ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 พ.ย. 2012
- It's an unfortunate reality in nearly every major city-road congestion, especially during rush hours. Jonas Eliasson reveals how subtly nudging just a small percentage of drivers to stay off major roads can make traffic jams a thing of the past. (Filmed at TEDxHelvetia.)
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/translate
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Did anybody else get totally enraged when he showed the picture of what traffic looked like on Jan 3rd to the audience but the camera didn't show it?
Very poor video production, would have been caught if even one person watched the video in full before uploading. Sad.
really annoyed me
It's the picture on 8:06.
Image of Jan 3 shown at 8.28
I need that for a school project :/
"Why are people wanting to keep a charge on something that used to be free?"
Stockholm Syndrome.
Most underrated comment ever lmao
Excellent talk! Concise, well-informed and eye-opening!
"When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
-Futurama Galactic Entity
In NYC it's almost $10 just to go over the bridge. Hasn't stopped many people.
Even though this guy couldn't figure out where these people went, there has to be other options available or people will just end up choosing to bite the bullet and pay whatever it takes to do what the need to do.
@@TimothyFish they most likely just shifted their travel time to a less congested (and therefore lower toll) time. Or they took the bus a little more often. Basically is everyone makes tiny changes the cumulative result can be huge
Great talk. Really showed me how effective this method can be. I can't wait to see the results when it gets implemented in Gothenburg in a few months.
You are right, stopping (like keeping tension of road under control) plays very huge role on this.
But also the little trick behind this is to keep "unncessary" cars at their home. Or to poke people to use public transport... if you make bridge cost 2€ and public transport 1€, people will stop using cars.
even having public transport at the same cost as the toll would be making sense because A: you don't have to pay for insurance, registration, maintenance, fuel, licensing of said class of vehicle, stress of driving... those amount to far greater savings than just the toll alone, that would amount to about 10 euro a day inside their pocket, just remember they have to pay those fees even if they aren't using their vehicle... with public transit - unless you have a subscription then you won't need to pay anything beyond what you are using which is a great cost savings strategy.
Yes, you may have your vehicle for the weekends and fun times when you just want to have fun but wouldn't it be much more fun if it was actually without stressful traffic on roads that are fun instead of seeing that same road as a commute?
Fascinating, excellent video.
I'm looking for this clip for the longest time. Thus alas! This was shown to my class during my college days and it's so informative in a sense on how to improve the transportation system.
thanks you gave me the brilliant idea
Thank you.
I forgot about the cold! you have a great point.
In germany they have a system called mitfahr meaning travel with.
You register with a company as a driver or passenger, then when your going some place ether to work or taking a trip you let them know where you will be and how much space you have, they then arrange people to ride with you and that covers petrol etc.
Its a fantastic system I have travelled all over Germany for pennies and met some really nice people along the way
So Uber/Lyft done correctly.
@@ericdew2021 indeed!
Amazing talk.
How amazing how the swedish accent and speach melody comes through his english !!
Yeah ... ?
I, of course, do as well. My point was how they fit together.
With the internet and other technology a lot people can be working from home instead of helping create gridlock.
Its really very simple, you only commute for your first year at a job after which you should have gotten enough training be proficient at your job and company evaluates your performance and tells you to work from home.
With the use of Voip, VNC and email, cheap internet, headsets and other technology a company can set up a system that would make working from home very easy and cheap.
If people would just quit fucking tailgating the problem would largely disappear! This would prevent a sustained wave in the traffic.
PissShiversss that's not true. It isn't brake checking that causes the traffic jam. It's ridiculous to say traffic always comes to a fucking halt because someone being tailgated decided to quickly tap their brakes. Usually the trigger is a curve in the road or merging points. Also, When people tailgate, they are forced to tap their brakes every now and then because there are always speed variations, which causes the chain reaction. People always tailgate even when the cars in front of them aren't going that slow. What exactly was false in my last post?
***** travelling at highway speeds, it would have to become a very large gap before it was too much. Just following the 3 second rule would suffice. It's not an issue of response time it's due to the fact that people have to brake at all.
Always a brilliant strategy to alienate part of your viewing audience early on! 👍
bravo!
He's on the right line here, because once they introduced a parking charge in town there was plenty of room where before you had to queue to park.
Traffic isn’t bad. You are the traffic.
A good rule of thumb is "congestion rates", which can reduce congestion rates by as much as 20 percent in Stockholm. It is possible that some people choose to avoid rush hour to avoid congestion to avoid congestion rates. Maybe they choose to go more to make their money safe
Superb presentation. I recommend anyone interested in this topic research the efforts that Singapore has made in this area. You think Stockholm gets congested? Take a look at Singapore.
Great! This problem, and many others are solved.
awesome talk :D
Watching this while stuck on a bus in traffic.
4:58 oh gosh, mr nerd pls stop being so adorbs, i can't handle
It's a band-aid method. Traffic will continue to increase as more people live within the same area. In Sao Paulo, Brazil, they have a system that guarantees that 20% of cars won't be on the street during certain times (based on the last number on the license plate, look it up). Did it help? Not really - I was there recently and it's as bad as I remember it from 15 years ago. The main problem with traffic is that everyone needs to do the same thing at the same time. There are ways around that.
Shifting shifts would probably help. I bet some companies have conventional shifts for a mix of purposes (keeping tradition, supporting employees with families, calling or meeting with with other businesses during the day). The question remains: how to incentivize employers to run different shifts.
Also, around here morning rush hour already lasts roughly from 7am to 10am. We would only gain so much from scattering (a subset of) shifts, and then we'd be back in the same dilemma.
Stockholm - 5+bridges most congested, congestion charge ~$2, non-linear vehicle# and travel time graph (a little reduc. in # cars → lot reduc. in travel time), initially
Yes, maybe limit it to the local area residents or who work there. Something like that works well in estonia.
he basically said that if governemt sets a fee on a road which has traffic jams, people will have to pay for it or take a longer and not optimal road to the work (and pay more for fuel) or start using public transportation (which takes more time)
"Uh de, this is Vladmir, who is in charge of bread supply." I would love to get this phone call heheh
OMG...the ramifications of this are amazing.
I live a life without any regular traffic. I work from home so I rarely see the problems that could be solved with a tweak to the traffic lights.
I got jammed at a north Dallas intersection (N bound Preston ahd GBT) and wound up having to skip to the next intersection off the turnpike when I got stuck half way across the intersection. The intersection was badly mis-timed, and ten minutes of reprogramming would make it so people backed up onto the turnpike wouldn't have been stopped on a 70mph
Once again: What happened to the people who stopped using the road? People who couldn't (or wouldn't) pay the price, were forced to somehow, someway think of a "solution": Perhaps changing office-location, quitting the job, stop school, who knows? Without knowing more about those people (and perhaps the hardships they went through) I wouldn't call this approach a complete success.
You're driving me crazy!
thats the point...
its discouraging people from driving so much by imposing relatively cheap fines that add up, and you can choose to be apart of either the 80% or the 20%
its not unlike consumption taxes on alcohol and tobacco
but unlike those taxes, this actually fulfills its purpose, it lowers congestion, not to mention the positive effect it has on the environment
classic literature principle: show not tell. When people are shown what change looks like, they don't even need to be told to change.
Vancouver could possibly benefit from this as its very similar to Stockholm.
right now we only have one current toll bridge (brand new) which is on a major highway... the port mann and the potential for another (replacing the tunnel with a bridge...) which would also be tolled, which was already tolled once before
whats happening? most drivers avoid the port mann instead opting to take the older much dated putello bridge. if were gonna do this we should do so similar to stockholm every bridge/tunnel have a small "congestion" charge for peak periods rather then tolling single new bridges 5 bucks a pop.
plus our transit system needs better management. we recently had a vote to increase sales tax to 0.5 to improve transit... no side won largely because no one trusts our transit organizers... too heavy management makes way too much does too little and is not stating to see cuts within the organization... IMO needs a complete rehaul for this to work
food for thought
Agreed. But like I've said, so far no one has came up with anything better, so we have to work with what we've got.
We've already got congestion charging in London, and while it worked originally you can't evade the real problem forever: that more and more people are going to use roads over time. Charging is a short term measure to a long term problem.
Take a look at ERP system in Singapore (Electronic Road Pricing).
Don't know which country started out first, not bothered either. Point is that this is a valid method.
You'll be pleased to know, my arm pits are genuine sir.
This reminds me of Brave New World. "Nudge the people..."
2012 this video was made. Still hasn't been solved
We need this in South Africa
So true, especially in Johannesburg. Im from Cape Town never traffic here.
+Keryn Links wut. There's crazy traffic everyday... in most of Cape Town.
I think he should have included figures on public transportation usage in Stockholm and as explained how its managed. The big question is how easily reproducible are the results in car dominated cities.
I agree. I have a thick swedish accent when I speak english, but its prefectly understadable unless I start to talk really fast. Its kind of like a american with a thick american accent start to speak spanish. As he/she doesn't have a latino accent it can be harder for latin americans to understand his/her spanish, dosen't change how well he/her can speak spanish however.
I think a lot of people in the comment section are missing a crucial point. For this to work properly you need to have a viable alternative to car traffic. In Stockholm we have very decent public transportation, and the choice of whether or not to take the car to work is mostly a matter of slight extra comfort.
4:28 cheers!
Those 20% of people didn't disappear from one day to the other, they used other means of transportation instead. The 20% didn't quit commuting to work the exact week after this measure was taken, which he showed.
I certainly agree with you, and I must say I was disappointed when the exposer said that the authorities were unable to find out who was affected and how. My (frankly too optimistic) guess is that they may have started using public transportation or using cars collectivity to go to school or work, but I admit that is only a guess and proper surveys must be performed to judge the output of this program.
Realistically, people did various things, including combining various trips. Rather than driving one day for dry cleaning and another day to buy some groceries and another day for a Dr. appointment, for example, you could combine all the trips into the city into a single day. If enough people do this, it cuts down on traffic congestion _quite_ _significantly_ compared to business as usual.
Well, commerce (at least retail) and food require labor at a certain time of day because people like to shop and eat out at certain times of day.. of course, online shopping can reduce this necessity.
As for manufacturing and doing other work around-the-clock, I guess that depends on finding enough workers who prefer working at night to spending a long time commuting, right?
"The first day with the charges looked like this"
*camer pans to Eliasson and stays on him almost til the end of the slide*
Brilliant editing there :/
The best traffic solution it let it flow until it bore or unable to flow or seek other route
That's also what town planners assume, but in fact, traffic lights actually cause accidents. In the vast majority of cases, roundabouts and traditional junctions are not only more efficient than traffic lights, but they are safer.
Guy looks like he's gonna serve me tea and biscuits
The bigger issue here is what is the "right thing"? You see in the bread example, no one makes the decision about what the right thing is because it is controlled by many small choices of individuals. With traffic the problem is really that road use and financial cost are not really linked. Therefore the cost is in time spent in traffic jams. When someone outside the equation controls costs, those costs reappear in other ways. Who gets to decide which costs and outcomes are most important?
He gets really excited at 5:00
I also invite any bicycle proponents to try them out in areas where there's ice and snow half the year.
But isn't the case in Lisbon that there's no feasible alternative? I guess there are ferries, but those are probably less convenient than transport within city.
Also, as far as I can tell from the map in the talk, in Stockholm the “paid zone” is around 25 km² (eg. if I had to, I could probably walk from such toll bridge to whenever I need to get), whereas if I understand correctly, in Lisbon they bridges are the sole feasible connection to the south.
Just pause at 4:28 and you can see it.
As he explained the participants of the researches didn't feel like they changed anything. They didn't from one day to the other hate to drive. The 20% could come there in many other ways, change the time they start working or just use the public transport, which is pretty good in Stockholm.
Actually, in this case, the problem isn't that there are too many cars on the roads, otherwise the solution would be to place restrictions on the number of cars that people can buy. The problem is that there are too many cars on the road at the same time. In this case, displacing the cars would be a solution.
Eliminate the accordion effect by maintaining a speed.. let the car in front of you get way ahead by the time you get to them they are speeding I could begin eliminating the stop
This doesn't work because people are too stupid to see what you're trying to do and cut in front of you to eliminate that distance so you have to stop and the accordion effect continues
Yes!
Yep, people who propose the “leave space” method of driving are being purposely ignorant of human nature. (And yes, I know truck drivers use this method, but that is because they are forced to leave space due to the need for longer breaking distances.)
I know, I thought this talk will be about self-automatic traffic. It's actually very feasible with current technology
Tolls in USA were introduced to pay for road repairs. They never went away.
The problem we have in the USA is that maintaining our road system cost more than the tax base that they are generating. In many case we give businesses tax incentives to move into town and we build roads to get people to the business, but then we have no tax money from the business to pay for maintaining those roads.
And the roads were never fixed (la county)
how to solve traffic jams? flying cars. boom. done. over.
Oh God, someone make 4:55 into a GIF or something! Just look at those crazy eyes!
Actually, the implementation discussed in this talk is technically (and officially) a tax in Sweden; search for [Congestion tax Swedish Transport Agency] if you don't believe it.
And you are right. But those aren't the 20% of people who stop using the roads. The people who stop would be the people who figure that they can get up half an hour earlier to get to work and avoid the congestion.
Relax!
Good point, but I would argue sheer traffic volume is not the only factor. Traffic Jams can be a matter of bad city planning or infrastructure.
Indeed, it works out well for the remaining commuters who pay the price. However, they benefit because other people who couldn't (or wouldn't) pay the price, were forced to somehow, someway think of a "solution": Perhaps changing office-location, quitting the job, stop school, who knows? What happened to the people who stopped using the road? Without knowing more about those people (and perhaps the hardships they went through) I wouldn't call this approach a complete success.
has been done in london and the same results were achieved. But this only works where there is good public transport.
Every nerd out there understands his reaction at 4:54!!
4:55 lol
I have thought about it. There are no costs to individual drivers for creating congestion for everyone else, this is exactly the problem. The government prevents this problem being solved by preventing private ownership of the roads. Congestion is simply a shortage of road space. A profit seeking private road owner will set the toll that maximises his income by attracting the highest number of customers without clogging the road so that the most number of cars pass. Same as selling bread.
Could you give an example of a situation where the unhampered free market has been allowed to function and yet a shortage or surplus of goods has remained? What do you mean exactly when you say it doesn't work?
You want to solve traffic jams, improve conmuter trains, like japan does, look at Tõkiõ, 40 million people live and the majority conmute by more of 40 trains lines. And the highways are 2 or 3 lanes.
France has the RER and Transilien, Germany the S-bahn, Spain the Cercanias, My country Argentina has 11 conmuter lines, and the Americans (from USA), well, they are screwed with 12 lanes highways
brunoignaciogi That is not the answer, because the population keeps growing, if I put everybody onto trains you'd still have congestion over packed trains, if everybody walked you'd still have congestion, because the bottom line is,there is too many people, and it will only get worse.
There is only one logical way to solve the problem of congestion, poverty, crime and destruction of our environment, is by reducing the number of people in the environment, on the planet.
There is no other way, there is no magical solution, Japan is chock-a-block with people, they walk around with masks, because of the pollution created by the mass of people there.
It is the trouble with people it everything and anything but facing the truth we need constructive laws to govern the number of people on the planet if we wish to have a future.
The human species has to bring in constructive laws governing the birth of people, to control its numbers, you can do this with logical laws, based on responsible behaviour, which everybody claims they are intelligent and responsible people, then start excepting intelligent and responsible laws to reduce the number of people on the planet, instead of behaving like a virus and just endlessly multiplying and destroying everything.
The solution to the problem is not endlessly breeding like your species is going on the verge of extinction.
Another one that's not capable of facing reality, like the person who has just wrote to me, telling me that only 3% of the world space is occupied by people, but he failed to take into account, the amount of natural land that has to be destroyed to feed this 3% of people which amounts to nearly 7 a half billion of them.
You are like him and 98% of the world population, who do not understand you live on sections of land on a planet, neither one has in Infinity properties, but you all embrace a system of endless growth a system of endlessly multiplying.
When the person shows me how they can endlessly multiply into a space that is fixed without destroying it, I will admit I am wrong.
In fact why don't you take me up on my challenge which no government or scientists has been able to do. which is strange isn't it when they all embrace a ridiculous unworkable unsustainable system of endless growth.
Take a cup, the limited space within the cup will represent the limited space of the land you live on, or planet. Hold it under the tap, the endless flow of water will represent the endless multiplying of people into this limited space.
Now you show me how you can endlessly pour water into a cup without it ever overflowing, without trickery, if you can, then you will be defying the laws of physics.
A fixed space no matter how big or small it is, is governed by the amount you can put into it by it's space not your desires or wishes, something that the human species is not capable of dealing with.
It is not me that needs to stop smoking whatever I'm smoking, it is you.
You are the typical member of the human species that has no ability to deal with anything that revolves around them, changing the way they behave or sacrificing to make the environment they live in a better healthier safer place.
Every baby that is born, needs a place to live and food, you really do talk a load of rubbish, when you say, babies do not destroy the planet, you have no concept of reality, you have no concept of species to landmass reality either do you, you have no idea why the planet has existed for hundreds of millions of years and the billions of species upon it have coexisted for that length of time without destroying each other and the planet itself, until of course we came along.
Why do you think the planet has existed for that long and not one single species as over multiplied and destroyed it. You really live in a dream world, it's no wonder the human species has no future when there's to many of you and not enough of me.
I won't read everyting you write it's just too much. and too stupid
you are a stupid britain in a motorcycle (yeah i watch your channel, and that's what you do)
"facing the truth"?, more like going to a mental hospital.
brunoignaciogi Spoken like a true selfish person who uses a car but refuses point-blank to recognise the problem it creates, for to do so would mean them giving up there car, that something you and them won't do.
So your response is pointless, why are you communicating, simple you're trying to justify the use of something that creates a problem and you can only come up with the word stupid.
Calling what I've said stupid, just shows the level of your mentality doesn't it.
A person who is unable to deal with the truth though it stares them in the face every single day.
The best thing to do if you have nothing constructive to say, and are unable to face the truth.
Then don't say anything, because you just show yourself up for what you are.
This conversation has come to an abrupt end just like your inability to deal with the truth.
PissShiversss Once again we see the same old behaviour pattern coming from the human species, because it's not capable of dealing with anything outside of its selfish wants.
So when somebody faces it with the true, the only thing it as that's passing itself off as anything resembling constructive argument in its corner, is verbal abuse and sarcasm, to cover it inability to deal with or understand what the person is saying.
This is what you are saying in reality.
I am not intellectually capable of dealing with what this person is saying, so I am going to use abusive language and sarcasm, to cover my inability to grasp this information, absorb this information and operate upon this information, because I am ruled by my emotions and am unable to operate beyond them, because I am so pathetic, and I am going to show how pathetic I am in my comments to this person.
You are all so boring.
If you have no ability to absorb the information I am giving you, and are not able to come back with constructive debate, then the best thing for you to do, is not to say anything, because when you do, all you do is show yourself up for what you really are, Uncaring, Irresponsible and Unintelligent.
But please carry on, I haven't had a good laugh for ages.
This person represent 98% of you lot out there, and how you think and behave, and it is this behaviour, which is the reason why no intelligent life will directly contact you, and the reason your species has no future.
This would be a great way to solve traffic in Los Angeles but people would definitely complain about a small charge for driving on the freeway and prevent it from happening in the first place
Groups that disappeared? I don't know about the location you tested, but if it was here in Arizona. It would be retired people (snowbirds) that are just out for a drive. People that suddenly realized they could have carpooled with coworkers. It wouldn't have been public transportation though as that is almost non-existent here.
I could do with a serious hand, because what is in my mind is a very large picture-to create an operating system for each individual to partake in the development, trade, resources attainment, skill, with their particular aspiring interest involvement in their area which has the ability to compare, contrast and network world wide. In say these two comments, I enjoyed your presentation and I also, think it offers valuable insight. I can't wait to see the contrast results of the two models.
It's basic economics. The roads increase in value on rush-hour therefore people ought to be willing to pay more to be able to make use of it that time.
That way only the people who truly need to be there will be driving and the rest, not willing to pay for it, will travel at other times.
That's why he stated nudging people in that direction. We all know driving at rush hour is bad, but we all still do it. So put a penalty/incentive in place to create change. After the change happens, the penalty/incentive can be removed and people's schedules have already adapted. This idea is in affect with our taxes and in private toll roads. Ideally its retraining drivers how to match travel speed, how to merge, and adding carpooling incentives.
Driving is a privilege not a right.
The few dollars collected from each car passing on the congested roads would alleviate government aid spent on road maintenance and public transport and the less cars on the road would lessen wear on the roads. What a great idea.
Mr. Eliasson just spent eight minutes using traffic as an example of how the free market works without using the words. "Who is in charge of bread in London? ... It organizes itself." Boom! Adam Smith's invisible hand in 11 words.
He looks really funny when you watch this without sound
Oh come on, the photo was a very crucial part of the presentation, and you don't show it?
Ow my bad... He just said: My hometown "Stockholm." haha
If you can't afford it then the meeting must not be important enough to warrant the money.
I don't know about Stockholm, but where I live, a lot of traffic problems could be solved by more intelligent signal operation. It's infuriating to approach a light and have it turn red on you, only to see that no one is coming the other way where the light is green. How difficult would it be to set up signals operated by an actual computer using sensors/cameras, instead of using half-century old, clockwork tech? Something that adapts to traffic flow, rather than using arbitrary time values...
I have to disappoint you. I live in a city with nearly perfect public transportation (Zürich), and there's still plenty of people driving cars.
Rationalizing sounds like a pretty good thing.
If you think about it, it is precisely that the people are unable to work this out themselves that the government needs to do this. If the people were able to work this out, there wouldn't be traffic congestion, everyone would have weighed the costs of creating congestion for everyone else against the cost of them having to take some alternative transport to work and the problem would never have happened.
Financial incentives (and disincentives) are the most powerful means to get people to do things (or not do things).
I'm not sure if it is the broken window fallacy, could you explain why you think so in more detail? If it is, then something things have been overlooked. Are these things enough to cancel out what was gained by less traffic and shorter commutes?
And there was that weird walking camera thing too.
Then why do we have traffic jams? In which cities does the government regulate tolls unsuccessfully?