Whereas land use development in the Oslo region – and in particular the municipality of Oslo – has to a high extent been in line with key principles of sustainable urban development, the development of the transportation infrastructure gives a more mixed impression. The bulk of transport infrastructure investments in Greater Oslo have been spent on increased road capacity. Surely, some of these roads (often in tunnels) have led traffic outside residential or central city areas and thus relieved these areas from noise and local air pollution.
Unfortunately, the statistics on completed transport infrastructure projects are
generally poor in Norway, and this also applies to the Oslo region. Some figures are, however, available from a study carried out by Lian (2004). In this study, the
implementation of the so-called Oslo Packages 1 and 2 was evaluated.11 Figure 2.12 shows the major road projects funded by Oslo Package 1 within the municipality of Oslo and in the county of Akershus. The projects were completed during the period 1990-2003.
11 These Packages were transport infrastructure investment plans based on cooperation between the Municipality of Oslo, the County of Akershus, the Ministry of Transport and the regional office of the Highway Directorate, based on a considerable contribution of revenues from a toll ring. The Oslo Package 1 included mostly road projects, whereas public transport improvements were the main focus of Oslo Package 2.
Figure 2.12: Road projects funded by Oslo Package 1 and implemented 1990-2003 in the municipality of Oslo (left) and the county of Akershus (right). Years of opening are shown for each road link. Source:
Lian (2004), pp. 5-6.
There have also been improvements in the public transport system. Most of these improvements have been funded by the Oslo Package 2. In the municipality of Oslo, the most important achievements are a new metro ring line supplementing the existing radial urban rail lines, new and improved streetcar lines with a higher frequency of departures, and a southward extension of one of the ordinary, radial metro lines. Moreover, the frequency of departure on some metro lines was increased in 2008. In the county of Akershus, the only types of public transport improvements are the establishment of separate bus lanes along some of the major transport arteries, and improved design of some public transport terminals wit an eye to ease shifts between different modes of travel (e.g. between bus and train). The latter two types of improvements have also been implemented along some roads and for some bus terminals and urban rail stations within the municipality of Oslo, along with changes in the setup for traffic lights along one of the major ring roads in such a way that the light automatically changes to green when the bus approaches.
The expenditures for the road projects completed as part of Oslo Package 1 was NOK 11 billion, whereas the public transport improvements of Oslo Package 2 (so far only partly completed) has a budget of NOK 15.6 billion, most of which set aside for the construction of additional tracks on the major rail lines from Oslo to the west and south. The substantial public transport investments are likely to contribute, other things being equal, to reduced car travel in the region. However, due to the
substantial road capacity increases that have also taken place, this effect has to a high extent been offset and even outweighed. In congested urban areas, better-flowing traffic tends to induce a number of people to travel by car who have previously left their car in the garage because of congestion. By and large, the roads will fill up again, but the proportion of car drivers will then be higher, and the number of transit
passengers (and ticket revenues for the transit companies) will be lower (Strand et al., 2009).
Based on a study of travel modes for journeys to work among residents of western suburbs of Oslo working in the downtown area, Figure 2.13 shows how the
likelihood of commuting by car varies with varying ratios of door-to-door travel times by car and transit (Næss, Mogridge and Sandberg, 2001.). The figure applies to male car-owning commuters holding a driver’s license, and having easy parking facilities at the workplace. A number of other variables influencing the modal choice were also controlled for.
Figure 2.13: Probability of commuting by car at varying ratios of door-to-door travel times by car and transit.
N=261 commuters living in western suburbs of Oslo and working in the downtown area. The probability levels apply to male respondents holding a driver’s license, with a high car-ownership level and good parking conditions at the workplace. The following variables have been kept constant at mean values: income level, education level, age, travel expenses paid by the employer, and errands on the way home from work. Sig. = 0.0000. Source: Næss, Sandberg & Mogridge (2001)
When car and transit were equally fast, the probability of commuting by car was 40 per cent. When car was 20 per cent faster than transit, the probability of going by car was 59 per cent. Increased road capacity leading in a short term to better-flowing traffic is therefore likely to change the modal split in favor of the least energy- efficient mode. In a longer term, congestion is likely to occur again
(Mogridge,1997). The low average probability of commuting by car among the respondents must be seen in the light of the fact that the workplaces were all located in the downtown area of Oslo, cf. also Figure 2.11. However, other studies in Greater Oslo show that the choice of travel mode is considerably influenced by the travel time ratio between car and public transport also for trips with destinations outside the central and inner parts of Oslo (Engebretsen, 1996).
According to Lian (2004), traffic in the municipality of Oslo and the county of Akershus increased by 24 % during the period 1990-2002. This is one percentage point lower than the national average, in spite of the fact that the number of
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
0 0,5 1 1,5 2
Travel time ratio car/transit
Probability of commuting by car
inhabitants and jobs as well as the average income level has increased at a
considerably faster pace than for Norway as a whole. In particular, the traffic growth has been moderate within the municipality of Oslo, where the traffic was only 13 % higher in 2001 than in 1990. In the county of Akershus, the increase was 34 %.
Adjusting for the stronger-than-average growth in population, jobs and income in the region during the period, the Akershus traffic growth rate is on level with the general national trend. (Lian, ibid.) Based on data covering the period 1992 – 2005, the Municipality of Oslo (2007) estimates traffic growth within the municipal borders to be 25 %, compared to a national average of 34 %. During this period, the traffic in Akershus grew by as much as 48 %.
Oslo has 122 km of bike paths within its municipal borders. This is only about one third of the corresponding figure for Copenhagen. During the most recent years only very few kilometers of new bike paths have been constructed (5 km over the period 2005-2008) (Aftenposten, 2008).