www.cero.nu
Robèrt, M. (2009). International Journal of Sustainable Transportation Vol. 3, No. 1
What is CERO?
• Developed for an energy sector with large complexity:
a) travel behaviour needs to be modelled explicitly
b) need for tailor-made cost-benefit assessments
c) a tool for benchmarking to spread good examples
• Engages a broad range of experts and researchers:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Statisticians
Economists
Behaviourists
Environmental consultants
Technical implementers
Change managers
• Developed in a doctoral thesis at KTH:
”Mobility Management and Climate Change Policies”
Developed with empirical support
from large organizations
Macro economic effects from 10%
trafic reductions in Stockholm county
(Robèrt och Jonsson, 2006)
-EUR 75 000 000 accident costs
-EUR 36 000 000 emission costs
-EUR 57 000 000 in vehicle time costs
( = EUR 170 000 000/year)
Why setting climate targets for
employee travel?
Travel costs and emissions walk hand i hand
- Short-term cost cut potential: 100 000-500 000 Euro/1000 employees and year
Employee travel costs and
emissions at the County
Council of Kalmar
- “Indirect values” of showing best practice
IT-sector, transport sector, energy sector, public authorities…
CERO is based on backcasting
Mapping
Travel policies
Target
Mapping
- Employee commute trips are in general far most dominant
Benchmarking
A trigger for internal processing and
stakeholder dialogues
(benchmarking positions are fictitious)
Ton/pers
Sturup
6,0
5,5
Norrköping
5,0
4,5
Landvetter
Arlanda
40 000
50 000
60 000
70 000
Kr/pers
Mapping of individual preferences
Car-sharing
Taxi
Problem with climate targets:
% - reductions are appropriate for emission
audits but hard to follow-up in policy terms
%CO2
Transformation of the backcasting target
%CO2
X 1j, 2 
Yˆt  uimj simj
i
j
m
1 
j
j
j 
 s (ui1  ui 2 ) 
j  i1
N1  i

Modules of tailor made 1% CO2-reductions
(commute trips)
• 31 car commuters switch to public transport
• Train tickets to 4 commuters with longest
commute distance
• Encourage 38 car commuters to renewable
fuel cars
• Allow telecommuting at least once a month
• Offer eco-driving to at least ¼ of staff
• Encourage at least 191 car commuters with
commute distance 0,5-6km to cycle
Modules of tailor made 1% CO2-reductions
(business trips)
• Replace 7% of business trips by car to public transport
Annual cost reduction 1,1 Mkr
• Replace 4% of business trips by car to virtual meetings
Annual cost reduction 2,3 Mkr
• Replace all business trips with private car to car sharing
Costs unchanged
• Replace 2% of aviation trips abroad to virtual meetings
Annual cost reduction 540.000 kr
• Replace 3% av domestic aviation to train
Annual cost reduction 215.000 kr
An example of a policy package targeting 40% CO2reductions…
Policy business trips
Substitution rate to
alternative
CO2 reduction Potential cost reduction
(million SEK)
Car to public transport
Car to car-sharing (bio-fuelled)
Car to video-conference
Aviation to videoconference
Work commute trips
19%
24%
34%
33%
Number of car commuters
switching mode
2,5%
2,5%
5,0%
5,0%
1,0
0,6
5,7
3,5
Private car to Public transport
Private car to Telework
long-distance commute to railway
Petrol car to bio-fuelled car
Total
87
76
35
212
5,0%
5,0%
5,0%
10,0%
40%
10,8
Labour productivity effects
j
M
1
,2 
j j
j j 
ˆ
P1, 2 
  ti1 i1  ti 2 i 2 
j
N1  i

The CERO-process in practice
Three backcasting steps
1. Principal level – Reach consensus on the target
description
CO2
Economy
Employee acceptance
2. Scenario level – Select an optimized travel
scenario from the smorgasbord
3. Plan of action level – Selection of measures that
correspond to the optimized travel scenario
Thank you!
[email protected]