Assessing the Impacts of Transportation and Land Use Policies and Strategies on Vehicle Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Equity, and the Economy

Contacto

Background

Senate Bill (SB) 375 (Steinberg, Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) required metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to prepare sustainable communities strategies (SCS) as part of their regional transportation plans (RTP) that integrate transportation and land use planning to meet regional greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets set by CARB. CARB’s role is to set the targets and review each MPO’s SCS in order to accept or reject the MPO’s determination as to whether the SCS would meet the region’s GHG emission reduction targets.

To support the SB 375 program, CARB periodically contracts with researchers to assess the scientific literature on the effects of key transportation and land use-related policies and strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG emissions. The goal of this effort is to strengthen the technical underpinnings of local and regional planning processes and identify important data gaps and research needs. To date, 34 transportation and land use-related policies have been studied. For each policy, researchers have produced two documents: a policy brief and a detailed technical background document targeted to practitioners. These publications are used to inform the development and improvement of analytical models and tools used by MPOs and other public agencies for SB 375 implementation, to develop quantification methodologies created by CARB staff to estimate the GHG reduction potential of California Climate Investments projects, and to inform recommendations CARB staff may make regarding actions local, regional, and State agencies can take to combat climate change and improve air quality.

The policy landscape and empirical evidence for transportation and land use strategies evolve over time. California’s housing and homelessness crisis demands greater focus on housing development as a climate strategy, and research that characterizes places for land use development that has the potential to mitigate and adapt to climate change continues to unfold. Newer strategies are emerging, such as low/zero-emission zones, pay-per-mile insurance, and housing relocation subsidy programs. The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented expansions in telework, telemedicine, and distance learning, and those trends and their associated impacts, continue to evolve. Finally, given the State’s ambitious goals to reduce VMT, CARB is seeking to continue building the case for individual strategies and sustainable transportation and development patterns more generally by highlighting their economic and other benefits. For all these reasons, CARB seeks to update briefs, add additional briefs covering emerging strategies, and continue to build and present evidence for sustainable transportation and development.

Policy documents that provide a backdrop for this work include documents like the 2022 Scoping Plan,[1] including appendices D and E; the California State Transportation Agency’s Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure (CAPTI) 2.0[2], Department of Housing and Community Development’s Statewide Housing Plan[3], the Carbon Neutrality Report, “Driving California’s Transportation Emissions to Zero,”[4] as well as the most recent SCSs adopted by MPOs.

Objective

This project has three objectives:

  • Update existing policy briefs, as necessary, in order to reflect new research and data and capture additional considerations of interest to CARB, principally economic costs and benefits. 
  • Develop policy briefs on new, emerging policies and strategies under consideration by local, regional, or state agencies.  
  • Assess the economic implications of sustainable transportation and development patterns that reduce VMT.

Scope of Work

Task 1: Identify which policy briefs to update

The research team, in collaboration with CARB, shall develop a list of policy briefs to update.  In developing this list, the research team shall examine the 34 existing policies for relevance and review existing literature in consideration of the issues listed below to determine if there is additional or more recent evidence to include. Where information is available, CARB is particularly interested in updating the policy briefs with information on economic costs and benefits. The research team shall provide CARB a list of the briefs with a short (one paragraph) explanation as to whether or not each brief should be updated. Based on that list, the research team and CARB will work together to finalize the list identifying which briefs to proceed in updating. Issues to examine:

  • The quality of the evidence
  • Caveats
  • Co-benefits
  • Economic costs and benefits, including but not limited to municipal costs to build and maintain infrastructure; job creation, including high-wage jobs; revenue; household income; business development; and any other economic factors relevant to the strategy  
  • Context-specific considerations
  • Rebound effects
  • Speed of change and effect over time
  • Implementation scale (community, city, county, region, state)
  • Geographic variations (urban, suburban and rural)
  • Equity considerations,[5] including documented benefits to disadvantaged or low-income communities, and
  • Suggested further research areas

Interim Deliverables

  • A list identifying each existing policy brief with a short (one paragraph) justification explaining whether it should be updated
  • In consultation with the CARB contract manager, a final list of policy briefs to update.

The pre-proposal should describe the process the research team will follow, the timeline for assessing which policy briefs to update, and the number of policy beliefs the research team may be able to update in consideration of the contract period and funding available.

Task 2: Identify topics on which to create new policy briefs

The research team, in collaboration with CARB, shall recommend emerging land use or transportation strategies for the development of new policy briefs. In developing this list, the research team shall consult research literature; sustainable communities strategies; local and regional climate action plans, land use or other transportation plans; and other State, regional, or local plans, policies, or programs inside or outside of California that have the potential to reduce VMT. In reviewing these sources, the research team must evaluate the issues listed in Task 1. The research team shall provide CARB a list of recommendations with a short (one paragraph) justification for focusing on that strategy. Based on that list, the research team and CARB will work together to finalize the list identifying which briefs to proceed in developing.

Interim Deliverables

  • A list of new transportation and land use strategies the research team recommends the development of policy briefs, including short (one paragraph) justification for the recommendation.
  • In consultation with the CARB contract manager, a final list of policy briefs to develop.

The pre-proposal should describe the process the research team will follow and timeline for developing the recommendations for new policy briefs, along with an estimated number of strategies the research team believes it could develop in consideration of the contract period and funding available. While the exact number of briefs will be determined by the research team and CARB, CARB anticipates approximately three to eight new briefs.

Task 3: Update/Develop the Policy Briefs

Based on the final list of strategies completed for tasks 1 and 2, the research team will draft the updated and new policy briefs. 

Each policy brief should be between four and six pages in length and written in plain language and in an accessible format aligned with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines for posting on the CARB website. Each policy brief should include supporting information in an appendix (not counted in the four-to-six-page range limit), including:

  • A bibliography of supporting articles
  • On-the-ground examples
  • Additional information for practitioners and others seeking further details about the studies selected for the policy brief, methodology, applicability issues, etc.

Please see the current policy briefs available on CARB’s website. New and updated briefs should be consistent with existing briefs in format and tone.

Interim Deliverable

  • Draft policy briefs for review and feedback by CARB and possibly other interested public agency partners.
  • Final policy briefs that incorporate feedback provided by CARB and possibly other public agency partners.

The pre-proposal should describe the process the research team will take to update and develop the policy briefs, and the timeline for producing them.

Task 4: Develop an Economic Impacts Report

The research team shall produce a stand-alone report documenting the range of economic costs and benefits of sustainable development and transportation patterns that support VMT reduction. Economic impacts should include, but not be limited to, household costs and savings, supported jobs and job quality, infrastructure investments made, and long-term fiscal outcomes (e.g., municipal service costs, tax revenue, economic productivity, overall cost-of-living) for jurisdictions that have supportive VMT-light development patterns versus those with more conventional ones. A clear understanding of the economic implications of sustainable transportation and land use development is valuable for informing policy decisions that meaningfully reduce VMT and help California achieve its climate and air quality goals. High‑quality economic analysis strengthens the ability of public agencies to prioritize high‑impact strategies, communicate important benefits to stakeholders, and anticipate potential implementation challenges. Ultimately, this work is intended to support the broader case for sustainable, resilient, and economically vibrant communities aligned with the state’s climate and equity objectives.

Interim Deliverable

  • Draft Economic Impacts Report for review and input by CARB and possibly some State agency partners.
  • Final Economic Impacts Report that incorporates input from CARB and any public agency respondents.

The pre-proposal should describe the process and methods for developing this report, including which impacts the research team anticipates covering.

Project Deliverables

The project proposal shall include but not be limited to the following deliverables:

At the Pre-Proposal Stage

  • Provide a cultural humility statement in the pre-proposal.

At the Beginning of the Contract

  • All researchers must undergo cultural humility training (e.g., implicit bias training and racial equity training). Training should be completed or scheduled within 30 days of contract execution.

During the Active Contract Period

  • The Contractor must submit Quarterly Progress Reports. These reports shall include plain-language summaries that can be posted publicly. CARB will provide the progress report template.
  • The Contractor shall engage in frequent (e.g., monthly) consultation calls with CARB and key interested parties.

Prior to Contract Close

  • The contractor shall submit all data, analyses, and analytical tools generated during this project.
  • The contractor shall satisfy the following requirements for the policy briefs and Economic Impacts report:
    • Each updated and new policy brief and the Economic Impacts report must be copy-edited, reviewed, and approved by the Principal Investigator.
    • Each policy brief and the Economic Impacts report must be written in plain language.
    • Each policy brief and the Economic Impacts report must include an equity implications section.
  • The contractor must work with CARB to create plain-language outreach deliverables for the public, summarizing the results and impact of the project.
  • The final policy briefs and Economic Impacts report submitted to CARB must be in an accessible format aligned with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines.
  • The contractor must participate in up to three virtual or in-person seminars, workshops, or community meetings to present and discuss project findings, as determined by the CARB contract manager.
  • Peer-reviewed publications should be publicly available (please budget for this expense; submission-ready publications shall be reviewed by CARB staff).
  • Additional deliverables shall be determined in consultation with CARB staff.

Minimum Expectations and Application Process and Requirements

Information on required material and process during the preproposal phase and expectations on the contract are found on the Solicitation landing page.

Timeline

This project is anticipated to be completed in 30 months from the start date. Cost shall not exceed $300,000.

Scoring Criteria

Responsiveness to the goals and objectives outlined in the pre-proposal solicitation(15 points)

Proposers should demonstrate a clear understanding of the policy objectives and research needs that CARB aims to address with this project while highlighting their expertise on the subject. The proposal should consider various aspects of the need and identify or acknowledge any potential biases. It should outline, in sufficient detail, the proposed approach to meeting the requirements of the Solicitation. The proposal must detail work that aligns with the objectives outlined in the Contract Solicitation, which include:

  • Updating existing policy briefs in order to reflect new research and data and capture additional considerations of interest to CARB, principally economic costs and benefits. 
  • Developing policy briefs on new, emerging policies and strategies under consideration by local, regional, or state agencies.  
  • Assessing the economic implications of sustainable transportation and development patterns that reduce VMT.

Policy relevance/benefits to the state(10 points)

The proposal should describe how the project will provide data, information, and/or products to support CARB in achieving the goals of SB 375 and in providing guidance to local, regional, and State agencies on actions they can take to reduce VMT while also advancing racial equity. environmental justice, and economic benefits through land use development and transportation strategies.

Previous work (15 points)

The proposal should describe the project team’s relevant experience in this area. Describe the extent to which the project team is composed of a multi-disciplinary team of experts, as well as how the project team will build on previous relevant work funded by CARB, other State agencies, and any other appropriate organizations. Five points will be reserved for project teams that meet at least one of the following criteria:

  1. The project team is multi-disciplinary.
  2. The project team includes members from various universities, non-academic institutions, or community-based organizations.
  3. The project team includes one or more members who will contribute significantly to the project (e.g., a principal investigator, co-principal investigator, or co-investigator, contributing 25% or more of their time) who have not worked with CARB in the past 5 years.

Technical merit (25 points)

The proposal should demonstrate the logic and feasibility of the methodology and technical approach, outline the sequence and relationships of major tasks, and explain how the work will be carried out. The proposal should also explain how the proposed methods are robust and how the results will be validated. The proposal should address:

  1. The appropriateness of the proposed measurement approach. Why are the methods suitable, and how will the proposed analysis yield relevant results?
  2. All the deliverables outlined in the “Deliverables” section.
  3. The review team will select only one pre-proposal for development into a full proposal and, if necessary, will provide feedback on what topics to be prioritized or further explained in the full proposal.

Level and quality of effort to be provided(15 points)

The proposal should demonstrate the effective allocation of time and resources to ensure the study objectives are met. Is the supervision and oversight sufficient to keep the project on schedule? Is the distribution appropriate for activities such as research, evaluation, analysis, data reduction, computer simulation, report preparation, meetings, and travel?

Cost effectiveness (20 points)

The proposal should demonstrate that the cost is appropriate for the proposed work and that the proposed work appears feasible within the requested budget. Projects that include co-funding will be evaluated more favorably.

Scoring Criteria Scoring Guidance

91-100 points. Exceptionally strong. The submission is technically strong, meets stated research objectives, is cost-effective, and has a high potential to be successfully completed.

81-90 points. Strong. The submission is technically sound.

71-80 points. Mixed. The submission has either strong technical merit or strong policy significance, but not both.

61-70 points. Weak. The submission is not sufficiently linked to the needs of the Board and offers limited technical merit.

60 points or below. Unacceptable. The submission is not linked to the interests or needs of the Board and lacks technical merit.

 

[1]2022 Scoping Plan Documents | California Air Resources Board

[2]CAPTI 2.0: Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure

[3]Statewide Housing Plan

[4]https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3np3p2t0

[5] Even for topics where the researchers find that equity is not a factor, the equity section would make clear that the subject has been considered.