic plans for transport, land use and the environment have set out a framework for dealing with these pressures, meeting the often ambitious goals andtargets articulated in these plans has proven elusive in many cases. On a broader
level, there would seem to be some unresolved tension between the environmental and economic goals for the transport sector: on the one hand, the Netherlands
aspires to develop an integrated, sustainable transport system, and on the other,sees itself as a transport and distribution leader in Europe.
A new integrated transport strategy known as the National Traffic andTransport Plan (NVVP) is now under review within the government. This mostrecent policy framework, the fruit of many months of consensus-seeking among
different branches of the government, is inter alia seeking to increase efficiency intransport policy and planning and thereby improve chances for implementing
policy goals. As a result, the highly centralised policy and institutional framework
for transport in the Netherlands is now moving toward a more decentralised
approach, endowing the provincial, regional and municipal structures with greater© ECMT 2001

7

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

overall responsibility for urban transport. Efficiency considerations have alsoengendered greater openness to notions of deregulation and privatisation in thetransport sector, notably in the provision of urban transport services. This will be a
key factor in how structures for urban travel evolve in the Netherlands inthe future.
In the context of this new proposed transport strategy, this report examines
the principal urban travel issues now under consideration in the Netherlands withparticular attention to their implementation. Following a preliminary descriptionof the general geophysical aspects and economic context of the Netherlands, thepaper will look at the trends in urban travel and land-use and go on to examine
the institutional context for policy making related to sustainable urban travel aswell as the policies themselves and their implementation status. The study willconclude with an evaluation of Dutch urban travel policy developed by the ECMTteam of peer experts, which is based on the findings of their study visit to theNetherlands in June 1999.

8© ECMT 2001

Chapter 2.

Context

2.1. Physical and human contexts
2.1.1. Physical context
Perhaps the most distinguishing geophysical characteristic of the Netherlands
is its close relationship with water. Bordered by the North Sea along its North andWest borders, and with three major international rivers – the Rhine, Meuse andSchelde – flowing downstream through the country to empty into the sea, theoften delicate balance between land and water has been a key factor throughout
centuries of the country’s development. In the North and West, approximately 30%of the inland surface area lies below sea level, with dunes and man-made dykes
holding back the water. In the East and South, the elevation is higher, but reaches
only 321 metres at its highest point (OECD, 1995). Without the coastal dunes anddykes, approximately 40% of the country would be under water (Atlapedia, Web).
A centuries-long practice of wetland reclamation (marshes, lakes and tidal
basins) expanded over time the total surface area of the Netherlands. Polders, asthese reclaimed wetlands are called, are no longer being created, however. Today,
approximately 65% of the land is devoted to agricultural activity; 12% is covered byforested and natural areas, 14% is occupied by urban areas and roads, and 9% iscovered by water (OECD, 1995).
2.1.2. Population and urbanisation
With a population in 1999 of 15.7 million and an overall surface area of
41 526 km2, the Netherlands is one of the most densely populated countries in theworld (approximately 465 inhabitants per km2) (CBS). Most of the country’s population is concentrated in the highly urbanised western section of the country
known as the Randstad (950 inhabitants per km2), the ring of towns and cities
extending from Dordrecht through Rotterdam, Delft, The Hague, Leiden, Haarlem,
Amsterdam and Hilversum to Utrecht and its surroundings. Site of the cultural,
economic and political capitals of the country, approximately 6 million people orroughly 40% of the Dutch population lives in the Randstad. Four million of theselive in or near the cities.

© ECMT 2001

9

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

At the centre of this dense, urbanised ring is a vast greenbelt area commonly
known as the Green Heart of the Netherlands. In 1990, when the Government drewa firm borderline around the Green Heart, approximately 70% of its land wasdevoted to agriculture and 15% set aside for natural reserves. Rapid growth of thelarge cities of the Randstad, now virtually contiguous in some parts, along withever-increasing demand for mobility has led to suburbanisation into the GreenHeart area, particularly during the 1960s and 1970s.1 Spanning three provinces and70 municipalities, the majority of residential and industrial development has
occurred in the six principal communities of the Green Heart. Population density
in this region is now roughly equivalent to the national average (KNAG, Web).
The most sparsely populated area in the Netherlands is the North(190 inhabitants per km2); the South and East have about the average population
density for the Netherlands as a whole, with the exception of the Zeeland, where
density is only 200 inhabitants per km2.
The percentage of the Dutch population living in cities of 100 000 or more
inhabitants declined until 1984; since then it has been rising again.
Table 1. Population of the five principal cities of the Netherlands
City

Population

Amsterdam
Rotterdam
The Hague
Utrecht
Eindhoven727 0951
598 500
445 300
234 100
196 100

1. Amsterdam (Web), 1999.
Source: Atlapedia, 1994.

Table 2.
Province

Groningen
Friesland
DrentheOverijssel
Gelderland
Flevoland
Utrecht
Noord-Holland
Zuid-Holland
ZeelandNoord-Brabant
Limburg

10

Urbanisation of provinces
Degree of urbanisation1

Per cent urbanised

IN
IN
IN
PU
PU
IN
PU
PU
PU
IN
PU
PU

74.0
58.2
61.4
85.3
96.0
66.4
99.8
97.5
98.5
67.9
95.3
97.7

1. OECD key: PU: Predominantly urban; IN: Intermediate.
Source: OECD.

© ECMT 2001

Context

Figure 1.

Map of the Netherlands

Land use in the Netherlands

Arable andpermanent
crop land
27.8%

Permanent
grassland
31.3%

Forest andother wooded
land 9.9%

Other areas
31%

Leeuwarden

GroningenWadden Sea
Friesland
DrentheIjssel Lake
North Holland
IjsselNorth Sea

Flevoland
Overijssel
Amsterdam

NETHERLANDS
The Hague
South Holland
Rotterdam

Utrecht
Gelderland
Rhine

ArnhemGERMANY

Waal
Meuse
Breda

North Brabant

Zeeland

Limburg
Scheldt

BELGIUM

Maastricht

Sea waters, inland waters
Randstad conurbation

Source:OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, Netherlands, 1995.

11© ECMT 2001

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

2.2. Economic context
2.2.1. General
Since the end of World War II, the Dutch economy has undergone significant
structural change brought about in part by high population growth and loss of its
colonies. From a predominantly agrarian past, it has developed into an open,
industrial economy and is now one of Europe’s strongest, combining sustained
GDP growth with falling unemployment and moderate inflation.
After roughly a decade of relatively weak economic performance in the 1970s
and early 1980s characterised by what was known as the “Dutch Disease”, theNetherlands embarked in 1982 on a sound macroeconomic, structural and regulatory policy reorientation that has over time earned it the more fortunate “Dutch
Model” attribution today. Combining anti-inflationary monetary policy with fiscal
consolidation and other factors such as wage moderation, output growth and job
creation have exceeded the EU average without stimulating harmful inflationarypressures. The OECD has called the Netherlands a leader in structural and regulatory reform in Europe.
Currently in its sixth year of expansion, OECD figures show real GDP growth atapproximately 3% in 1999 after averaging slightly over 3% per year from 1993 to 1997
and inching towards 4% in 1998. OECD projections foresee a moderate deceleration
to around 2¾% in 2000-01. Unemployment based on national definitions dropped toapproximately 3¼% in 1999, the lowest since the early 1970s (OECD, 2000).
2.2.2. Role of the transport sector
Transport has for centuries played a key role in the Dutch economy, in largepart due to its strategic geographic position at the interface of the North Sea andthe hinterland of Europe. Rotterdam is the largest port in the world, and roughly
30% of goods loaded or unloaded from ships in the EU pass through Dutch ports.
With a centuries-old tradition of trading, the Netherlands is bordered by highly
developed industrial economies and lies at the mouth of three major European
rivers that form natural channels of communication with neighbouring economies.
Dutch carriers are responsible for approximately half of the international transport
by water in the EU, and for at least one-third of international road transport.
Further, the density of registered road vehicles and roads in the Netherlands areboth more than four times that of OECD Europe and roughly ten times that of theOECD at large. The transport sector has outpaced at roughly 4%, the 3% growthrate in National Income (Kwikkers, 1999 and OECD, 1995).

12

The largest regional contribution to GDP is from the Noord-Holland and Zuid
Holland provinces, which comprise Amsterdam (Noord) and Rotterdam and The
Hague (Zuid).

© ECMT 2001

Context

Table 3.

Share of transport in GDP1
GDP (in million Gld)2
1995 prices
1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

19972

19982

626
209

630
986

651
319

666
035

686
269

712
265

738
357

Share of GDP (at factor costs) %Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing
Manufacturing
Construction
Trade, hotels, restaurants, repair
Transport, storage and communication
Government

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

3.3
17.7
6.0
16.1
7.8
11.5

3.4
17.3
5.9
15.8
7.9
11.6

3.5
17.8
5.8
15.6
8.0
11.3

3.6
18.4
5.6
15.5
7.5
12.6

3.5
18.0
5.3
15.6
7.5
12.4

3.4
18.3
5.3
15.8
7.7
12.2

3.2
18.1
5.3
16.0
8.1
12.0

1. Up to 1994, figures are based on the System of National Accounts 1968 (SNA 68) and from 1995 onwards, on theEuropean System of National and Regional Accounts 1995 (ESA95).
2. Provisional.
Source: OECD (2000).

2.3. General trends in transport
The Netherlands has a highly developed transport system both for passenger
and freight transport, with extensive road and rail networks, numerous waterways
which are important to both domestic and cross-border goods transport, and thebiggest port in the world at Rotterdam as well as a key transhipment centre in
Amsterdam.
Growth in the transport sector has in recent years exceeded government
projections2 in virtually all transport modes. This substantial growth has takenplace against the backdrop of a number of key demographic and economic developments; among them:• a 19% increase in the Dutch population from 1970 to 1995 reaching over
15.4 million inhabitants, a level initially forecast to be attained in 2010;• an increase of 38% in the 20-65 age group, considered to be the mostmobile, from 1970 to 1995;• a 59% rise in the number of households over the same period. A further
16 to 25% growth in household numbers is expected through 2030;• a doubling of the number of women in paid employment over the last
20 years, a trend expected to continue;© ECMT 2001

13

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Table 4. Transport infrastructure in the Netherlands
Length in thousand kilometres

Road network
Paved roads
Outside built-up areas
Highways
Provincial roads

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

111.2
57.6
2.2
6.6

113.4
58.2
2.2
6.4

115.6
58.8
2.2
6.3

116.0
58.8
2.2
6.6

116.1
–
2.2
–

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6

18

18.3

18.9

19.3

19.7

8.0
10.0

8.2
10.1

8.4
10.5

8.6
10.7

8.8
10.9

2.8

2.8

2.8

2.8

2.8

Inland waterways
Bicycle pathsof which:
Urban
Non-urban

1

Rail network2
1. 1997 and 1998 figures are estimates.
2. 1998 figure is estimate.
Source: CBS (Web), V&W, 1999c and UN-ECE, 1999.

• a 45% increase over the last 25 years in average household income as aresult of economic growth.
(V&W, et al. 1999a, and ECMT, 1998).
2.3.1. Car ownership
Largely due to these factors, car ownership has shot upward in the Netherlands,
with car numbers increasing 130% between 1970 and 1995. Further growth in numberof cars is expected between 1995 and 2030, with possibilities of as much as an 80%
increase to almost 10 million cars over that period. Of the approximately 7 million
households in the Netherlands, 25% do not have use of a car (V&W, et al. 1999a).
Traffic trends, particularly for passenger transport, also reflect these economic
and demographic tendencies.
2.3.2. Passenger transport

14

Passenger traffic rose by 97% between 1970 and 1990 while GDP increased by
67% over that period. (OECD, 1995). From 1990 to 1995, the total number of kilometres travelled by private car (drivers and passengers) rose by 10%, with growth
primarily concentrated in the trunk road network, where traffic has increased by
40% since 1986 (ECMT, 1998).

© ECMT 2001

© ECMT 2001

Table 5.
1986

Trends in private mobility

1989

1992

1995

1998

1999

Mode

ppd1
(km)

Total2(bill. p-km)

ppd1
(km)

Total2(bill. p-km)

ppd1
(km)

Total2(bill. p-km)

ppd1
(km)

Total 2(bill. p-km)

ppd1
(km)

Total2(bill. p-km)

ppd1
(km)

Total2(bill. p-km)

Car (driver)Car (passenger)
Rail
Tram/bus/metro
Moped
BicycleWalking
Other

15.8
8.5
2.1
1.6
0.3
2.6
0.7
1.2

69.1
49.9
9.5
7.1
1.3
12.4
4.2
5.6

17.1
8.8
2.3
1.4
0.2
2.8
0.8
1.7

76.0
51.7
10.5
6.5
0.9
13.4
4.5
8.0

17.6
7.9
3.3
1.8
0.2
2.7
0.7
1.2

80.8
50.5
15.1
8.4
0.8
13.2
4.5
6.1

17.5
8.2
2.9
1.6
0.2
2.7
0.8
1.3

81.5
52.0
13.5
7.3
0.8
13.5
4.7
6.6

18.1
7.6
3.2
1.5
0.2
2.5
0.7
1.2

85.5
51.6
15.2
7.2
0.8
12.8
4.4
6.2

18.6
7.7
3.2
1.5
0.2
2.5
0.6
0.9

88.5
53.1
15.4
7.4
0.7
13.3
4.3
4.4

Total

32.8

159.1

34.3

171.5

35.4

179.4

35.2

179.9

35.0

183.7

35.2

187.1

1. Distance travelled per person per day.
2. Excluding mobility of persons in institutional households; including multiple journeys.
Source: V&W.

Context

15

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

According to these data, overall passenger-kilometres by car (passenger anddriver) have increased 18 per cent from 1986 to 1999. In comparison, tram, bus andmetro passenger-kilometres combined dropped roughly 4 per cent over the period,and bicycle passenger-kilometres grew approximately 7 per cent. 1999 passenger
modal split in passenger-kilometres represents as follows:

Table 6. Modal share in passenger kilometres (1999)
Modal share(% p-km)Mode

Private cars
Public transport (bus, tram, subway and rail)
BicycleWalking
Other (includes mopeds)

76
12
7
2
3

2.3.3. Freight transport
Transport of goods by surface modes has seen substantial growth as well,increasing by approximately 50% from 1970 to 1990. During this period, roadfreight transport more than doubled against significant decreases in rail transport.
Trends in domestic freight transport show overall growth in road freight trafficof approximately 5% from 1993 to 1998. After slipping slightly in 1994, freight transport by rail remained relatively steady over the period, while inland waterways
traffic grew approximately 10% from 1986 to 1997.

Table 7. Domestic freight transport by Dutch companies
Million tonnes

16

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

19981

19992

Road
Rail
Inland shipping

393.4
4.8
90.9

391.0
4.3
97.7

398.1
4.4
88.7

386.5
4.4
89.4

396.7
5.0
96.6

413.0
5.3
100.0

455
8
–

Total

489.1

493.0

491.2

480.3

498.3

518.3

–

1. Provisional, CBS.
2. Provisional, ECMT.
Source: ECMT, 1998 and V&W, 1999c.

© ECMT 2001

Context

In international freight traffic, overall volumes are steadily increasing. Totalroad freight traffic increased by 7% between 1986 and 1994, reaching a total of
391.04 million tonnes, 104 million tonnes of which was from international traffic.
After rising to 533 million tonnes in 1997,3 road freight volumes are expected toreach 810 million tonnes4 in 2010. Overall rail freight traffic is forecast to reach
65 million tonnes by 2010, more than half of it on the Betuwe rail line linking theports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam and Schiphol airport and providing directconnections with the rest of Europe. Inland shipping, which plays a particularly
strong role in freight traffic in the Netherlands, made progressive gains from 1986
to 1997, increasing 40% over the decade. Despite air transport’s relatively small
share of the freight carriage market, volumes handled at Schiphol airport
increased by 42% between 1992 and 1995 (ECMT, 1998).

Table 8.

International freight transport by Dutch companies
Million tonnes
1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

Road1
Rail
Inland shipping

86
12
111

91
14
132

112
15
132

112
16
134

112
18
140

Total

210

237

259

262

270

1. Transport by light vans not included.
Source: CBS (Web).

17© ECMT 2001

Chapter 3.

Key Trends and Sustainability Issues
in Urban Travel

3.1. Urban travel
Dutch cities have for many years served as reference points for urban specialists and policy makers around the world as they seek ways to render more sustainable their urban transport systems. Indeed, the integrated policy framework of theNetherlands, which provides for investment in and development of urban public
transport systems and promotes cycling and walking as means of personal mobility in and around urban settlements, has enabled the private vehicle to be successfully kept at bay in many parts of Dutch towns and cities.5 Travel by car, however,still holds the predominant share of passenger travel in virtually all urban areas.
3.1.1. Modal share in towns and cities
The most remarkable and well-known feature of urban travel in the
Netherlands is without a doubt the predominant role that cycling plays inpersonal mobility. Responsible for approximately 7% of passenger-kilometrescountry-wide, cycling claims as much as 25-30% of the modal split in some urban
areas. Public transport holds a moderate 12-14% of passenger-kilometres on anational level, but up to 50% of modal share in some metropolitan areas. Tight
parking policies integrally linked to restrictive land use policies have limited car
use in many parts of city centres and their peripheries.
Pressures from rapidly rising car ownership and use are, however, undermining the efficacy of some of these policy initiatives. As a result, congestion, bothin and outside of cities, has been brought to the top of the transport priority list in
the Netherlands.
3.1.2. Car traffic and congestion
Much of the Dutch population perceives congestion as one of the most important transport problems in the Netherlands. The number of traffic jams has risen by
160% since 1990, and there are now on average 1 300 traffic jams per month. Total© ECMT 200119

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

congestion on the arterial road network doubled in the period 1990 to 1997. About
30% of this congestion is attributable to about 20 notorious traffic bottlenecks.
An estimated 350 000 to 500 000 cars get caught in traffic jams on an average
weekday out of 6 to 7 million car journeys on trunk roads. The overall cost tosociety of traffic jams and vehicles/hours lost has increased by 70% to 1.7 billion
guilders since 1990, representing 0.3% of GNP.
According to government figures, personal car use will have increased by 45%
in 2010 relative to 1986 levels and will have thus exceeded current targets by 10%(V&W, et al. 1999a).
3.1.3. Public transport trends
The share of public transport in the total number of passenger-kilometrescountrywide has risen since 1986, an increase almost entirely attributable to moreridership on trains. Urban and district public transport has sustained an overall
decline in use, with the exception of public transport use by students and rail
traffic in large metropolitan areas.
Public transport is more competitive over longer distances and in dense
traffic flow areas. As mentioned above, in the large cities of the Randstad and intraffic to and from city centres, public transport can attain as much as 50% of themodal share. In peripheral business and industrial zones, however, public transport performance tends to be less impressive, with longer connection times that
increase overall passenger travel time and thereby weaken public transport’s
competitive position relative to the car. As cities continue to spread into peripheral areas, this niche will become of increasingly critical importance to public
transport’s market share (V&W, 1999a).
Table 9.

Passenger-kilometres travelled on urban and inter-urban public transport1
Millions

Total public transport(p-km travelled)

1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

1999

16.6

17.0

23.5

20.8

22.4

22.8

1. Includes rail traffic.
Source: V&W.

3.2. Land use

20

Land use trends in the Netherlands are intrinsically linked with the country’s
geophysical and economic past. As much of the surface area of the land has been
literally wrested from the sea and kept at bay by large dikes, land has always been
scarce, and population density relatively high. Economic activity has developed© ECMT 2001

Key Trends and Sustainability Issues in Urban Travel

along the routes linking the country with the European interior – Germany, France,
Belgium and beyond. The building of these links has entailed intensive infrastructure development, and the organisation of this activity relative to its planning,financing, and implementation and management has formed the basis for spatialplanning practice in the Netherlands (Priemus, Hugo, et al., 1997).
3.2.1. Recent trends
Spatial configuration of the Netherlands has remained much the same since
the early post-war years: concentration of urban density in the Randstad region,
large open green spaces such as the Green Heart, geographical delineation by theprincipal rivers and the North Sea coast, clustered urban development in the
Gelderland and Noord-Brabant provinces and less urban density in the northern
region. In recent years, highest growth is taking place in regions outside theRandstad, particularly in Brabant and Gelderland. In other regions, growth figures
vary a great deal depending on the economic configuration of a particular area.
With rapid growth in car ownership and new prosperity in the 1960s, suburbs
expanded significantly around the cities and growth centres as demand for new
housing shot upward. Population drifted from cities into smaller towns, villages
and rural areas, leading to greater travel distances from the cities and more diffuse
trip patterns. At the same time, more jobs began to locate on the fringes of towns
than in the centres.
With the movement away from cities came demand for new infrastructure,
notably for transport. To meet this demand, the motorway network developed
more rapidly than public transport, and as is often the case, has had a role inpromoting further development on the urban fringes. Greater dispersion of home
and work locations has subsequently increased travel distances in and aroundurban areas.
Recognition of the negative aspects of the runaway urban growth led to initiatives beginning in the 1970s to cool down the feverish pace at which urban areas
were expanding and provide some protection for natural landscapes and green
spaces.6 But continued rapid if somewhat sporadic growth of urban areas, alongwith accompanying demand for residential and industrial space has led totensions over the future development of greenbelt areas, most notably the GreenHeart (VROM, 1999 and Cheung and Hoen, 1996).
3.2.2. Demand for land space
Approximately 700 000 new homes are expected to be built between 1999
and 2010, half of these in the Randstad. If population growth stabilises andeconomic growth is modest, an additional 300 000 homes are projected to berequired by 2030. However if population continues to increase and economic© ECMT 200121

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

growth accelerates, upwards of 900 000 additional new homes will be built.
Demand both in quantity and quality terms will vary according to the region andindividual desires, but is expected to be highest both in city centres and in suburban and rural green areas.
Demand for industrial space is expected to increase and become more variedwith the expansion of the services sector, which is expected to claim 60% to 70% of
the economy in 2020 to the detriment of the traditional industrial and agricultural
sectors. 12 800 hectares are to be allocated to industrial development up to 2020,
followed by an additional 9 000 to 12 000 hectares needed in part to upgrade
existing industrial sites (VROM, 1999).
Urban land use (residential, work and traffic) now accounts for 15% of thespace in the Netherlands.
3.3. Environment
Despite considerable progress over the last 20 years, particularly with regard to local air
quality problems, the combination of strong economic growth and increasing mobility in the
Netherlands is putting increasing strain on the environment.
3.3.1. Air emissions
CO2
Energy consumption in the transport sector increased from 20.4% to 23.8% of
total energy consumption from 1990 to 1997 (OECD, 1999). With growth in both thenumbers of cars and their use, transport energy consumption is projected tocontinue to rise, especially given that cars being purchased tend to have more
powerful engines, even if more economical.
The rise in energy consumption in transport does not bode well for emissionsof carbon dioxide (CO2). The upward trend in energy consumption has broughtwith it a corresponding rise in CO2 emissions. For this reason CO2 is one of theprincipal focal points for transport-related environmental policy at present.7 CO2emissions rose from 157 MT, of which 25.3 MT were from the transport sector
in 1980, to 184 MT in 1997, with 40.5 MT from transport8 (OECD, 1999). This represents a 17% increase in total CO2 emissions and a 60% increase in transport CO2
emissions over the period. Road transport is responsible for approximately 90% oftransport sector emissions, a majority of which is from freight transport.
Local air quality
22

Local air pollution in the Netherlands has significantly improved over the last
couple of decades, largely due to improvements in automobile technology,© ECMT 2001

Key Trends and Sustainability Issues in Urban Travel

Table 10.

Trends in road transport CO2 emissions in the Netherlands
CO2-equivalents in million tonnes
1990

1995

2010 BAU1

Passenger cars
Other road transport
Non-road transport

16.0
9.4
3.2

17.8
10.9
3.3

17.8
16.0
4.0

Total

28.6

32

37.8

1. Business as usual scenario.
Source: RIVM in Annema et al. (1999).

notably the three-way catalytic converter. Since 1970, carbon monoxide (CO) emissions have fallen by more than half and emissions of ozone-precursor volatileorganic compounds (VOCs) by roughly one-third, although this has had little
impact on ozone levels. Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and partially combusted hydrocarbon emissions increased until 1989, but have been in steady decline since. Leademissions have decreased sharply since the introduction of unleaded petrol. The
decreasing trend in these emissions, particularly those of NO2 may, however, slow
and even start upward again because of the sustained growth in traffic volumes.
Statutory limit values for local air quality have been set for concentrations of
SO2, black smoke, suspended particulates, NO 2, CO, lead and benzene. Thosevalues set for NO2, CO and benzene in effect until 2000 in urban areas with heavy
traffic are actually less severe than the overall limit values for the Netherlands.
In 2000, however, the more severe values applied throughout the Netherlands will
also become applicable in urban areas.
Concentrations of fine particulate matter, NO2, ozone, benzo(a)pyrene,benzene and black smoke currently exceed statutory limit values. Althoughconcentrations of fine particulate matter have dropped over the last decade as aresult of policies to reduce acidification, 80% of the population is still exposed toconcentrations in excess of current standards. The length of road along which standards for NO2, benzene and benzo(a)pyrene are exceeded has stabilised in recent
years after dropping several tens of per cent early in the last decade. Roadsidelevels of CO and lead no longer exceed standards (VROM, 1998).
3.3.2. Noise
Noise nuisance has seen notable improvements in recent years, with thepercentage of the Dutch population suffering from noise disturbance levels over50dB(A) on a decline. In 1990, approximately 50% of the Dutch population experienced severe noise; by 1996, this figure had dropped to 40% of the population.

© ECMT 200123

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Table 11.

Selected air emissions from transport sources1
Thousand tonnes per year
SO2

NOx

1985
1990
1995
1997
1998
2010
2020

CO

Total

Transport

Total

Transport

Total

Transport

588.0
574.6
495.7
453.1
440.8
390
414

342.8
348.5
313.1
292.7
283.2
210
241

258.2
201.6
143.9
117.7
113.1
92
97

26.0
29.0
29.9
22.6
23.2
26
29

1 357.2
1 116.3
868.2
749.3
722.8
–
–

973.8
749.1
557.1
475.3
437.8
–
–

1. 1985-1998 figures: RIVM. Milieubalans 99. 2010-2020. Emissions projections based on RIVM European Co-ordination
scenario. Nationale Milieuverkenning 4 1997-2020.
Source: RIVM.

In urban areas, road traffic is a principal contributor to noise. Despite significant reductions in noise from road traffic over the last 10-15 years, 25% of the
Dutch population reported suffering from road traffic-related noise in 1995, withroad traffic the most important cause of noise disturbance in 1995 after noise fromneighbours (VROM, 1998). The percentage of “quiet areas” in the Netherlands will
decline (without policy adjustment) by almost 4% between 1995 and 2020 as aresult of the noise nuisance from road traffic (Kwikkers, 1999).
Road traffic nuisance is expected to continue to drop up to 2010. At that time,along with noise nuisance from civil aviation, it is expected to rise again, althoughaccording to forecasts, the population suffering from road traffic noise nuisance is
expected to remain below the 1995 level.
3.3.3. Fragmentation and biodiversity loss
Because of the Netherlands’ small surface area and the great density of its
infrastructure and expanding road and railway networks, the flora and fauna of theNetherlands are threatened with fragmentation. The spreading of urban areas
pushed along by demographic and economic trends is encroaching on rural lands
with potentially serious implications for the existing countryside and its animaland plant populations.
3.4. Safety

24

Safety, like air quality, is an area that has seen real improvements in recent
years in the Netherlands. The result of strong, sustained policy commitment to
reducing the number of accidents on Dutch roads, traffic casualties and fatalities© ECMT 2001

Key Trends and Sustainability Issues in Urban Travel

have been on an overall decline since the 1960s. Whereas car traffic volumes haveexperienced substantial growth since that time, fatal accident numbers have
dropped: from 1970 to 1990, car mileage increased by a factor of 2.5; during thesame period, the number of traffic fatalities dropped correspondingly by a factorof 2.5. This decoupling of traffic volumes and fatal accidents has led to a decreasein risk expressed in number of fatalities per billion vehicle-km from an index
of 100 to 15 in 20 years time (Schepel, 1999).
Whilst the number of fatal accidents dropped approximately 18%
between 1985 and 1996, the total number of people injured in traffic accidents has
not gone down significantly. The target established for 2010 – 40% fewer accidents
requiring hospital treatment – will therefore most likely not be achieved. The
annual cost of traffic accidents in the Netherlands is estimated at Gld 11.5 billion,
or more than six times the cost of congestion (V&W et al., 1999a).

Table 12.

Fatalities (death within 30 days)
Severe injuries
Casualties (fatalities + injuries)
Number of accidents
Source:Road traffic fatalities and injuries
1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

1999

1 366
13 64415 01013 360

1 376
13 65215 02813 247

1 285
11 65412 93911 364

1 298
11 73513 033
11 4691 180
11 96613 146
11 561

1 066
11 73312 79911 1241 090
12 38813 478
11 599ECMT.

25© ECMT 2001

Chapter 4.

Institutional Context for Sustainable
Urban Travel

Policies impacting urban transport in the Netherlands are the product of an
integrated, iterative process involving input from transport, environment and land
use institutions on the central, provincial, regional9 and municipal levels ofgovernment. Following is a general description of how these different institutions
design and implement urban travel policy.
4.1. General administrative structure of the Netherlands
The overall structure of the Dutch administrative system has remained essentially unchanged since the middle of the 19th century. In the 1848 constitution, developed by the liberal Dutch statesman Thorbecke, a “decentralised unitary state” wasarticulated for the Netherlands, providing for relative autonomy for local and provincial governments within a framework and conditions set by the central government.
Within this so-called “House of Thorbecke”, the Netherlands today is divided
into 12 provinces and 53810 municipalities with local governments. Together withthe central government, these bodies form a three-tiered, hierarchical system ofadministration for the country.
At the helm of the Central Government is the prime minister, who under theconstitutional monarchy system heads a cabinet that is responsible to the Dutch
legislature or States-General, of which there are two chambers. Of the
14 ministries conducting central government affairs, four are directly involved inpolicymaking that impacts urban travel: the ministries of Transport, Public Works
and Water Management (V&W); Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment(VROM); Economic Affairs; and Finance.
The 12 provinces are each governed by a popularly elected legislature known as
the Provincial States. From among its members, the Provincial States elect a day-today administration, known as the Deputised States. The Chairman of the Provincial
and the Deputised States is the Queen’s Commissioner, appointed by the Crown.
The municipalities are headed by the Council of Municipalities under thechairmanship of a mayor, who is also appointed by the Crown. Together with the© ECMT 200127

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

aldermen (elected by and from the Council), the mayor handles the day-to-day
administration of the Municipality.
Under this three-tiered administrative structure, the Central Government is
responsible for setting national policy and defining policy frameworks that provide the overall parameters for action on the provincial and local levels. In thisway, Central Government has a strong influence in policy making on a local level.
Provinces and Municipalities can in general terms take policy initiatives within
their jurisdictions in all areas as long as there are no legal restrictions set by a highertier authority. These lower tiers of administration possess so-called “general competence” and are therefore not limited to only executing tasks prescribed by the Central
Government. However, they have restricted resource-generating capacity: with limited
power of taxation, they rely on Central Government resources for most of theirfinances : nearly 70% of the income of the Municipalities comes directly from the central budget; the remaining 30% from municipal income. As policy action is decided,
Provinces exercise a primarily supervisory and co-ordinating role in implementation,whilst the Municipalities, inherently closer to the population, are in general terms
charged with carrying out the tasks (Ruige et Malagardis, and Vergeer, 1998).
4.2. Transport planning
As set out in the Second Traffic and Transport Structure Scheme of 1990
(SVV2),11 overall responsibility for urban transport planning resides with theCentral Government. According to the SVV2, the overall objectives for traffic andtransport planning are defined as “accessibility and quality of life”, the realisationof which is to be embodied in quantitative objectives and achieved throughco-operation among the central, provincial and municipal governments under theoverall direction of the Central Government.
Central Government responsibilities in transport planning include:

28• Public transport:– Investment in the national rail network and local transport.
– Control of operating deficits.
– Improving provision of “collective transport”, e.g., through promotion of
employer provided transport.
• Road transport:– Infrastructure investments in motorways of national importance.
• Rail and waterway freight:– Infrastructure investment and promotion of combined transport.
• Land-use planning:– Definition of location policy for residential and industrial development.
(V&W et al., 1989-90).

© ECMT 2001

Institutional Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

4.2.1. Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (V&W)
Central Government transport policy is defined and developed in the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, one of the larger ministries
with approximately 14 000 employees. The organisational structure of the Ministry
consists of four directorates-general, several general departments and one
agency, which carry out the principal functions of the Ministry.
The Directorates-General oversee:• Public Works and Water Management.
• Freight Transport.
• Passenger Transport.
• Civil Aviation.
• Post and Telecommunications.
Other departments include Strategy and Co-ordination, The Royal
Netherlands Meterological Institute, and the Central Departments division, which
supports the overall activities of the Ministry with its international relations andcommunications divisions.
As concerns transport, the primary functions of the Ministry consist of:• Providing facilities for the control and supervision of mobility andtelecommunications.
• Overseeing the safety of traffic and transport.
• Creating the “best possible conditions” for the transport and communication sectors.
The Strategy and Coordination Department (S&C) is in charge of implementation of the Ministry’s strategic policy as a whole, including strategic development,
co-ordination of administration and the Ministry’s European policy.
The Directorate General for Passenger Transport (DGP) oversees most issues
related to urban passenger transport. The aim of the DGP is to “achieve a durable
and safe traffic and transport system with attention (to) the safety of the infrastructure, vehicles and users” and “a well-functioning passenger transport market fortransport companies and users alike”. DGP is responsible for development of policies concerning personal mobility (land and water) and the traffic and transportsystem. It is divided into three policy divisions (1. Innovation, 2. Infrastructure,
Traffic Safety and Vehicles, and 3. Mobility Market) and two (South and East) highspeed rail projects (V&W, Web).
The Directorate General for Freight Transport (DGG) handles all issues
related to goods transport by land and by water. The primary objectives of the
DGG involve improving the conditions of the goods transport system in general,strengthening the competitive position of transport companies, and guaranteeing
transport safety.

© ECMT 2001

29

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

4.2.2. Regions30

On a regional level, the Provinces co-ordinate transport policy. However insome cases, the so-called Framework Act Regions handle in practice most of thesecond-tier responsibilities for transport policy as well as other areas.
These regional entities emerged in the early 1990s when Municipalities in theseven large urban areas of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Utrecht, Eindhoven,
Arnhem-Nijmegen and Enschede-Hengelo) began to co-operate intensively ontransport planning problems. As explained in SVV2, issues specific to large cities
were perhaps not being effectively addressed in the existing administrative structure. Their co-operation was subsequently formalised on an official basis in the
Framework Act of 1993, which mandates their existence until 2003.
As concerns transport, the principal tasks of the Regions are to co-ordinate
with the other tiers of government in the preparation, programming and implementation of transport activities concerning:• local and regional public transport;• the road network;• parking policy;• road safety;• cycling provision;• freight transport, including distribution and delivery; and• the link between transport and land-use planning in terms of the location ofresidential and industrial development and public facilities.
Policies in each of these areas are set forth in a regional transport plan, theelaboration of which is the responsibility of the region. While the principal policy
focus of these plans is transport, they must take account of the other closely
related policy areas of land-use planning, environmental protection, housing
construction and economic development (V&W et al., 1989-90).
Once the mandate of these Regions has expired in 2003, it is as yet uncertain
exactly how these responsibilities will be attributed and to what levels of government. The plans to decentralise government responsibility for transport,
articulated in the VERDI Accord of 1996 (please see next section) along with new
decentralisation proposals outlined in the NVVP12 endow the Provinces with agreater oversight on transport issues. As it stands at present, the Provinces generally play only a limited role in transport planning, particularly in areas where theRegions have a stronghold on policymaking – in essence, the large agglomerations
where most of the pressing traffic problems and infrastructure issues occur.
The Municipalities generally implement the policy guidelines defined bynational and regional authorities. Though they are not obliged to, most of the larger
Municipalities also develop their own overall traffic and transport strategies. All© ECMT 2001

Institutional Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Municipalities submit their project and local infrastructure plans to the Provinces orRegions for consideration and funding approval.13 Under the NVVP, Municipalities
will acquire increased authority to manage their own transport policy.
4.2.3. Vertical co-ordination between levels of government
Because of this combination of starting points in transport planning andadministration – which can be loosely characterised as decentralised preparationand implementation coupled with a centralised taxation system – much consultation and co-ordination is required between the Central Government, theProvinces, the Regions and the Municipalities.
This consultation process was embodied in formal procedure on
29th March 1996 in the VERDI Accord, established between the Ministry ofTransport, Public Works and Water Management, The Ministry of Home Affairs, theInter-provincial Consultative Group and the Association of Dutch Municipalities.
The parties involved jointly agreed that the realisation of traffic and transport
policy requires co-ordinated efforts from the different layers of administration. To
this end, national objectives are agreed in mutual consultation. Under the Accord,
the Central Government, the Provinces, and the Municipalities, articulate thesenational objectives in integral traffic and transport plans. The different tiers ofadministration then enter into mutual administrative contracts agreeing implementation plans. Should the obligations not be met, the central authority can
instruct the Provinces, which, in turn, can instruct the Municipalities to carry out
the contractual agreement. In practice, consultation on implementation of national
goals is often characterised by Central Government financial incentives to thelower tiers of administration in exchange for effective implementation by the
Municipalities.
Implementing the procedural process outlined in the VERDI Accord has, however, been complicated by the fact that the Accord is between the Provinces andMunicipalities and the Central Government and does not directly concern the
Regions, which, as noted above, hold most of the responsibility for regional transport planning in the seven large urban areas in the Netherlands. From discussions
with several of the Regions during the ECMT Peer Review, it appeared that
regional authorities did not feel particularly impacted by decentralisation aspectsof the VERDI agreement.
Co-ordination between government authorities in transport planning is not only
vertical, but also horizontal. As noted earlier, reflecting the tradition of consensusseeking in government decision-making, policy development concerning urban
travel involves interaction between the transport authorities and those responsible for spatial planning and environmental affairs, as well as economic and fiscal
concerns. Particularly in the development of national strategies such as the SVV2

© ECMT 200131

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

or the forthcoming NVVP and the National Environmental Policy Plans (NMPs) or
the national Spatial Planning Strategies,14 inter-ministerial consultation committees are set up to ensure agreement to sectoral objectives and plans that implicate other sector strategies. In this way the strategic plans established reflect
commonly agreed objectives and targets.
It was the impression of the ECMT Review Team that most official institutional
co-ordination and co-operation among different sectors took place on a national
planning level, however. When discussing interaction among transport, environmental and land-use institutions on a provincial, regional or municipal level, it was lessclear the extent to which systematic inter-sectoral consultation and co-ordination
was taking place.
Following is a brief overview of institutional structures for spatial planningand the environment.
4.3. Land-use planning
Spatial planning policy is under the wing of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and the Environment (VROM). Land use has been considered an important instrument for environmental management in the Netherlands since the first
Spatial Planning Act was elaborated in 1965, and has grown in importance as the
economic and demographic evolutions in the Netherlands over the last 20 years
have pushed land use to the forefront of sustainable policy development.
The institutional structure of this process is generally as follows: followinginterministerial consultation and public enquiry, the Central Government sets out
guidelines for national spatial planning, and together with the municipal authorities submits the national plan to the Parliament.
The Provinces in turn draw up regional land use plans that also involve public
consultation. The provincial authorities confer in this process with Central Government on the content of the plans, thereby allowing the Ministry to check forconsistency with national guidelines. Whereas national guidelines are not legallybinding, if the regional plans show inconsistencies with the national planning principles, the ministry can issue directives to the Provinces to ensure that nationalguidelines are respected on a regional level.

32

Local authorities establish municipal land use plans drawing on the parameters established in the regional plans and submit the plans to the Provinces forapproval. The local plans are compulsory for rural areas but can also be elaborated for urban areas. The basis for building permits, all development plans
having a potential impact on land use must conform to these municipal plans(OECD, 1995; and Galle and Modderman, 1997).

© ECMT 2001

Institutional Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

In addition to the land use plans described above, national structure
schemes are required for all major decisions relating to land use or infrastructuredevelopment. These structure schemes exist for issues such as traffic and transport, water supply, agriculture and housing. Regional, and therefore local, development plans must take account of these decisions as well. Involving close
consultation among the sectoral ministries concerned, the structure plans must go
through specific approval procedures and are subject to the scrutiny of the
Ministry for Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.
This long-standing cross-sectoral link in decision-making has been key to theintegration of environmental considerations in, among others, transport infrastructure development. An example of this is the expansion of Schipol airport, which
while under the competence of the Ministry for Transport, Public Works, and Water
Management, is nonetheless subject to the imperatives of the Ministry for Housing Spatial Planning and the Environment because of the project’s subordination
to the traffic and transport structure scheme. Integrated institutional processes
such as this, as well as cross-sectoral policy development are characteristic of theway in which the latest generation of policy strategy documents for transport, theenvironment and land use been developed in the Netherlands.15
4.4. Environment planning
On a national level, responsibility for environment policy is housed in VROM,
which was established in 1982. VROM oversees general environmental policy andco-ordinates policy dealing with the environment in the other ministries. It has
direct responsibility for laws concerning air, soil, waste, noise, radiation, and environmental impact assessment, among others. It sets out the national strategy forenvironmental planning in the National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP).
Within the Ministry, the Directorate General for Environmental Protection has
four divisions responsible for Environmental Quality and Emission Policy, Life-cycle
and Environmental Management, and General Environmental Policy. The fourth
division includes the Inspectorate for the Environment, whose staff at both centrallevel and in nine regional inspectorates support a network of local and provincial
officers charged with the enforcement of environmental laws and regulations.
The work related to environmental impacts of transport is housed primarily in
the Noise and Traffic and the Air and Energy departments of the Environmental
Quality and Emission Policy Division, the latter overseeing issues related to local
air quality and the environmental impacts of urban travel (OECD, 1995).
Environmental legislation is mostly implemented at the provincial andmunicipal levels. The Provinces are responsible for implementing national environmental legislation in their territories, for granting licences in the context of theEnvironmental Management Act, and for waste water discharges into provincial© ECMT 2001

33

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

surface waters. The Provinces draw up an environmental policy plan and a water
management plan every four years and oversee the implementation of environmental tasks by the Municipalities and water boards, which handle water management of the polders and in some cases water pollution in their jurisdictions.
Municipal authorities are charged with implementing a number of environmental laws under the Environmental Management Act, handling complianceissues relative to licenses for industry, and construction and maintenance of thesewer system as well as refuse collection (OECD, 1995).

34© ECMT 2001

Chapter 5.

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

5.1. Urban transport policy
5.1.1. The Second Traffic and Transport Structure Scheme (SVV2) 1990-2001
Since 1990, transport in the Netherlands has been guided by the strategic
principles and objectives laid down in the Second Traffic and Transport Structure
Scheme of 1990. Developed in co-ordination with the strategic plans for theenvironment (NMPs 1-3) and land use sectors (VINEX) (discussed in the following
sections) the SVV2 was designed with a view to setting transport policy on a pathleading up to 2001 that would bring about accessibility while maintaining qualityof life. Progress toward these goals is measured against quantitative targets.
From a policy integration perspective, the transport strategy is exemplary, inthat it entwines quantified environmental and spatial planning objectives withtransport sector development goals. From a procedural point of view, it, along withthe two other strategy documents, reflect what was no doubt a difficult, but nevertheless relatively successful institutional co-operation. From a product standpoint,
it resembles to a large extent what experts pushing integrated policymaking forsustainability would champion.
With an overall goal of “striking a balance between individual freedom, accessibility and environmental amenity” in the pursuit of “a sustainable society”, thestrategy is structured around two principal areas of focus: on one end, Environment
and Amenity, on the other end Accessibility. Five steps are then defined as the path
to reaching these goals, including:• Tackling problems at their source, including making vehicles as clean, safe andefficient as possible, curbing infrastructure expansion to limit demand forland, and reducing encroachment into natural areas by limiting vehicle
access.
• Managing and restraining mobility, by reducing the number of kilometrestravelled in both goods and passenger transport by, among others, limiting
the distance between home and work via pricing and location policy.
• Improving the alternatives to the private car, including for passenger transport,
improving cycling facilities and public transport and encouraging shared© ECMT 200135

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

use of vehicles; and for freight, improving rail and waterway facilities andencouraging combined transport.
• Selective accessibility of the roads, involving a more strategic, “case-by-case”
evaluation of infrastructure expansion.
The policy tools to carry the strategy forward are defined in the context of four
policy areas: Environment and Amenity, Managing Mobility, Accessibility and Support Measures. Within each of these areas, quantified targets were established in
short-, medium- or long-term scenarios depending on the policy and problem.
(V&W et al., 1989-90).
The result is a tightly woven lattice of environmental and transport sector policies that together are designed to carry the Netherlands forward to its “sustainable society” objective.
Meeting the sectoral development aspirations while improving the environmental integrity of the sector has, however, proven elusive. The inherent complexity involved in implementing such an integrated policy strategy as SVV2,
complicated further by the macroeconomic and demographic growth over theperiod, has contributed to what the Government itself has acknowledged to be an
at best mixed result.
According the Government’s Perspectives Memo, a document prepared toevaluate the effectiveness of the SVV2 and mould a framework for reflecting on
the next generation of transport strategy for the Netherlands, there was insufficient co-ordination of the objectives and provision of the means to achieve them.
Inadequate funds were allocated for the roads and railways programme, so thatthe quality criteria for infrastructure were not attainable. Actual costs went wellbeyond expected costs of realising these plans, and, as the Memo points out, it
proved much more difficult than anticipated to realise modal switching from private cars to public transport, despite considerable investment. (V&W et al., 1999a).
The Memo characterises the SVV2 period and its outcomes as follows:• In general, mobility, congestion and emissions from traffic are all expected
to exceed targets; CO 2 remains a major concern.
• Traffic volumes have risen more rapidly than forecast.
• Building of new infrastructure progressed more slowly than planned.
• Congestion increased.
• Pricing policy has shown promise, but has yet proven to be as effective as
envisaged; fuel taxation is limited by cross-border price differences, androad pricing has met resistance.
36• Environmental quality has not improved to the extent anticipated.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel• Market liberalisation of public transport and taxis looks promising, butpublic transport remains at present insufficiently attractive to bring about ashift from car use; moreover, it is still heavily subsidised.
• Parking policy has shown signs of being an effective tool on a local level– over 50% of cities have policies for paid parking – but has limitations
beyond the local scale.
• Road safety has improved, but the number and toll of road traffic accidents
is still high, as measured in fatalities, injuries and financial damage (V&W
et al., 1999a).
As the SVV2 period comes to a close, questions have arisen as to how to capitalise on gains made during this time and further pursue the “sustainable society”
goals set at the outset of the strategy 10 years ago. The Perspectives Memo articulates a number of broad areas where a policy dialogue has been undertaken toarrive at a new transport planning approach; they include:• Shortage of capacity and how to best to evaluate the need for expansion.
• The environmental impact of traffic and transport and how best to meetgoals for “quality of life”.
• When and under what circumstances should market forces be brought intoplay in transport, and in this context, what is the best role for the government to play in resolving tensions between supply, demand, scarcity andequity? Further, should government administration of the transport sector
remain relatively centralised or should greater decision-making power be
devolved to the Provinces and Municipalities?
• What sectoral goals and policies are of the national domain, and in turn,which are more appropriately placed on a European or international
agenda?
5.1.2. The National Masterplan for Traffic and Transport (NVVP)The NVVP, which has been under preparation for some time, will be sent to
Parliament at the end of 2000. During the planning period, a new approach has
been sought to traffic and transport policy that will take stock of the lessons
learned during SVV2 and move the Netherlands toward a more efficient planningstructure for the transport sector.
During the period of reflection and definition, a number of important policy
approaches have been defined for the NVVP:• Quantified targets e.g., especially for traffic volumes will not be used to theextent they were under SVV2 to measure the efficacy of policies; thesuccess of a particular policy or measure will be determined based on its
impact in qualitative as well as quantitative terms.

© ECMT 200137

National Peer Review: the Netherlands• Pricing policy will continue to promote a shift away from fixed charges togreater variabilisation and differentiation of pricing in the transport sector.
Tools include higher fuel taxes (although there is concern about the necessity
for co-ordination with neighbouring countries) and a kilometre charge directly
linking use of infrastructure and its price. Differentiation will focus on theimplementation of a road pricing system.
• Greater efficiency will be sought in the use of the road system and in traffic
management systems.
• The private sector will become more involved via the gradual introduction ofcompetition in public transport and by encouraging public private partnerships in infrastructure provision.
• Technological advances will be key in meeting environment and safety goals.
• Decentralisation of government responsibilities will play an important role in setting
the overall administrative context for greater efficiency in all aspects oftransport and traffic planning.
5.1.3. Decentralisation of government responsibility for transport

38

As noted in Chapter 4, the Dutch system of administration has for well over a
century been based on a highly centralised government structure with co-ordinatedpolicy planning and implementation with the provincial, regional and municipal
tiers. The SVV2 reflected this approach: objectives were to be realised throughco-operation among the central, provincial and municipal governments mostly
under the direction of the Central Government. In the assessment of the impactof SVV2, however, it was determined that there had been too little involvement andsupport from the lower tiers of government, the responsibility for the strategy falling
entirely on the shoulders of the Central Government.
In an effort to increase efficiency in the administration of transport and trafficplanning, and avoid the NVVP being known as a Ministry strategy only, the Central
Government will under NVVP limit its authority to policies and projects of national
and European importance. In this way, it will assume some powers from the othertiers as necessary, but more often, it will devolve authority to the Provinces,
Regions, and Municipalities for policies and projects of specific concern to thoselevels. Provincial, regional and local governments will obtain greater responsibility, within agreed frameworks, for problems related to and investment in the operation of traffic and transport. They will be expected to conduct an integrated
policy planning approach, considering not only transport aspects, but factors
concerning the economy, the environment and spatial planning as well. The
Central Government will most often not be involved in these deliberations. The
range of financial instruments will also be increasingly at the disposal of thedecentralised authorities, thereby empowering these lower-tiers of administration
with real capacity to make and implement policy. In this way, the NVVP intends tocomplete the decentralisation process that the VERDI accord began in 1996.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

5.1.4. Financing infrastructure and transport
Indicative of the centralised nature of the Dutch transport administration is
the way in which urban transport infrastructure and activities are financed. Central
Government revenues are allocated to Provinces and Municipalities for primarily
two objectives: infrastructure development and support for cost recovery in public
transport operations.
Financing local transport infrastructure
Development of local and regional transport infrastructure is primarily
financed from Central Government funds/resources via three financing mechanisms: the Municipal Fund, the Provincial Fund and the Central Government’s
Infrastructure Fund. Special grant funding is also available for special projects.
In general terms, infrastructure development priorities are decided at amunicipal, provincial, or as the case may be, regional level, and applications forcentral funding are then made through these sources.
Provincial and Municipal Funds
Managed by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Interior Affairs, theMunicipal Fund and the Provincial Fund are fed by general Central Government
revenues from taxation. The Ministry then deliberates on how much resources willbe allocated to each of the Provinces and Municipalities from the funds and forwhich purposes: decisions are made based on a variety of criteria related to thesize, regional profile, and tax revenue-generating capacity of the Province orMunicipality.

Figure 2.

Financial streams for traffic and transport

Central Government Budget

Infrastructure Fund

Main infrastructure

Provincial Fund

Regional infrastructure

Municipal Fund

Local infrastructure

39© ECMT 2001

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

As concerns the Provincial Fund, grants are provided to the Provinces for
projects in five broad areas, notably:• road and water;• nature conservation;• environment and rural planning;• economics and tourism; and• general administration, public order and safety.
The grant amounts per province are determined on the basis of a province’s
costs in each of the designated areas, taking into consideration the tax revenuegenerating capacity of the province.
In similar fashion, Municipalities receive a grant each year from the Municipal
Fund, the amount of which is based on the relative cost levels of a given municipality (determined by a calculation based on the number of inhabitants of the town orcity, whether the Municipality has a role of particular importance in the Province orRegion, etc.) and the tax revenue-generating capacity of the Municipality. In contrast
to the Provincial Fund grants, Municipalities generally have greater power to decideon which services it will spend the grant money (MINFIN, Web).
In 1998, the Municipal Fund contained Gld 22.6 billion, approximately 32% of
total municipal income. The other 68% of municipal revenues consisted of specificpurpose grants (38%), from which some urban transport financing comes, andmunicipal own income, primarily real estate and parking tax income (30%) (Ruige
and Malagardis, and Vergeer, 1998).
The volumes of the Municipal Fund and Provincial Fund are adjusted every
year for inflation and for levels of Central Government expenditure.
Infrastructure Fund

40

The Infrastructure Fund is supplied from the return on the infrastructure surcharge on the motor vehicle tax, and from a portion, fixed annually by law, of theduties on motor fuels received in that calendar year, as well as from general tax
resources. Provinces and Municipalities are eligible to receive grants from theInfrastructure Fund for investment in public transport, cycling facilities, environment and road safety projects, and for urban or regional road building andmanagement. Construction, maintenance and capital costs of the national main
infrastructure (road, water and rail) are paid from the Infrastructure Fund as well.
The Infrastructure Fund was created in the context of the SVV2 in order toprovide a cohesive, integral structure for decision-making on traffic and transport
infrastructure. Prior to the establishment of the fund, budget decisions regarding
infrastructure were handled on a case-by-case basis, with financial and substantive
issues handled separately in different divisions of the government; as a result, a
strategic overview of how infrastructure decisions were being made was lacking.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Since that time, a Long Term Infrastructure and Transport Programme has
been drawn up each year following consultation with the levels of government
concerned. The Programme presents infrastructure development decisions for thenational arterial road infrastructure, main waterways, the national rail infrastructure and regional infrastructure.
Contributions from the Fund can be made either for one large project, or for abundle of smaller projects. In the latter case, the province or region has theauthority to allocate the grant from the Fund to a number of small, unspecified
transport measures. The Central Government will meet a maximum of 95% of
public transport infrastructure costs and maximum 50% of road infrastructure costs.
It is, in theory, possible for the Infrastructure Fund to borrow money on the capital
markets, although this is not frequent.
All projects have to be coherent with national policy priorities for transport
sector development. As a general matter of policy, it is assumed that maintaining
existing infrastructure takes priority over the creation of new infrastructure. Thispriority has been reinforced in the NVVP, with accent placed on evaluating possibilities to use existing infrastructure resources more efficiently before expanding
infrastructure provision.
5.1.5. Financing public transport
Another way in which the Central Government provides support to local transport activity is by financing cost recovery gaps in local public transport operations.16 Indeed most urban public transport operations in the Netherlands are notable to cover their costs with own revenues; the cost recovery percentage forurban and regional transport is about 35 to 40%. In order to more or less cover the
deficit burden of these companies, the Central Government pays Gld 1.5 insupport for every Gld 1 earned.
Efforts are afoot to bring the cost recovery ratio of urban and regional public
transport to 50% (including maintenance). The injection of market dynamics into
public transport provision is expected to help in reaching this cost recovery goal.
Rail transport has now reached its 100% cost recovery objective (excluding infrastructure costs).
5.1.6. Pricing policies
As in most countries, the use of pricing as a transport policy tool in the
Netherlands – be it via higher taxes on fuel, road pricing, or parking charges – hasbeen a source of considerable contention. Reconsideration of the tax deduction
for travel expenses even led to the fall of the government in 1989.

© ECMT 200141

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

The potentially controversial nature of pricing measures notwithstanding, theDutch Government has quite clearly embraced the idea that the external costs oftravel should be internalised; in particular, that motorists should pay for the costs
of using the road network. With the SVV2 and NVVP, pricing policy evolved from afocus on fixed pricing schemes to a concentration on charges that vary according touse, and that are differentiated based on the time of day and location of travel.
Fuel taxation (though limited by considerations of competitive pressure fromneighbouring countries), parking charges, and an envisaged kilometre charge will
– together with electronic road pricing – form the pillars of this pricing framework.
Certainly the most talked-about, if not the most important, part of Dutch
pricing policy is electronic road pricing, a policy tool that has been on the table in
the Netherlands for a number of years now. Whereas many countries have considered various forms of road or congestion pricing, few have taken the plans as far as
has the Netherlands.
Road pricing
Given the persistent traffic volume and congestion problems of theNetherlands, the Central Government has held firm to plans to implement a roadpricing scheme in one form or another, weathering often vehement opposition from
Municipalities and regional authorities, interest groups and other stakeholders.
Several reasons have been given for the tenacity of the Dutch Government
relative to road pricing:• the particular severity of the congestion problem in the Randstad given that
it is one of the most densely populated regions in the world;• the importance placed on “accessibility” in the Netherlands due to thesignificance of trade, transport and logistics in the Dutch economy;• the priority placed on environmental quality in the region, again, largely
due to the density of the population and the role that pricing policies canplay in bringing about environmental benefits;• the relative openness of Dutch policy culture to innovation and experimentation in policy making. (Given the limited experience with implementationof road pricing policies, they remain somewhat experimental in nature.)(Boot et al., 1999.)

42

The two most recent schemes that have been under consideration in the
Netherlands are the Rekeningrijden cordon pricing plan, which was under negotiation and review at the time of the ECMT Peer Review visit,17 and the latest planthat has now replaced Rekeningrijden known as Spitstarief, a congestion pricing
scheme presented to Parliament at the end of 2000.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Rekeningrijden – cordon pricing plan
First introduced in 1987 as part of the “Randstad Accessibility Plan”, Rekeningrijden was envisaged as a cordon pricing scheme based on toll points on ring roads
surrounding the four big cities of the Randstad (Amsterdam, The Hague, Utrecht
and Rotterdam). Designed to alleviate particularly severe peak-hour traffic
congestion in these ring road areas, the plan was to apply to all users of the road
network between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. The rate assigned for access to these cities wasEuro 3.2, with a Euro 1 discount for road users paying electronically instead ofupon receipt of a bill to their homes. (Boot et al., 1999.)
A part of the Law on Electronic Road Pricing, the plan was also conceived as a
tax law, which provided that revenue generated from the scheme would befunnelled back into Central Government coffers to be redistributed throughout
the country as a means of offsetting other taxes. The rationale was that revenue
should be neutral and benefit inhabitants of all regions in the Netherlands. However, the flow of revenue streams away from the local areas involved in thescheme was, in fact, a main reason why the scheme was unable to secure support
from the cities, in spite of the financial incentives that were eventually offered tothese cities in the hope that a pilot scheme could be tested.
As Rekeningrijden faltered in late 1999-early 2000, a revised scheme known
as Spitstarief was conceived. As its name suggested, Spitstarief is a “rush hour”
congestion-pricing scheme that will eventually concern the whole country and notjust the Randstad.
Spitstarief – congestion pricing scheme
A part of the Draft Proposal on Accessibility and Mobility to be presented to
Parliament at the end of 2000, Spitstarief is the first of three types of mobility
tariffs that under the Proposal will be phased in from 2002 to 2006. Spitstariefbuilds on Rekeningrijden in that the technology, tariff rate, charging times etc., willbe the same. The scheme will begin in the Randstad with 11 toll stations on
motorways around the four major cities in the region and is designed to relieve
congestion on access routes to these cities.
Following a two-year pilot testing phase and evaluation of Spitstarief, thepossibility for toll “lanes” and “toll roads” will be determined via a further seriesof pilot tests. During this trial phase, evaluation of, among others, the scheme’s
impact on driver behaviour and technology performance will be conducted.
A notable difference relative to Rekeningrijden concerns the flow of revenues
from the scheme. Whereas the central tax office will handle the financial aspects ofthe scheme, the revenues themselves from the congestion pricing and toll experiments will be funnelled into newly created Regional Mobility Funds, the structure© ECMT 2001

43

National Peer Review: the Netherlandsof which is to be determined jointly by the Regions, Provinces and Municipalities,
who will have complete jurisdiction over the use of the funds, as long as the
projects have a relationship with transport/mobility problems.
An interesting aspect of Spitstarief is the incentives provided to bring theconcerned Municipalities, Provinces and Regions on board. In May 2000, the“Offensive Strategy towards Accessibility of the Randstad Region” (BOR) was sent
to Parliament, providing Randstad Cities and Provinces with additional money for
infrastructure development as well as money for the Regional Funds (the Ministry
will double the earnings from the Spitstarief with allocations from Central funds
within maximum limits) in exchange for approval of the Spitstarief. Contracts
between the Central Government and the Regions of Amsterdam, The Hague, andRotterdam were signed at the end of 2000. An eventual signing with Utrecht has
been postponed until beginning of 2001.
With Spitstarief it therefore appears clear that despite the difficulties encountered with Rekeningrijden, road pricing is still very much a policy commitment of
the Dutch government.
Parking policies
A second aspect of Dutch pricing policy is that of parking. Up until the preparation of SVV2, parking policy in the Netherlands was primarily focussed on
meeting demand, thereby accommodating growth in traffic. Quite the opposite of
the policy at present, office and commercial developments were required toprovide often extensive parking facilities at their business sites based on arequired minimum provision approach to parking supply. Car traffic levels
increased and congestion worsened partially as a result of this policy.
With SVV2 came recognition that parking could, in fact, be a very efficientdemand management tool. The minimum parking approach was rejected in favourof maximum parking supply ceilings for business and commercial sites.
Following the shift in thinking outlined in SVV2, the 1991 Parking Policy
Implementation Paper set forth a pro-active policy framework for parking provision focusing primarily on commuter traffic in the urban centres and new employment areas. Central to this re-focused parking approach were two principal
arguments:• A restrictive parking policy could contribute significantly to relieving bottlenecks in accessibility and improving quality of life in urban areas.

44• With three parking spaces available for every car, land space valued atroughly Gld 47 billion was being taken up by parking, and only a portion ofthis sum was being directly charged to the car user through parking tariffs.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

The principal tenets of the policy were two-fold:
1. All municipalities with more than 30 000 inhabitants should pursue a proactive parking policy by 2010.
2. In conjunction with spatial planning policy,18 as of 1995, businesses andpublic facilities were to be held to the following parking restrictions:– at A-locations (locations with good accessibility by public transport), a
norm of 10 parking spaces per 100 employees was to be applied in theRandstad and 20 spaces per 100 employees elsewhere;– at B-locations (locations with good accessibility by public transport andreasonable accessibility by car) 20 and 40 spaces were to be allotted per
100 employees respectively.
In parallel to the introduction of the parking policy, the “Law on Municipal
Parking Tax” was introduced, making it possible for Municipalities to levy parking
charges as a form of taxation. In 1995, 50% of municipalities with more than
30 000 inhabitants had implemented a pro-active parking policy.
Since the implementation of the 1991 policy, experience has revealed a number of areas in which the policy could be improved:• while most Municipalities have introduced parking policies, co-ordination
on a provincial/regional level which would take into account impacts ofparking policy outside municipal boundaries has perhaps not been given
enough consideration, particularly in smaller Municipalities;• competitive pressure among Municipalities over the establishment of business and commercial entities in their jurisdictions can lead to waiving of theparking restrictions as a means of attracting a business. A strong regional
layer of administration could offer a solution to this. A greater regional
approach to the policy would help this;• the parking norm is often considered more of a long-term goal than a stringent standard by some Municipalities; and• it is difficult to apply the parking restrictions to sites having received theirbuilding permits prior to SVV2. For this reason, it may take a long time
before the policy effects are fully felt.
(V&W, et al., 1989-90 and Kwikkers).
Though not without its difficulties, the Dutch experience over the last 10 years
in defining a new framework for parking policy demonstrates how Central Government can provide a forward-thinking, proactive policy framework for an area ofpolicy development that is fundamentally local in nature.

© ECMT 200145

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Fuel taxation
Both SVV2 and the Perspectives Memo cite the importance that fuel-pricing
policies can play as a way of internalising external costs of transport and thereby
having potentially strong impacts on car use. Fuel tax measures can be a particularly effective tool in strategies to limit CO2 emissions, which as noted in
Chapter 3.3 is of particular concern to the Netherlands.
The SVV2 recognises the benefit of offsetting increases in fuel prices withdecreases in fixed prices such as the annual vehicle tax in order to avoid
distortions. It specifies, however, that this should be done in the context of theEuropean framework, this to avoid competitive pressures from neighbouring countries. Excise tax on petrol is at present approximately 50% of the price per litre.
Given the commitment to a fuel pricing strategy in both the SVV2 and theforthcoming NVVP, policy will most likely evolve in this area in the near future.
However, it may be limited by political and economic considerations in theEuropean context.
Public transport pricing
Public transport pricing has also been a key element of pricing strategy in the
Netherlands. In order to maximise the competitive position of public transport
relative to the car, SVV2 calls for preventing public transport fare levels fromincreasing above the variable costs of car use. According to current policy, however, fares can be adjusted relative to wage and industry cost levels, in order tokeep operating deficits in “manageable bounds”. The operating subsidy evokedearlier in Section 5.1.4 has also been a major factor in keeping the operating deficits under control.
5.1.7. Urban public transport development
The Dutch government has long considered public transport an essential partof urban and regional travel. Promoting and maintaining public transport’s competitive position relative to the car has been a priority of Dutch transport policy,
and for this reason, the government has provided substantial support – both interms of investment and operations – to help the sector resist pressures on modal
split from the car.

46

This strong government backing for public transport is no doubt responsible
for the highly developed, well-integrated public transport system in the
Netherlands today. However, the predominant government presence in public
transport development and operations has also engendered inefficiencies thatare at the origin of current policy to expose the public transport sector – albeit
with care – to market dynamics.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Urban public transport since SVV2In SVV2, the importance of a high-quality public transport system insafeguarding “amenity and sustainability” is stressed, as is its combined role withspatial planning policy in limiting urbanisation and enabling “compact cities” tofunction well. The principal objective is to offer a real alternative to the private car,and improve quality of life, protect the environment and enhance road safety. To
reach these goals, SVV2 calls for “massive investment” in capacity and quality.
Focus is on increasing public transport use in commuter travel, improving integration with the European network of high-speed trains, and maximising speed andcomfort in inter-city travel (V&W, et al., 1989-90).
Despite this strong government commitment to promote and support public
transport – which has led to some very commendable initiatives such as, among
others, an integrated ticketing system, a combined train-taxi fare, and the successful integration of railways into urban transport systems – its impact on modal split
has been less than hoped.
According to a 1997 Policy Effect Report, the impact on car use of improvement in provision of public transport services was less than 1% overall, and 3% in
specific corridors (V&W, et al., 1999a). As noted in Section 3, increases in the total
number of passenger-kilometres since 1986 are entirely attributable to train traffic.
And as the Perspectives Memo points out, the approximately Gld 4 billion paid bytaxpayers each year for public transport19 along with the additional billions forinfrastructure expansion constitute half of the budget of the Ministry of Transport,
Public Works and Water Management, but relate to only 10% of passengerkilometres (V&W, et al., 1999a).
A new framework for public transport: introduction of market dynamics
In the lead-up to preparation of the NVVP, there has been a change in theapproach to public transport policy. The goals for higher quality in public transport service provision along with an increased modal share for public transport
and a reduction in traffic congestion remain. However, there has been new recognition that opportunities for reaching these goals will be significantly enhanced by
improving the efficiency and the financial self-sufficiency of the public transport
sector. This will principally entail further decentralisation of public transport
authority to the Provinces/Regions and Municipalities, introduction of competitionin public transport provision, and privatisation of public transport organisations.
The decentralisation process has already begun under the VERDI accord, withgreater responsibility for public transport, notably bus operations, already shiftedto Municipalities. Alongside the VERDI agreement, the recently approved
Passenger Transport Act will set the necessary legal framework for the introductionof competitive tendering in public transport.

© ECMT 2001

47

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

48

The main aspects of the Dutch Government’s approach to tendering include
the following:• First, there must be a climate of “genuine competition” for concessions tobe granted by decentralised authorities.
• A concession will provide a company with the temporary (six years maximum) exclusive right of public transport operations in a certain area.
• Central Government set in law the conditions that such concessions mustsatisfy regarding announcement of timetables, prices and conditions oftransport.
• The granting of concessions will be introduced gradually. The objective isthat one third of the turnover in urban and district transport throughout thecountry as a whole is contracted out by 2003. In 2003, an evaluation will be
carried out, after which a decision will be made as to further introduction ofmarket forces in urban and district transport.
• Regional rail transport (including urban sections of the rail network) will be
decentralised and added to the budget for urban and district transport
between 2000 and 2008. A minimum one-third of the budget must be put
out to tender by 2003.
This new, more market-oriented approach to public transport, brings with it
what the Perspectives Memo characterises as a shift from “supply-oriented” to“client-oriented” thinking on the part of authorities and transport companies;
indeed “public transport” is becoming “collective transport”. Focal points of thisnew frame of mind include:• Linked mobility: visualising a journey as a combination of bicycle, taxi, public
transport, hired car, as the case may be.
• Higher standards for quality characterised by promptness and reliability.
• Individualised collective transport: demand-led, on-call, with door-to-door service
if necessary.
• Integrated regular transport, with integrated tickets and tariffs.
• Innovation, including state-of-the-art information systems for journeys.
• Co-operation between authorities, businesses and transport companies.
• An integral approach to road traffic, collective transport, urbanisation and landuse planning.
(V&W et al., 1999a).
At this time, one of the principal challenges for policy makers is to capitaliseon the benefits of market liberalisation to correct current inefficiencies in public
transport, while maintaining the strong features of the Dutch public transportsystem such as the integrated ticketing and fare system acquired through years of
pro-active government policy in this area.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Light rail
With a view to better integrating municipal and regional transport, particularlyin the Randstad, several light rail projects have been developed that could
provide more flexible, faster passenger service in and around the region. Various
ideas have been developed recently, perhaps the most advanced of which isRandstadRail, which would integrate the existing public transport systems of The
Hague, Rotterdam and Zoetermeer, making as much use as possible of existing
infrastructure.
The plan is for RandstadRail to be fully operational by 2003 using existing rail
connections from The Hague to Rotterdam and from The Hague to Zoetermeer. It
is expected that the first part of the rail link between Zoetermeer and Rotterdam
will then also be ready.
Necessary investment to build RandstadRail is estimated at more thanGld 1 billion through 2003. Projected cost recovery ratio is estimated at over 50%,
taking into consideration a projected 15% population growth in the area from 1993
to 2010, and a doubling of the number of journeys by public transport in the same
period (Kwikkers, 1999).
Taxi transport
With the new focus in Dutch transport policy on “linked” mobility, involving
different modes of individual and collective transport, the role of taxi services will
be of increasing importance to urban travel dynamics. The “trein-taxi” programme,
which offers a special train-taxi fare package for rail passengers, has alreadyproven successful in linking these forms of travel.
The taxi sector was opened to competition in 1999 with the expectation thattaxis will as a result become more attractive in terms of price, service, and quality
and thereby play a greater role in public transport, notably as a link in the chain of
public transport services. The market must be totally open in 2002: in the interim,taxi company licences will be issued on a national basis; maximum fares will be set
by law; geographical limits of particular taxi services will be abolished; and all taxis
will be equipped with an on-board computer to facilitate supervision and control.
Public transport by water
As a measure to improve accessibility in and around urban areas, public
transport by water is now under consideration and in trial phase in several locations. The numerous Dutch waterways have significant capacity to accommodate
large numbers of passengers. Connections by water have recently been established or planned on an experimental level between Amsterdam and IJmuiden
and between Amsterdam, Almere and Lelystad. It remains to be seen whether
these initiatives can survive in the long term.

© ECMT 2001

49

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

A second trial is underway involving a rapid ferry between Dordrecht andRotterdam. This service, which uses modern catamarans, will compete with roadconnections between the two cities. The Municipalities around Dordrecht that are
adjacent to water are to simultaneously bring a connecting Waterbus into service,with links to the rest of the public transport system.
5.1.8. Cycling policy
Since the early 1900s, bicycle use has been one of the most popular modes oftransport for the Dutch. Thanks to long-term, supportive government policy andhelped along by the relatively flat topography of the Netherlands, the bicycle
today is one of the principal means of travel both in and around Dutch cities.
Whereas the overall share of cycling in countrywide passenger-km is roughly 7%,
the Dutch use their bicycles for approximately 25% of their journeys. The number ofcycling journeys for distances of up to seven kilometres is the highest in Europe.
The SVV2 sets out a policy framework for cycling that identifies the bicycle as
the “ideal mode of transport” for journeys of up to 5 to 10 kilometres. It goes on,
however, to highlight some of the key factors that are impeding the further
development of cycling in modal share. These issues are the focal points of cycling
policy at present. They include among others:• the need for direct, attractive and safe cycle routes linking homes withplaces of work, shops and schools;• the need for more safe cycle parks in shopping centres, workplaces andother public facilities as well as in older residential areas in cities;• the problem of bicycle theft;• risks of accidents.
The VERDI agreement transferred greater responsibility for bicycle policy inurban areas to the Provinces and Municipalities, however cycling remained, andwill no doubt continue to be a priority in transport policy at a national level.
In order to provide a framework for its commitment in SVV2 to help municipal
and provincial authorities to ensure safe and attractive cycle routes and facilities,
the government developed the Dutch Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) (1990-1997).
Comprising 112 projects over the period, including 31 research projects and41 pilot projects, the BMP focused on the following areas:• Opportunities to promote:– switching from the car to the bicycle;– switching from car to combined use of public transport and the bicycle.
• Safety for cyclists.
50• Bicycle parking facilities and theft prevention.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Over the seven-year period, Gld 303.6 million were expended on the Central
Government’s activities under the Plan. In addition to this expenditure, about
271 million guilders were channelled from the Central Government to the Municipalities and Provinces for their cycling projects in the context of the BMP(Kwikkers, 1999).
Since the time of the BMP, an additional Gld 460 million has been funded forthe period 2000-2007 for improvements to bicycle parking facilities at railway
stations.
Among the findings of the BMP were the following:• Bicycle policy alone is not sufficient to increase bicycle use and curb an
increase in car use; this is consistent with the conclusions of the SVV2. Likewise, public transport along with traffic policy as a whole will determine
modal switching to combined use of public transport and bicycle from the car.
• A decline in number of fatalities and accidents among cyclists is highly
dependent on total traffic safety policy.
• The police and judicial authorities have an important role to play in ensuring a reduction in the number of bicycle thefts (V&W, 1999b).
These findings will be instrumental in developing measures under NVVP topromote bicycle travel. This will be a factor in the success of the NVVP’s linked
mobility objective.
5.2. Spatial planning and land-use
The environmental and social consequences of the rapid growth of theRandstad, suburbanisation and increasing traffic volumes in the 1960s and 1970s
prompted a new examination of spatial planning in the Netherlands in the 1980s
and 1990s. A general concern arose that high growth rates in urban areas needed
to be contained in a policy framework that would constrain sprawl and provide a
structure for residential and commercial development that would account for not
only social concerns related to housing, but also impacts of development on green
spaces outside of urban areas. Moreover, scarcity of suitable land space forresidential and commercial development was leading to the general feeling that
the Netherlands was becoming “full” (VROM, 1999).
It was in this context that the current spatial planning policy for the
Netherlands was defined.
5.2.1. Supplement to the Fourth National Policy Document on Spatial Planning,
VINEX
Guided by a “compact cities” vision for land-use planning, the Supplement to
the Fourth National Policy Document on Spatial Planning or VINEX was adopted© ECMT 2001

51

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

in 1993 as the policy framework for spatial planning in the Netherlands
through 2001. Compelled by the land use, economic and social pressures noted
above, policy makers proposed in VINEX a compact urban structure based on
objectives of:• reducing growth of personal mobility by car;• generating a broader social and economic resource base for urban amenities, and thereby creating “vital urban areas”;• protecting the remaining open areas.
In order to advance toward these goals, the “compact cities” strategy was
structured around three key development principles:• Each region would provide for its own housing and industrial development
needs; this represents a commitment to keeping the population distribution over the country stable, with no “overflows” from the Randstad into theneighbouring regions.
• New urban developments would be concentrated within urban areas, andrural areas are preserved via a restrictive development policy.
• New housing, work and recreational areas would be concentrated near citycentres with public transport connections.
(Galle and Modderman, 1997).
In order to carry the “compact cities” strategy from idea to implementation,
several policy tools were developed, among them, the so-called “VINEX
contracts” and the “ABC policy”.
VINEX contracts
Central, regional, and local authorities entered into a series of voluntaryagreements designed to address the urban development criteria defined in
VINEX. The fruit of several years of difficult negotiation, these contracts, initiallyeffective from 1995 to 2005 and now prolonged to 2010, contain agreements ondevelopment sites that meet VINEX imperatives, the number of houses to bebuilt, government funding for the purchase of land, site preparation, infrastructure
provision (including for public transport) and soil remediation.

52

Since 1995, the Government has been closely monitoring the timely implementation of the VINEX agreements. It is expected that the national housing
construction targets for the period 1995-2000 will be achieved. This means thatabout 425 000 new dwellings will have been built according to VINEX criteria inthis period.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

ABC Policy
A second policy tool designed to carry out VINEX is the ABC location policy
for business and other commercial sites. Under the slogan “the right business in
the right place” ABC is an innovative planning tool that uses restrictive parking
policy as a driver for development constraints for businesses and services. Thisrather pioneering policy approach has attracted the attention of urban and transport planners from around the world.
As its name suggests, ABC is a three-tiered location structure based on thefollowing tenets:• Businesses with a higher-than-average number of employees and visitors
should locate on sites with good access to public transport routes, such as
in city centres near the central railway stations (A sites) or near a peripheralpublic transport node (B sites).
• C locations or those sites that are easily accessible by road should be designated for companies that are primarily dependent on road transport in theirbusiness.
It is the parking restrictions assigned to each of these location categories that
represent the real power behind the policy. Picking up the parking restriction categories introduced in SVV2:20• A sites are allotted 10 or 20 parking spaces per 100 employees.
• B sites: 20 or 40 parking lots per 100 employees.
ABC policy has now been adopted in provincial and local spatial plans. The
Provinces, supported by the national planning inspectorate, are in charge of its
implementation, and under NVVP, responsibilities for the ABC policy are
expected to be further decentralised.
Since its implementation, ABC has been generally accepted. However, thehighly restrictive nature of the parking limits, along with the economic pressures
facing local and provincial authorities relative to business locations in theirjurisdictions, have led to a certain relaxation of the parking restrictions in someregions.
5.2.2. Fifth National Policy Document on Spatial Planning
As the VINEX period of “compact cities” moves forward to 2001, the next
generation of spatial planning strategy will be defined in the Fifth National Policy
Document on Spatial Planning, which will set out land use policy for the
Netherlands for the period 2001-2020. Elements of this new strategic plan for land
use include:• Development of vibrant, multi-nodal “network cities” that function as single
housing and job markets, supported by integrated regional transport systems.

© ECMT 2001

53

National Peer Review: the Netherlands• A strategy for a robust countryside, maintaining and reinforcing natural andcultural landscapes and open spaces, while creating opportunities for new
economic activities to support rural life.
• Clustered development outside the Randstad along transport corridors
linking the most important urban centres.
Prepared in parallel with the NVVP, the new spatial planning strategy willreflect as factors in future spatial planning a number of the transport policy priorities to be articulated in NVVP, notably, the emphasis on use of existing infrastructure networks to the extent possible.
5.3. Environment policy
5.3.1. Overview
Beginning in the late 1970s – much earlier than in most industrialised economies – environmental policy-making in the Netherlands has become increasingly
integrated, both with policy development in other sectors, and among the different environmental media (air, water, soil, etc.). Due to its relatively small size, highpopulation density and heavy degree of industrialisation, the Netherlands wasamong the first industrialised countries to recognise that sector-focused environment policy (i.e., air, water, soil, etc.) was not effective in reducing pollution for thefollowing reasons:• Solutions defined for one problem often generated new problems in otherenvironmental sectors or geographic regions.
• Lack of co-ordination among policy-makers in dealing with environmental
problems related to other sectors created policy discrepancies leading tocost inefficiencies and credibility problems for the environment as a policy
issue.
• Environmental legislation divided by sector caused confusion for industry(e.g., in licensing procedures) and inspection and enforcement problems forgovernment.
The recognition that all economic and industrial sectors need to be integrally
tied to environmental policy making led to the development of the National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP) strategy, which focuses both on effects, defined as
quality objectives for environmental themes and regions, and sources, the actors
responsible for environmental degradation through their economic activities(NETH-EMB, Web).

54

Transport is one of the target groups for environmental policy. As such, crossfertilisation of transport and environmental goals occurs in the development of
the strategic plans and goals for both the transport sector and the environment.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

Now in its third version, the NMP, which aims to achieve sustainability by theyear 2010, sets quality objectives defined in terms of emission reduction targets
for nine different environmental “themes”, several of which are of particularconcern to transport: climate change, acidification, and local nuisance (e.g., noiseand local air pollution). Emissions reduction targets from the transport sector arealigned with the SVV2 targets.
Whereas it is expected that NMP objectives will in large part be achieved via
measures set out in NMP 3, it is unlikely that targets will be reached for a numberof areas that implicate the transport sector: notably CO2 and climate change, noisenuisance and NO x and hydrocarbon emissions.
5.3.2. CO 2
As in many countries, CO2 targets have been difficult to meet in the Netherlands.
The targets initially set in the NMP and SVV2 for fuel consumption and CO2 emissions(stabilisation of emissions in 2000 and a reduction of 10% in 2010 based on 1986
levels) have been replaced by projections of a 40% overall increase during the period,
according to VROM. Underestimation of growth in traffic volume, and perhaps overestimation of fuel efficiency improvements and the impact of pricing mechanisms
appear to be at the root of the miscalculation.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the Netherlands has committed itself to reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by 6% of their 1990 levels between 2008-2012. Half ofthe necessary reductions to meet this target will depend on international measures (e.g., emissions trading); and half (25 MT) are to be found in the Netherlands
according to the policy options outlined in the Climate Policy Implementation
Plan, released in June 1999. The package includes inter alia: increased vehicle fuelefficiency via the 1998 agreement between the European Union and the European
vehicle industry represented by ACEA;21 fuel efficiency labelling of new cars (alsoin the context of EU-agreed measures); higher fuel prices; a “feebate” differentiated vehicle tax scheme for purchases of new cars; increased speed limit enforcement; road pricing; and promotion of on-board instruments to monitor driving
behaviour. The programme known as “Het Nieuwe Rijden” or “the new way of driving”
is expected to decrease fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from passenger carsby 10%. Other measures include fiscal incentives to discourage car-based commuting and increased tire pressure.
5.3.3. Noise
Despite significant improvements in noise from road traffic over the last
10-15 years, the NMP3 notes that 25% of the Dutch population reported sufferingfrom road traffic-related noise in 1995. As mentioned above, city representatives
during the Review also cited noise disturbance as perhaps the principal environmental concern in their municipalities.

© ECMT 2001

55

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Both the SVV2 and NMPs set limits for noise disturbance. For urban areas,
SVV2 targets a 50% reduction in the number of homes with external walls exposedto traffic-related noise levels over 55dB(A). NMP3 calls for a more general stabilisation of total noise (including non-traffic-related noise) at 1985 levels in 2000 andthat all severe noise nuisance should be eliminated by 2010 (all noise sources
considered).22
Measures designed to address the noise problem in cities include: lowering
maximum speed limits; introducing low-noise asphalt in city centres; and encouragement of better traffic management in urban areas, including discouraging car
use in city centres and promoting “environmentally friendly” distribution systems.
Evaluation of the implementation status of these measures will be important inensuring future progress on the noise issue.
5.3.4. NOx and hydrocarbons
As concerns NOx and hydrocarbons, targeted for reductions of 75% in 2010, a
successful tax incentive (1986) supporting the introduction of three-way catalytic
converters23 has been effective in reducing levels of these pollutants, along withemissions of VOCs and CO.24 According to VROM, with the implementation of theforthcoming Euro 3 and 4 standards, NOx emissions for passenger traffic are
expected to continue to fall from 2005 through 2020, surpassing the target.
The impact of higher-than-expected freight traffic volumes on the overall NO x
target remains uncertain. However, according to VROM, the NOx target may still bemet, as the additional reductions on the passenger transport side may serve tocompensate in part the excess emissions from freight.
5.4. Safety policy
Safety has held an important place in Dutch transport policy for decades.
From the 1950s up to SVV2 in 1990, policy-making targeted the key factors impacting safety (e.g., legislation and regulation, engineering, protective devices, roaduser behaviour). During this period, despite tremendous growth in car traffic
volumes, overall traffic-related fatalities fell substantially.

56

SVV2 took policy-making one step further, setting specific targets for reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injury: fatalities are to drop 50% and injuries
40% in 2010 based on 1986 numbers. Prompted by a short-term reversal in theoverall downward trend, which showed an increase in traffic deaths on motorways
during 1988-89 largely attributed to speed, the SVV2 set forth a series of measuresintensifying speed limit enforcement and driver behaviour among others.
Although it is uncertain at this point whether the targets of SVV2 will be met,
progress in lowering traffic fatalities and morbidity appears to continue.

© ECMT 2001

Policy Context for Sustainable Urban Travel

The recently begun “Permanently Safe” programme (1997-2001) has introduced the notion of sustainability to road safety policy in the Netherlands. Withan emphasis on risk minimisation, this innovative strategy disaggregates thevariety of elements impacting safety in traffic planning, road engineering, education, enforcement and vehicles, to improve the effectiveness of policies, andbetter influence driver behaviour in the long term.
Permanently Safe contains 24 agreements between the Central Governmentand regional and local authorities on measures for the period 1998 to 2001 thatshould make traffic structurally safer. The programme is based on the idea that ina “permanently safe” traffic and transport system, the infrastructure is adapted insuch a way that the road user almost automatically acts in a safe manner.
As concerns policies dealing with urban travel in particular, the programmecalls inter alia for the extension of 30 km/hour and 60 km/hour zones, priority for
cyclists on the right, and education (Schepel, 1999).
The total costs for the Programme are estimated at Gld 400 million. Central
Government’s contribution to this is Gld 200 million. The remaining
Gld 200 million is borne by the decentralised authorities (Kwikkers, 1999).

57© ECMT 2001

Chapter 6.

Analysis of Review Team6.1. Context
This chapter presents the analysis of the ECMT peer review team concerning
urban travel policy making and implementation in the Netherlands. It is based on
their discussions with urban travel professionals both within and outside of government during their three-day visit to the Netherlands in June 1999 as well as on
background information documents provided in advance of and during the visit.
Prepared separately from the previous five chapters of this paper, it should
be read as both the conclusions to this review report, and as a stand-alone assessment of the ECMT team concerning integrated policies for sustainable urban
travel in the Netherlands.
The current analysis is organised as follows: Section 6.2 examines strategic plans
involving urban travel, land use and the environment in the Netherlands. Section 6.3
considers administrative structures for transport policy in the Netherlands and how
they impact urban travel policy-making, notably the decentralisation of government
responsibility in this process. Section 6.4 looks at the principal aspects of urban traffic
and transport policy. Section 6.5 reflects on the wide range of issues concerning landuse and spatial planning. And Section 6.6 takes up some of the principal environmental and safety policy issues in the Netherlands at this time. Section 6.7 proposes
the general findings and conclusions of the team.
6.2. Strategic plans for urban travel, land use and the environment
The Netherlands has a laudable history of developing integrated, comprehensive policy strategies that set forth plans for the development of a particular policy
area. The sectors under consideration in this policy review – transport, land-use andthe environment – are exemplary of this approach. Indeed, the strategic planning
practised in the Netherlands articulates much of what policy analysts working onsustainable development recommend: upstream, intersectoral, comprehensive policy planning that considers all of the key economic and environmental factors of aparticular policy area. Current ECMT and OECD work on sustainable urban travel isencouraging this integrated, “package” approach to policy making, as recommended
in the 1995 report Urban Travel and Sustainable Development.

© ECMT 2001

59

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

The long-standing tradition of strategic transport planning in the Netherlands,
which began with the First National Traffic Survey in 1907, has led to the development of the Second Traffic and Transport Structure Scheme of 1990 (SVV2), whichis to guide transport policy development through 2001, and its offspring now
under preparation, the National Masterplan for Transport and Traffic (NVVP). Similarly, strategic policy for spatial planning and land use in the Netherlands
from 1990 to 2015 is articulated in the Supplement to the Fourth National Policy
Document on Spatial Planning (VINEX). And development of environmental policy
has since 1982 been set forth in a series of environmental programmes, whichbecame National Environmental Policy Plans or NMPs in 1989. The third NMP was
released in early 1998. These strategic plans have provided a solid framework fororienting policy-making to reflect the priorities of a given time.
While the practice of strategic planning in the Netherlands is globally recognised as commendable, implementation has, in certain cases such as the SVV2, run
into difficulty. The Dutch government itself recognises that the transport plan has
borne less than the results targeted, and for this reason, the government has
taken a different tack in developing the NVVP.
As expressed in the Perspectives Memo, the SVV2, which sets out to improveaccessibility while balancing individual mobility with environmental concerns,
established specific targets for a number of priority policy areas, including Environment and Amenity, Managing Mobility, Accessibility and Support Measures.
Projections for progress in several of these areas were, as the Memo points out,
overly optimistic. It would appear at least in part that, an underestimation of theevolution of external factors – notably growth in traffic volume – and an overreliance on the success of certain policy mechanisms (e.g., pricing) as well as
political considerations have made the implementation of SVV2 and the attainment of the projected results more complex than anticipated (e.g., an overall drop
in road traffic and a reduction in vehicle emissions – CO2 in particular – and noise).
It now seems that a less prescriptive approach has been taken in the development of the NVVP. While this is understandable given the difficulty in meeting thespecific targets under SVV2, there may be a risk that, unless the new plan gives fullconsideration to the difficult issues such as pricing policy and investment needs, itwill not be effective in tackling the transport challenges facing the Netherlands
today. The emphasis being placed on a number of key areas, including introductionof market dynamics in public transport and decentralisation of the institutional
procedures for decision-making among others, should help to improve the chances
for successful implementation of NVVP as long as key aspects of these policy andadministrative factors are carefully examined and analysed.
6.3. Administrative structure of transport policymaking and decentralisation60

As presently structured, Dutch transport policy seems to be heavily centralised compared to most other western European countries, notably in terms of the© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review Team

allocation of resources to local public transport and involvement in urban travel
policy-making. Given the geographic configuration of urban areas in the
Netherlands, with 20 of the country’s major cities of more than 100 000 inhabitants
and approximately 40% of the population located in the western Randstad region,
it is perhaps necessary that there be a certain degree of national-level
co-ordination of the activities in that part of the country. National co-ordination is
also important in this region given the intensive interaction among the cities of
the Randstad, as well as the presence of the port of Rotterdam and Schiphol
Airport. Centralised decision-making may offer other advantages as well: it has, forexample, enabled the provision of integrated public transport ticketing throughout the Netherlands.
A heavily centralised system such as that of the Netherlands may have its
drawbacks, however. It can limit the scope for local initiative and acceptance of
local responsibility for policy making and implementation, especially given thecurrent funding structures for public transport. It may also incite competition
between central and provincial/regional levels of government for transport investments, leading to absorption of national funds for “mega-projects”. Similarly,
Municipalities may find themselves in permanent competition with each other forCentral Government funding, in addition to competing with each other over issuesof general economic development. The very centralised nature of the system may
also have been a partial reason for the difficulties in implementing policy objectives laid out in the SVV2.
Decentralisation appears then to be a beneficial path for the Netherlands totake as regards transport policy making and implementation. The risk to implementation of a strongly centralised system was, in fact, recognised in the SVV2,
which points out in its chapter on Implementation that “the Ministry of Transportcannot do the job alone”. In 1996, the VERDI agreement articulated the limitationsof a centralised system and sought to transfer, where appropriate, decisionmaking responsibility for transport policy to the Provinces and Municipalities.
With its commitment to co-operative working between the different tiers ofgovernment and greater decentralisation by Central Government, the VERDI
accord was therefore clearly a significant development, as was the discretion given
to lower tiers of government in the allocation of some resources from the Infrastructure Fund.25
The evidence presented during the Review suggests that decentralisation is
welcomed by Municipalities that are well-placed to take advantage of the greater
opportunity and scope for local initiative (e.g., Leiden’s limited deregulation oftaxis). Decentralisation should probably then be pursued, while recognising
the importance of maintaining certain positive elements of the centralised system– e.g., integrated ticketing and the ability to take a strategic view of the transport
problems of the Randstad – which cannot be managed on a devolved basis.

© ECMT 2001

61

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

For the objectives of decentralisation in the VERDI accord to be met,
however, several issues should be examined closely: notably, the need to rationalisefinancial streams relative to responsibility for urban transport policy; and secondly,
the need for increased transparency with regard to the roles and powers of the Regions
and cities relative to the Provinces. During the Review, this latter issue was recognised at all levels of government as needing clarification.
The financing and funding discussion will be taken up in some detail in
Section 6.4 below. For the purposes of the present chapter, it should be notedthat while it is true that policy decisions regarding urban travel are not exclusively
a Central Government responsibility, but, in general, the result of intensive negotiations among the Central Government, the Provinces and Municipalities ; andthat some urban regions, such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague disposeof their own administrative and research capacities to prepare decisions, theCentral Government is nevertheless quite powerful financially as a result of thecentralised taxation system, especially with regard to infrastructure investments.
Backed by this financial strength, the Central Government can thus take on arelatively “authoritarian” stature, exercising considerable influence on investment
decisions at various levels, e.g., not only as concerns national or international
issues, but also relating to elements of transport policy which other countries may
allocate to regions or municipalities (e.g., local public transport, and to someextent bicycle traffic or parking policy).
6.3.1. Framework Act Regions
Prior to the emergence of the so-called Framework Act Regions in theearly 1990s, the administrative structure of the Netherlands for transport policymaking was not well-suited to the urban travel concerns of large agglomerations.
This was primarily due to the large number of small municipalities and the historical provincial boundaries. The emergence of Regions seemed a pragmatic
response to this problem, allowing the larger cities to have a stronger say andmore direct access (through a kind of “city province status”) to the national
government.

62

The role of the Regions has caused a certain degree of confusion, however,relative to that of the Provinces. The Regions appear to be considerably more
powerful than the Provinces, despite the stipulations provided for the Provincesin the VERDI accord. They are responsible for traffic and transport planning,
management of urban and inter-urban public transport and infrastructure plans. It
is perhaps somewhat incongruous that the Provinces – which are “presque sans portefeuille” in terms of transport investments in urban regions –, are nonetheless more“democratic” entities in that they provide more direct representation of the people
in political decision making than the Regions.

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review Team

During the Review, it was apparent that there was clearly unresolved tension
between the various administrative entities, and, in particular, uncertainty overthe future role of the Regions; indeed, the Framework Act of the early 1990s, whichbrought them into existence, expires in 2003. This ambiguity could render policymaking and decision-taking more difficult than it need be.
In spite of the lack of clarity with regard to the roles and responsibilities ofProvinces and Regions in particular, it must be noted that the general impression
given during the Review was one of co-operation and mutual understanding
among the various authorities encountered.
It would clearly not be appropriate to expect major changes to the Dutch system of local government in order to accommodate the needs of transport policy. But
the more that can be done to encourage co-operation and resolve uncertainties
about the roles of the various tiers of government, the easier it will be to implement
policies, particularly those which might be unpopular with some of the electorate.
6.4. Urban traffic and transport policies and measures
6.4.1. Systems for financing infrastructure and transport
The centralised nature of transport policy is reflected in the systems for allocation of finances for transport investments and in the funding of public transport
operations and maintenance. Indeed, transport in the Netherlands appears to begenerously funded by Central Government.
Infrastructure
A particular feature of the Dutch system is the unified funding of road andpublic transport infrastructure from the Infrastructure Fund. Fed by the infrastructure surcharge on the motor vehicle tax as well as from a portion of motor fueltaxes and general fiscal resources, this funding structure provides, in principle, avery sturdy foundation on which the Netherlands can pursue the development of
its public transport system on all levels.
On a more hesitant note, the State’s willingness to meet up to 95% of the costsof transport infrastructure clearly generates significant demand for projects from
Regions and Municipalities and creates problems of prioritisation for Central
Government. It may act as a disincentive to local authorities to adopt more modest,
cost-effective transport solutions or to bring in private developers or partners fortheir projects. There would seem to be significant scope for attracting greater
private sector investment into the transport system either in conjunction with thetendering out of public transport services or in securing contributions from developers or businesses likely to benefit from particular infrastructure developments.

© ECMT 2001

63

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Whereas it is important that the Central Government and/or Regions havecontrol over transport infrastructure projects in order to maximise co-ordination of
resources, it is equally essential that Municipalities be involved in the planning
process and take responsibility for implementation. In a small country such as the
Netherlands, which is dependent on good transport facilities, there must be solid
co-operation among the different authorities on the three administrative levels.
The link between investments and operational costs is very clear when it
comes to public transport – even a small investment in the infrastructure, e.g., ashort, bus-only road – can reduce the operational costs substantially. Therefore,
effective co-ordination is necessary among the administrative authorities overseeing investments and operations if they are not one and the same.
Maintenance and operational costs
Costs for maintenance and operations should ideally be covered by local
road and public transport users (e.g., the local tax payers) when revenues are
insufficient. At present, the cost recovery rate for urban and regional transport of
35% to 40% is quite low relative to that of other countries in Europe, as are farelevels, which could possibly be raised to reduce the deficit.
With this in mind, Central Government subsidies for public transport operating
costs seem particularly high, with 1.5 guilders of subsidy for every 1 guilder in fares.
This scheme certainly provides an incentive for revenue generation, but seems toprovide less of an impetus for cost efficiency. It was clear that steps were being
taken through the proposed programme of contracting out public transport services
to try to make public transport more efficient and therefore to reduce this bill. The
present target of contracting out a third of services by 2003 seemed relatively unambitious, however, and it should be possible to make more rapid progress in reducing the public transport deficit without adversely affecting quality.26
As concerns public transport, it is important that regional and local authorities
that oversee land-use regulations, parking policies, traffic signal operations etc.,
are involved in discussions surrounding the operations costs of the public transport system.
6.4.2. Pricing policies

64

Pricing policy is likely to be a key component of an effective transport
strategy. In particular, increasing the price of car usage relative to public transport
would seem to be necessary in the Netherlands, as elsewhere, if car usage is to be
reduced. Public transport fares already seem to be relatively low in the
Netherlands – indeed it may be necessary for them to rise if the efficiency of the
public transport market is to be improved. The scope for fuel price increases,
limited until recently by the geographical position of the Netherlands and its© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review Team

exposure to competition from other EU states, has recently opened up, as
Germany has announced its intentions to increase its fuel duty. Increases of thisnature should be encouraged in order to provide incentives for use of public
transport/ non-motorised modes of transport. Effectively targeted increases in thecost of car usage therefore seem an essential element of Dutch transport strategy.
The SVV2 of 1990 cites raising the variable costs of car use relative to the fixed
costs as a means to better address traffic restraint. This approach is echoed in
the 1999 Perspectives Paper, which points out that a stricter application of “theuser pays” principle will be necessary in order to more effectively manage andrestrain traffic growth.
As concerns pricing issues, discussions during the Review centred primarily
around options for implementing an electronic road pricing scheme, parking
policy, and public transport pricing.27
Road pricing
Few countries have taken the very difficult issue of road pricing as far and insuch a systematic way as the Netherlands. The progress made in structuring thisconcept and in addressing key issues of road pricing is certainly commendable
and will no doubt further understanding of this complicated pricing mechanism forother countries interested in undertaking such a pricing policy.
Successful implementation of road pricing has eluded the Netherlands forquite some time, however, despite several attempts at its introduction. Most
recently, at the beginning of 1999, initial hopes that car users might be willing toaccept the latest initiative were dashed when an organised consumer-based resistance managed to capitalise on some of the thornier aspects of the policy todampen potential support.
With objectives to improve the accessibility of cities and better manage roadcapacity, especially during the peak hour, Rekeningrijden,28 the current policy ofroad pricing in the Netherlands, is more an “entrance fee” or cordon pricing
concept than an instrument for financing heavy investment.
The implementation difficulties that this latest initiative has encounteredseem to be primarily linked to the structural aspects of the proposed law, rather
than to the idea of road pricing itself. Foremost among the reasons for public
resistance appears to be the question of where the revenues from the scheme will
actually go. Originally conceived as a tax law, the revenue generated fromentrances to a particular city are to flow into a central fiscal pool, to then be
re-distributed equally throughout the country as a means of offsetting other taxes.
The Government’s argument that this scheme is therefore transparent and revenue neutral holds true in principal. However, the potential penalty to economic
activity in the city concerned – whether perceived or real – is compelling enough© ECMT 2001

65

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

for cities to demand that revenues generated be looped directly back into the
local economy, rather than being funnelled through a more circuitous path via
central coffers. It appeared that this condition, were it met, might have been atleast partially sufficient to keep Amsterdam at the table in June 1999 for discussions on its being the first pilot city to undergo the pricing scheme. As a means ofaddressing this revenue question, a proposal for financial compensation to thecity equivalent to the amount of tax revenue generated by the road pricing
scheme for the Central Government was also being discussed at the time.
The latest proposals for peak hour cordon pricing around the four main
centres of the Randstad were at the time of the review relatively advanced,
although it was still uncertain that they would be successfully introduced asplanned.
In a separate initiative, the city of Rotterdam has proposed a pricing scheme
which would involve toll lanes designed to manage heavy port-related traffic.
Planned as a charge, rather than a tax, the revenues from the toll lanes would befunnelled back into the project to defray the capital costs of increasing roadcapacity to accommodate the lanes. There may be some advantages in the
Rotterdam proposal in that road users would have the choice to either use the paylanes and perhaps save time, or use the free lanes and save money. This may help
in garnering public approval for the project.
It seemed unfortunate that the details of Rekeningrijden needed to be fixedin legislation; as a result, subsequent changes (if, for example, the charges need tobe modified at some point to optimise the effectiveness of the scheme) would
require further, possibly controversial, legislation. Nevertheless this seemed aninevitable consequence of the fact that road pricing was regarded as a tax forlegislative purposes.
Greater flexibility in the road pricing mechanism, with the possibility forincremental improvements to the scheme as experience accumulates, may
improve chances for successful implementation of a road pricing strategy. Thevery introduction of road pricing would be a significant development in policy
terms, not only for the Netherlands, but also for fellow countries around the world
looking to this policy mechanism as a potential means to manage the persistently
confounding problem of urban congestion. If successful, it would no doubt lead tofurther understanding of ways to design and apply road pricing, which would be atremendous benefit for policy makers on all levels of government both in andoutside of the Netherlands.
Parking policies
66

Parking policy is another area in which the Netherlands has demonstrated
admirable ability to develop comprehensive policy plans. As set forth in the 1991

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review Team

Parking Policy Implementation Paper, policies that tightly restrict parking in city
centres and limit parking availability in others areas based on accessibility to
public transport (as articulated in the ABC scheme)29 have been cited as exemplary in many countries for their design. With this policy plan, the assumption
behind parking policy became “demand follows parking” instead of the contrary.
This approach has enabled parking policy to become an effective demand
management tool in Dutch cities.
As evidenced by the Review discussions in Leiden and Amsterdam, mostDutch cities have implemented tight paid parking schemes in city centres. Leiden,
for example, has 16 guilder per day parking passes, and fees of 4 guilders/ hour inthe tariff zone and 2.5 guilders/hour outside of the tariff zone. It is also laudable
that over 50% of Dutch cities have policies to reduce the amount of on-street
parking and to extend the areas where it applies. And based on the “Binnenste beter”
or “better inner cities” doctrine, which is at the heart of the policy, car-restricted town
centres are growing in number.
As in many other countries, incorporating private parking lots into restrictive
pricing schemes is difficult. Under several mobility management initiatives in the
Netherlands, private firms, public transport operators and local governments havereached agreements on ways to achieve this.
Bottlenecks in the parking regulatory system have nevertheless arisen, whichhas perhaps limited the overall efficacy of these policies. Experience, for example,
in Leiden showed that tough parking restrictions in the city centre have caused
some high-quality shops to retreat from the centre to outlying areas leading tosome loss of economic activity in the centre. There have also been signs of“commuter traffic” building up in the outer areas, as visitors bypass the expensive
city centre parking by seeking cheaper space outside of the centre. In Dutch cities,
as elsewhere, parking restrictions are therefore likely to extend out from thecentre over time as the pressures caused by traffic growth shift. However, concerns
about the impact of restrictive parking policies on the economic competitivenessof towns vis-à-vis their neighbours can make authorities reluctant to introduce suchpolicies. This points to the need for a strong regional policy on parking to ensure alevel playing field.
Future reflection on parking policy will need to centre around finding ways tominimise the undesirable effects of restricted parking policies and therefore more
effectively implement parking schemes. This may be important in evaluating theimpact of parking policies in the NVVP.
6.4.3. Urban public transport enhancement and development
As a densely populated country, with relatively short distances between
centres and significant congestion on its roads, the Netherlands has what might be© ECMT 2001

67

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

considered an ideal configuration for a well-developed public transport system.
For several decades from 1960 onward, the Netherlands was renowned for its
modern and extensive public transport network: the interchanges between different modes of transport were famous; the devices for giving priority to vehicles attraffic signals were widely acclaimed, as were the forward-thinking policies
combining promotion of bicycles and public transport.
It would appear, however, that the Netherlands has perhaps not kept pacewith the need for improvements to its urban public transport services in recent
years – especially with regard to quality. The introduction of new technologies,
e.g., smart card use in ticketing, has been slow, as has been the opening to competition. As a result, modal share and the overall financial health of the public
transport system has suffered.
Despite initiatives taken since the SVV2 to improve public transport – which
include an increase in investment, initiatives to decentralise responsibility andlimited openings to competition – public transport retains a relatively low modal
share and is burdened with high costs and low cost-recovery rates relative tointernational experience. This is in spite of the 4 billion guilders of tax revenue
earmarked each year for public transport operations and additional billions forinfrastructure, which as the Perspectives Memo points out, account for half thebudget of V&W but benefit less than 10% of passenger/kilometres.
Moreover, the Perspectives Memo refers to a 1997 Policy Effect Report thatstates that improvements of the supply of public transport services have brought
only marginal reductions in car use levels.30 And urban and “district” transport has
seen a steady decline in use overall, with the exception of student passengers.
The Central Government has made improving public transport a priority in
the NVVP. According to the Perspectives Paper, the NVVP signals a “shift inthinking” with regard to public transport: further decentralisation is being encouraged via the VERDI Accord, which will no doubt help in ensuring improvements toquality and thereby facilitate increases in public transport’s share of the modal
split. Opening the door to private entities will most likely lead to an improved
cost-recovery ratio for public transport and better financial health overall for thesector. And general improvements in all aspects of public transport brought about
by these initiatives will create the right environment for actions to reduce traffic
congestion, a key goal in Dutch transport policy.

68

In developing policies to impact public transport’s market share, it will benecessary to take into account the particularly large cycling community in the
Netherlands. The target population for modal switching should be carefully identified in order to bring about a reduction in the number of cars on the road; carusage will not be impacted if new public transport passengers come from thecycling or pedestrian populations in cities.

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review TeamAs mentioned earlier, modal integration and interchange, exemplified by theextensive cycle parking at stations and initiatives such as “trein taxi”, remains a particularly strong feature of Dutch transport policy. Park and Ride “transferia” sites,such as those in Leiden and Amsterdam, appeared to have had less success up tonow, however, which suggests that attention needs to be given to the design andlocation of such sites and, in particular, to supporting measures such as bus priority systems and perhaps town centre parking restrictions and charges, which areneeded to make park and ride attractive to car users.
Introduction of competition in public transport
Given the objectives for improvements to public transport described above,and the need for greater overall efficiency in the system in order to meet thesegoals, the introduction of market dynamics in public transport seems quite appropriate for the Netherlands at this time. Competitive tendering will no doubt bringwith it opportunities for improved cost recovery (and therefore a reduced subsidy
burden), a greater sense of initiative on the municipal level, and possibilities for
an injection of innovative thinking into the system – outcomes which would serve
well the objectives set forth by the Central Government.
As recognised by Dutch authorities, however, the introduction of competitive
tendering will not address the entirety of challenges facing public transport in the
Netherlands. Care must be taken by the government to establish a regulatoryenvironment that will ensure high standards of quality (e.g., promptness and reliability) and safety, with emphasis on integration of ticketing and tariffs to theextent possible and interconnection between transport modes. The Netherlands
has a head-start in the latter areas and should ensure that those positive aspectsof the system are maintained.
The success of competitive tendering will depend on a number of factors,
among them, the effectiveness of the tendering procedure itself. The formulationof the tender, the evaluation of bids, and the writing of contracts are complicatedtasks, the effective completion of which is indispensable to the process as awhole. It is therefore necessary to engage the competence of professionals in four
particular fields: public transport planning, public transport operations, businesseconomics/finance, and law.
As mentioned in Section 6.4.1, the conservative time frame established forthe opening of tendering in urban and “district” transport – one-third of services
contracted out by 2003, followed by an assessment of experience before further
steps are taken – seems excessively cautious. While it does take time to re-orient
policy directions and change perspectives among public transport authorities andoperators, the time period allotted for this adaptation may in fact be counterproductive to the changes in sector dynamics and efficiency desired. Experience© ECMT 2001

69

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

in neighbouring countries in Europe shows that market forces can be effectively
and expediently introduced into public transport in considerably less time, withpotentially greater benefits as a result. There may be useful lessons to take fromthese experiences with regard to tendering in regional rail transport, proposals forwhich are now awaiting decision in Parliament.
6.4.4. Cycling policy
Cycling holds a unique, privileged status among modes of transport in the
Netherlands. It has for decades enjoyed an exceptionally high share in the modal
split, and has managed to hold onto its share – in some cities as much as 30% of
trips – despite growth in car usage. This quite remarkable record would suggestthat support over many years for cycling, in terms of both policy and infrastructure
provision, has been effective.
Indeed, due to the sheer numbers of bicycle users in urban areas, theNetherlands has for decades had to establish sound policies for the better integration of bicycles into road traffic and safety. Most recently, the SVV2 provided
for a series of measures to encourage bicycle use for trips of 5 to 10 kilometres.
These include provisions for the improvement of bicycle routes, safety, andparking conditions in and around public areas as well as the reduction of theft. In
addition, SVV2 sets out objectives for modal switching from car to bicycle use andfrom car to public transport and bicycle use.
Acknowledging the pressure from car use on cycling, the government – via theBicycle Master Plan (1990-1997) undertook a significant investment in the
improvement of facilities and conditions for bicycling to support the objectives
laid out in SVV2. With the VERDI agreement, greater responsibility for urban
bicycle policy was shifted to the Provinces and Municipalities. This decentralisation of policy notwithstanding, the importance of cycling throughout the country
will no doubt keep it on the Central Government’s transport agenda as well.
Persistent growth in car traffic has continued to put pressure on bicycle traffic,
however, and insodoing has heightened the safety risk to cyclists. Moreover, theftof bicycles, which has always been a concern in the Netherlands, remains animportant issue, as does parking availability and security, notably at stations.
Cycling will surely hold a key place, therefore, in the policy provisions currently
under development in the NVVP.

70

In the definition of this future policy, it may be important to carefully consider
the issue of targeting increases in the bicycle’s share of the modal split relative totargets for other forms of public transport. As mentioned earlier, increases inpublic transport’s share in urban travel should not be promoted at the expense of
the exceptional cycling base. There is, it would seem therefore, a rather delicate
balance to strike in setting objectives for modal split.

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review TeamWith car traffic continuing to rise in the Netherlands, the key policy challenge
for cycling in the years to come remains finding ways to not only maintain, but also
expand cycling activity in urban areas. This will necessarily entail, as the government recognises, careful attention to the safety and security issues associatedwith cycling in cities. It will also require consideration of how cycling fits in with thewhole range of urban travel objectives on the table in the Netherlands right now.
Many countries around the world are looking for ways to promote cycling as ameans of working towards sustainability in cities. There is much that thesecountries can learn from the targeted and concerted support of cycling in Dutch
transport policy, which has helped to create and sustain this somewhat singular
relationship that the Dutch have had with the bicycle for over a century now.
6.5. Spatial planning and land use
Spatial planning doctrine in the Netherlands is without a doubt one of thefinest examples of the cross-sectoral, multi-level policy planning embodied in theprinciples of urban sustainability. It is not surprising that the Dutch land-use
model is held up as exemplary around the world. Much can be learned from theirbold adoption of integrated objectives for the environment, personal mobility andland use in spatial planning, as well as their use of innovative policy mechanisms
to articulate those goals.
It is equally commendable that spatial planning policy has been implemented to the extent that is has with success, given the often divergent economic
and political interests of those impacted by the policies. In fact, one of the mostcompelling lessons to be learned from the Dutch experience might be howdifficult it really is – once the integrated, cross-sectoral, “sustainable” policies aredeveloped – to effectively translate these strategies into action.
6.5.1. VINEX
The current spatial planning scheme for the Netherlands, articulated in the
Supplement to the Fourth National Policy Document on Spatial Planning or
VINEX, provides a unique framework for integrated land-use planning in terms ofboth the philosophy on which the planning doctrine is based and its organisation.
Guided by a Compact Cities principle, VINEX sets out to achieve the concentration of urban development for housing, work and recreational sites necessary tominimise the need to travel and promote public transport use, cycling andwalking. It also calls for the preservation of rural areas.
The innovative, multilevel planning approach in VINEX is based on cooperative voluntary agreements between central, regional and municipal levels ofgovernment on a variety of issues including: housing development, public© ECMT 2001

71

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

transport projects, and location of businesses among others. The level of Central
Government funding of these development sites is also a subject of negotiation.
The relative success to date of this planning process is evidenced by the extension of its effective end-date from 2005 through 2010.
The successor to VINEX, the Fifth Spatial Planning Strategy, which is set tobegin in 2001, will retain the Compact Cities concept, and carry it further to address
the evolution of polycentric or “network” cities. From both organisational andconceptual points of view, therefore, VINEX appears to be a robust policy tool.
Given the complexity of the VINEX framework, which involves the juxtaposition of different administrative levels, cross-sectoral agendas, and co-operation
between private and public entities, it is not surprising that implementation todate has been difficult, though it has not been without successful results. Harmonising the schedule of housing development schemes and public transport accessibility; reconciling the interests of private developers with the strategic objectivesof the plan, maintaining specific quantitative targets for housing development in achanging economic environment are perhaps just several of the hurdles thisstrategy may encounter. The Fifth Spatial Planning Strategy will no doubt carryforward and build on the VINEX experience to further improve opportunities for
its successful implementation.
6.5.2. ABC Policy
Set forth in the VINEX plan as the location policy for businesses and facilities,
the so-called ABC policy has been the subject of much attention and debate bothin and outside of the Dutch borders. Widely applauded in terms of its conceptual
development, it also has been hampered by many of the difficulties inherent toimplementing strategic plans that involve and impact a variety of different administrative levels, economic sectors and interests.
The ABC policy is a national land-use planning concept. Its implementation,
however rests entirely with the cities. Conceptually, it is bold and innovative. The
use of parking availability as a mechanism to drive business and commercial
development in urban areas provides, in principle, a solid link between urban
travel objectives and spatial planning. The incentives theoretically are on target;
in practice, however, they appear to fall prey to economic pressures, which findloopholes, weakening the impact of the strategy overall.
The success of ABC appears to be primarily impeded by a number of key
weaknesses in the policy, among them:72• The regulation applies only for building permits requested since the ABC
policy came into effect in 1990. Land under development prior to that time
is not affected.

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review Team• Whereas responsibility for implementation of the policy resides at the local
level, Municipalities are not obliged to apply the ABC restrictions. Given
that the strict parking norms, especially as concerns the A locations, present
a disincentive to some companies to locate in those areas, Municipalities
seem to be buckling under pressure to attract business, applying the ABCpolicy in a less stringent way or not at all, in order to compete with eachother. Indeed only 20% of the municipalities make use of this demand
management tool. As a result, A-locations are very often the site of public
service activities instead of private enterprises.
As an alternative or complement to this regulatory approach, it might be interesting to see whether a more consensus-seeking tack – which has successfully
brought local governments and businesses together in the past for large development schemes – would lead to more effective development of A-locations. The“Incentives Programme for the Intensive Use of Space” might support such endeavours. It might also be worth considering linking the ABC framework with a parking
charge policy or area access fee policy involving all large producers of traffic.
6.5.3. The Green HeartIn spite of the spatial planning context that favours a concentrated, activityintense use of space for residential and business development, the demand formore dispersed forms of single family housing and for living in attractive landscapes is nevertheless ever-present, notably as concerns the rural heartland of theRandstadt, the so-called Green Heart. Living in this Green Heart is particularly
appealing to many inhabitants of the area because it provides easy accessibility
to any city in the Randstad.
The status and future of this region has been widely debated over the last few
decades, both in terms of its geographical designation and as concerns policies for
its development. Indeed, the Central Government, Parliament and the Dutch
population itself remain deeply divided on how to treat the Green Heart: somegroups oppose any development at all; others see benefit in its development;
and still other “pragmatists” find themselves somewhere between the two poles.
It would seem, therefore, that there exists a certain degree of indecision andambiguity about what approach to take relative to the Green Heart, despite thecurrent policy for its development which was articulated in 1990.
Recent approval of national investment financing into a high-speed train
traversing the Green Heart may demonstrate that current spatial planning policy
concerning the region is perhaps not strong enough to withstand pressure fordevelopment of infrastructure projects to increase accessibility to the region.
Alphen is a case in point here: local desire to increase accessibility by car to thecity was so strong that national funding was recently acquired for two highway
projects linking Alphen with Amsterdam and Leiden. These infrastructure projects
then naturally facilitate further urban development in the region.

© ECMT 200173

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

Given the unique nature of the Green Heart, and in order to ensure a sustainable path for its future, it would seem beneficial to pursue ongoing efforts to clarify the long-term spatial planning framework for the region, taking better into
account the existing pressures to develop the region around existing infrastructure, and the desires of the region’s inhabitants for better accessibility.
6.6. Environment and Safety
6.6.1. Environment
The Netherlands has a long-standing history of concern for the environment
and environmental activism. Since the first environmental legislation dating
to 1950s and 1960s, the establishment of VROM in 1982, and the preparation of
the first National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP) in 1989, the Netherlands hasdeveloped an increasingly more comprehensive and integrated environmental
regulatory structure involving all sectors of the economy. As concerns transport,
the ongoing growth in traffic volumes is putting increasing pressure on theenvironment, notably in urban areas. As a result, traffic-related environmental
problems are of persistent concern to both transport and environmental policy
makers in the Netherlands.
The SVV2 highlights a number of areas of focus for “environment andamenity” in transport policy, among them : reductions in NOx and unburnedhydrocarbons, CO2 , noise, and fragmentation of rural areas, as well as safety.31 The
specific targets set forth in the SVV2 for improvement in these areas are generally
in line with those outlined for traffic and transport policy in the National Environmental Policy Plan of 1989 and NMP 2 (1994).32
A third NMP has recently been published (beginning of 1999), which will guideenvironmental strategy in the Netherlands through 2003. Given the inter-ministerial
co-operation currently in place in the development of NVVP, it is assumed that there
will be close synergy in the recommendations set forth in each of these documents
as concerns the impact of inter alia urban travel on the environment.

74

During the Review, environmental problems were less of a focus in discussions than issues of transport and land use policy. This may have been the casebecause local air quality, a preoccupation in urban travel policy development inmany other countries, was considered less of a direct factor in urban travel policyin the municipalities and regions visited. The impression given during the Review
was that environmental legislation over the last couple of decades has effectively
addressed local air pollution problems.33 Noise from urban traffic was cited as anenvironmental concern for local authorities. And the overall impact of traffic andtravel activity on CO2 targets was a key issue on the national level, but was seen as
only a minimal factor in policy making on a local level.

© ECMT 2001

Analysis of Review TeamAs regards the transport sector’s contribution to CO2, the Climate Policy
Implementation Plan appears to be quite comprehensive. Its successful implementation will, however, no doubt depend on the legislative approval of a numberof the measures, among them, the road pricing scheme, and the overall impact in
the Netherlands of the EU-Commission – ACEA agreement, which remains a question for all countries relying on this measure in the context of the national climatechange plans.
Because the NVVP will be focusing in part on “quality of life”, it can beassumed that noise disturbance might figure among the priorities in the development of the policy plan. Costs of implementing some of the more technicalmeasures (e.g., introduction of quieter road surfacing) may be an issue for review,
as perhaps are the complexities involved in using decibel levels as targets inurban areas, as is the case in SVV2, given the potential impact on location policy.
6.6.2. Safety
As evidenced by their impressive road safety record over the last decade, theNetherlands has clearly committed itself to reducing traffic-related accidents, andassuring overall road safety in the long term. Traffic injuries and fatalities have
dropped substantially over this period ; as a result, the Netherlands has one of
the most favourable safety records in Europe. The Dutch government has not
stopped with these positive results, however. Policy-makers are further pushing tointegrate the notion of sustainability in safety policy, and insodoing, assuring asustained minimisation of risk in road transport. This forward-thinking, long-term
approach to safety is particularly commendable.
The Permanently Safe programme (1997-2001) is bold in that it appears to
break down existing policy structures to better integrate the notion of safety. Its
implementation will therefore no doubt be complex, and will require theco-operation and support of transport administrations and authorities on all levelsof government. Based on a series of agreements between Central Governmentand regional and local authorities, and preceded by demonstration projects
designed to garner support for the idea, the strategy seems to be structured insuch a way, however, that chances for consensus and co-ordination may be quitefavourable, especially given that the interest of safety and security on the roads isan interest common to all parties. It is quite clear in any case that the Permanently
Safe strategy demonstrates the commitment of the Netherlands to sustained
improvements in road safety over the long term. Given its already admirable
safety record, this is particularly commendable.
6.7. Conclusions
In this important time for transport policy development in the Netherlands,
policy makers have the benefit of a long-standing, widely acclaimed history of© ECMT 200175

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

strategic planning to build on. Indeed, the Dutch experience shows an exemplary
institutional ability to pull together the variety of sectors and levels of government in a common effort to develop innovative, integrated policy strategies.
Though certainly not without difficulties, it appears that policy planning in the
Netherlands is based on relatively open discussions among institutions andstakeholders and efforts for good communication and transparency. Indeed in the
recent period of evaluation of the SVV2, the Dutch appear to have examined with
objectivity and clarity the problems of existing policy, and demonstrated admirable ability to adjust and adapt policy approaches to steer transport developments
in more sustainable directions.
The impressive Dutch tradition of consensus building in policy making has
enabled the definition of sound policy strategies; it has also played a significant
role in making these policies more difficult to implement. Preparation of the NVVP
seems to be based on lucid thinking with regard to sources of implementationdifficulties, and desire to address these challenges in this next round of policy
development.
The following general findings of the Review team might be considered in thisprocess:• Striking the right balance in decentralisation will be essential to the successof future transport policy. While maintaining overall planning authority for
the Randstad at a national level, decentralisation of financial streams in
addition to planning for urban transport should be pursued.
• Greater clarity and transparency with regard to the relative roles of theRegions and Provinces would be helpful to urban travel policy-making in
general.
• The involvement of market forces in public transport should be encouraged, and an accelerated time frame for competitive tendering considered.
This, along with more-targeted incentive mechanisms, should go a long way
toward improving the efficiency of the public transport system.
• While recognising the political difficulties involved in implementation,
development of a sound pricing strategy should continue to be pursued as
an important instrument for reducing congestion and containing further
traffic growth.
• To continue the progress made in reducing the negative environmental
impacts of traffic and transport in cities, further efforts should focus on noise
and CO2 abatement.

76

With these perspectives considered, and with the strong Dutch planning
tradition as a base, policy makers can trace an economically sound and environmentally healthy future for urban travel in the Netherlands.

© ECMT 2001

Notes

1. Please see Chapter 6.5.3 for further discussion of the Green Heart.
2. The forthcoming NVVP for the Netherlands is founded on revised growth scenarios inthese areas. Please see Chapter 5 for further discussion of the plan.
3. Transport by light vans is not included in this figure.
4. European Renaissance Scenario, which predicts economic recovery in Europe accompanied by successful European integration.
5. Please see Chapter 5 for discussion of policies and measures.
6. Please see Chapter 5.2 for discussion of land use policies.
7. Please see Chapter 5.3 for discussion of environmental policies.
8. Includes transport in the industry sector and covers road, railway, air, internal navigation, pipeline transport, and non-specified transport.
9. The regional authority is specifically involved in transport policy and planning.
10. The exact number of municipalities varies somewhat according to the source. 538 is theofficial number at the time of the Peer Review in June 1999.
11. Please see Chapter 5.1 for further discussion of the SVV2.
12. Please see Chapter 5.1.3 for further examination of decentralisation plans under theforthcoming NVVP.
13. Please see Chapter 5.1.4 for discussion of financing and funding procedures.
14. These are examined in Chapters 5.1-5.3.
15. Chapter 5 examines policy development in these areas, with emphasis on the ways inwhich sectoral priorities and objectives intersect in strategic plans and work their way
down into individual policies and measures.
16. Please see the following section as well as Chapter 5.1.7 for an examination of efficiency
initiatives and introduction of market forces in public transport.
17. The analysis of the ECMT peer experts related to road pricing that are found in
Chapter 6.4 of this report, were prepared prior to the replacement of Rekeningrijden with
Spitstarief.
18. Further discussion of the “ABC Policy” will be undertaken in Chapter 5.2.
19. Including 1.5 billion for rail infrastructure maintenance and 2.5 billion in subsidies for
public transport operational costs.
20. Please see Chapter 5.1.6 for discussion of parking policy under SVV2.

© ECMT 2001

77

National Peer Review: the Netherlands

21. The European Commission and the European Automobile Manufacturers Association(ACEA) signed an agreement in 1998 in which ACEA commits itself to, among others,reaching average CO 2 emissions of 140 g/km by 2008 for all new cars sold in theEuropean Union. This would reduce new car fuel consumption by 25% comparedwith 1995 levels.
22. NMP3 cites plans for a revised objective for severe noise nuisance for the period 2020-2030.
According to V&W, discussions on this are ongoing.
23. According to VROM, approximately 80% of the fleet is now equipped with catalytic
converters.
24. A side effect of the introduction of catalytic converters has been a doubling of N2Oemissions. In the new Climate Policy Implementation Plan, a provision has been madeto address this increase.
25. Please see Section 6.4.1 for a discussion of financing of infrastructure and transport.
26. Please refer to Section 6.4.3 for consideration of tendering issues in public transport.
27. Discussion of public transport financing is covered in Section 6.4.1 and more generally
in Section 6.4.3.
28. The ECMT team visit to the Netherlands and the preparation of this analysis took placewhen the Rekeningrijden road pricing scheme was still under consideration. It thus
preceded the subsequent replacement of Rekeningrijden with the Spitztarief scheme,
discussed briefly in Chapter 5.1 of this report.
29. Please see Section 6.5 for consideration of the spatial planning aspects of ABC.
30. This is not necessarily unusual. There is wide consensus that improvements to public
transport alone do not, in general, suffice for significant reductions in car use.
31. NOx, CO2, noise and safety are considered in this Review.
32. NMP2 confirmed the objectives for 2000 set in the first Plan and proposed new policy
mechanisms to reach those targets.
33. There may be regional differentiation on this issue. Climatic conditions and type of
economic activity may play a role in determining the importance of local air quality in acity or region.

78© ECMT 2001

Bibliography

Annema Jan Anne and van Wee, Bert (1999),“The Role of Research in Kyoto-related climate policy in the Netherlands”, National
Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), and Utrecht University, Facultyof Geographical Sciences, the Netherlands. 11 October 1999.
Boot et al. (1999),“The Long Road Towards the Implementation of Road Pricing: The Dutch Expertience”,
prepared by Boot, Jos, Boot, Pieter and Verhoef, Erik for the ECMT Workshop on
Managing Car Use for Sustainable Urban Travel, Dublin, Ireland 1-2 December 1999.
Cheung, Francis and Hoen, Arjen’t (1996),“Relationships Between Transport and Land Use in the Netherlands”, Paper presented
at the PTRC 24th European Transport Forum, Proceedings of Seminar B: Transport Policy andits Implementation, 2-6 September 1996. PTRC Education and Research Services Ltd.
London: 1996.
ECMT (1998),
Transport Infrastructure in ECMT Countries: Profiles and Prospects (Monographs), ECMT,Paris: 1998.
ECMT (1999),
Investment in Transport Infrastructure 1985-1995, Volume 2: Country Studies, ECMT, Paris: 1999.
Galle, Maaike and Modderman, Ettjen (1997),“Vinex: National Spatial Planning Policy in the Netherlands during the Nineties”,
Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Vol. 12, No.1 Special Issue, Delft
University Press: 1997.
Kwikkers (1999),“Sustainable traffic and transport”, a background report prepared for the ECMTNational Peer Review of Urban Travel Policy in the Netherlands. Communicatie andManagement Kwikkers, The Hague: May 1999.
Needham, Barrie and Zwanikken, Tim (1997),“The Green Heart and the dynamics of doctrine”, Netherlands Journal of Housing and the
Built Environment, Vol. 12, No.1 Special Issue, Delft University Press: 1997.
OECD (1995),
OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Netherlands, OECD, Paris: 1999.
OECD (1999),
OECD Economic Outlook, December 1999, OECD, Paris: December 1999.
OECD (1999),
OECD Environmental Data: Compendium 1999, OECD, Paris: 1999.

© ECMT 2001

79

National Peer Review: the NetherlandsOECD (2000a),
OECD Economic Surveys, Netherlands, OECD, Paris: March 2000.
OECD (2000b),
OECD Main Economic Indicators, OECD, Paris: February 2000.
Priemus, Hugo et al. (1997),
Introduction, Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Vol. 12, No.1 Special
Issue, Delft University Press: 1997.
Ruige et al. (1998),
Recommendation report, Comparative research: Appendices F2: The development of indicators to facilitate budget transfers from the national level to the local level: the Netherlands as an example,
October 1998: www.tacis-moe.ru/report/comp_research/f2_text.htm.
Schepel, Steven (1999),“Sustainable Road Safety: a Comprehensive Approach in the Netherlands towards
Taming Traffic or Creating the Conditions to make Cars Compatible with Common RoadUsers such as Children and Senior Cyclists”, Ministry of Transport, Public Works andWater Management, The Hague: 1999.
UN-ECE (1999),
Annual Bulletin of Transport Statistics for Europe and North America, United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe, New York and Geneva: 1999.
V&W et al. (1989-90),
Second Transport Structure Plan (Part D: Government Decision): Transport in a sustainable society,
Paper submitted to Parliament on behalf of the Minister of Transport and Public Works
and the Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment as a Cabinet
document, Second Chamber of the State-General, Session 1989-1990.
V&W et al. (1999a),
Perspectives Memo for Traffic and Transport, Consultation document of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planningand Environment, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture, NatureManagement and Fisheries, provincial and local governments, and Framework Act
Regions, February 1999.
V&W (1999b),
The Dutch Bicycle Master Plan: Description and evaluation in an historical context. Ministry ofTransport, Public Works and Water Management, Directorate-General for Passenger
Transport: March 1999.
V&W (1999c),
Annual Report on Transport in the Netherlands 1998, Ministry of Transport, Public Works andWater Management, August 1999.
VROM (1998),
The National Environmental Policy Plan 3, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning andEnvironment of the Netherlands, The Hague: 1998.

80

VROM (1999),“Planning the Netherlands: Strategic Planning Principles for the Fifth National Policy
Document on Spatial Planning”, a abbreviated English version of the document
De ruimte van Nederland, adopted by the Dutch cabinet on 22 January 1999, Ministry of
Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment of the Netherlands, The Hague: 1999.

© ECMT 2001

Bibliography

Internet sites
Amsterdam (Web),Internet site of the city of Amsterdam: www.amsterdam.nl
Atlapedia (Web),Internet site: Atlapedia, Latimer Clarke Corporation Pty Ltd.: 1993-1998:
www.atlapedia.com/online/countries/netherla.htm
CBS (Web),Internet site of Statistics Netherlands: www.cbs.nl/en/figures/keyfigures/sbv0599x.htm
KNAG (Web),Internet site of the Royal Dutch Geographical Society: www.knag.nl/english/
MINFIN (Web),Internet site of the Ministry of Finance of the Netherlands:
www.minfin.nl/uk/budget/home_bud.htm
NETH-EMB (Web),Internet site of the Royal Netherlands Embassy in Washington, DC:
www.netherlands-embassy.org/fie_hltenv.html
The Hague (Web),Internet site of the city of The Hague: www.denhaag.nl/dsoint/
V&W (Web),Internet site of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management:
www.minvenw.nl/cend/dvo/international/english/brief.html

81© ECMT 2001

AnnexThe Peer Review Team
Peer reviewers

Representatives of the ECMT Secretariat

Mr Peter GÜLLER
Managing Director
SYNERGO
P.O. Box 4925
CH-8022 ZURICH
Switzerland
Telephone (41-1) 211 40 12
Telefax (41-1) 212 39 07
e-mail: synergo@dial.eunet.ch

Mr Jack SHORT
Deputy Secretary General
ECMT2, rue André Pascal
75776 Paris Cedex 16
Telephone (33-1) 45 24 97 18
Telefax (33-1) 45 24 97 42
e-mail: jack.short@oecd.org

Mr Peter Mc CARTHY
Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Regions
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
GB-LONDON SW1P 4DR
United Kingdom
Telephone (44-171) 676 2230
Telefax (44-171) 676 2207
e-mail: peter_mccarthy@detr.gsi.gov.uk

Ms Mary CRASS
Consultant – Environmental Affairs
ECMT
2, rue André Pascal
75776 Paris Cedex 16
Telephone (33-1) 45 24 13 24
Telefax (33-1) 45 24 97 42
e-mail: mary.crass@oecd.org

Mr Bo E. PETERSON
Associate professor
Lund University
Lund Institute of Technology
Department of Traffic Planning
Box 118
LUND S-221 00
SwedenTelephone (46-46) 222 91 25
Telefax (46-46) 123 272

83© ECMT 2001

OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16
PRINTED IN FRANCE(75 2001 02 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1328-0 – No. 51615 2001