Moving People: Traffic Congestion, Road Building, and Sustainable Transportation Solutions in Urban Areas, страница 18

Building policies that promote sustainable urban transportation may be easier to recommend than to put into practice (Worldwatch Institute, 2001).  However, the federal government of the United States, acting through the FHWA, could fund any sustainable transportation projects for cities and metropolitan regions; these cities would receive funds that come from nationally taxed sources.  Similar national programs are already in effect and working effectively at the FHWA.  For example, the Highways for Life program at the FHWA has a similar structure to the one proposed, but it has the overall goal to create “long-lasting highways using innovative technologies and practices”. (Highways for Life, 2006).  Why not introduce a program at FHWA to promote sustainable transportation networks and have the DC area operate under a pilot project within this program?  A Washington, DC pilot project under a lead agency could propose one or more sustainable transportation strategies that bring economic, environmental, and social benefits to the region.  If successful, the FHWA program could expand to benefit urban areas across the United States.  Developed and developing nations could consider similar, governmentfunded structures to promote urban transportation sustainability.

Promoting sustainable transportation around the world will help mitigate the environmental effects from past transport-related blunders.  However, this will require strong support across government bodies.  The benefits from the simple solutions noted outweigh the costs from laborious commutes across diverse metropolitan regions.  Fitting the proper solutions to diverse, urban locations will be an ongoing challenge in reaching the goal of sustainable transportation.  If all levels of government can work within a definitive framework to fund and promote urban sustainable transport, then the goal may be within reach before too long.

Bibliography

1.  American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2000). AAAS Atlas of Population and Environment. University of California Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.

2.  American Rivers. (2002). “Paving Our Way to Water Shortages: How Sprawl Aggravates the

Effects of Drought.” Natural Resources Defense Council and Smart Growth America.

3.  American Society of Civil Engineers. (2004). Sustainable Engineering Practice: An

Introduction. ISBN 0-7844-0750-9.

4.  Bare, T. (2003). Recharacterizing the Debate: A Critique of Environmental Democracy and an Alternative Approach to the Urban Sprawl Dilemma. Virginia Environmental Law Journal 21: 455-501.

5.  Bayliss, D. (2000, April). Urban Development and its Implications for Mobility. International

Union of Public Transport (UITP) Mexico Conference.

6.  Beatley, T. (2004). Planning for Sustainability in European Cities: A Review of Practices in

Leading Cities. The Sustainable Urban Development Reader. Routledge, London.

7.  Beatley, T., & R. Collins. (2000). Smart Growth and Beyond: Transitioning to a Sustainable

Society. Virginia Environmental Law Journal 19: 287-322.

8.  Beimborn, E. et al. (1999). Alternative State Approaches to Transportation/Land Use

Interactions. Center for Urban Transportation Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

9.  Bengston, D. N., et al. (2004). Public Policies for Managing Urban Growth and Protecting Open Space: Policy Instruments and Lessons Learned in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning 69: 271-286.