A case by case approach must be tailored specifically to the transport option under consideration and to the appropriate area or spatial level. This forms a partial analysis, which involves a detailed segmentation of the economic actors in the spatial areas relevant to the appraisal of the option. The following sets out a feasible approach which involves completing two analysis forms (shown here in Tables 9.2 and 9.4). The information used in completing these tables can be transferred directly to the Part 2 AST.
The approach outlined here can be tailored to particular studies and local circumstances, with the degree of quantification appropriate to the size of the study, the scale of the option under consideration and the expected relative significance of EALIs (both positive and negative) in the overall appraisal.
The case specific approach suggested here involves analysis of the potential behavioural responses of different "sectors" of economic activity. Here, the term "sector" has been used to describe different types or areas of economic activity, such as the manufacturing sector. Within each sector are "economic actors" whose decisions affect the economic performance of an area or region. Economic actors include businesses both in an area and outside it, land and property developers, and individuals in their roles as residents, workers, shoppers, visitors and tourists.
The following is a possible segmentation, adopted in Table 9.2, which could be used:
The above is suggested as a general starting point for segmentation of economic activity into sectors; however, not all will be relevant or important in some areas, while in other areas it might be necessary to sub-segment sectors, for example where there are many different types of manufacturing industries where different industry responses to a transport option might be expected.
Once a usable segmentation has been selected, this approach involves investigating how the economic actors relevant to each sector might be affected by, and respond to, the changes in costs or accessibility brought about by the transport option under analysis. As outlined below, in most instances much of the required analysis will be based on survey evidence and accessibility analysis.
For example, in considering the business sectors, including the tourism industry and retailing, a combination of data gathering and structured interviews could be used in order to establish:
This process could also be advised by other data gathering, analysis and interviews, including suppliers and professional advisers, and in particular the property and recruitment sectors. The latter are important with regard to gathering information and opinion on impacts relating to land-use and labour market factors respectively.
The EALI assessment table includes these, albeit in a simpler form, but a fuller treatment of these can be found in SACTRA (paragraph 10.158 et seq.). Here the basis of the analysis is to assess how a transport option will impact upon each sector of the spatial economy under consideration. Such impacts will arise through factors such as:
In order to adopt a systematic approach to the identification and quantification of impacts, each case should be segmented to identify the principal sectors which act as the sources or drivers of economic performance at the appropriate spatial level. Then for each sector, the potential role of the option in enhancing its economic performance needs to be considered. Generally, this will require an understanding of the potential responses of the economic actors within each sector to the transport option. This could usefully be informed by the methodology set out in Section 11 for Accessibility and Social Inclusion impacts. Change in accessibility for each people group and employment sectors indicates the positive and negative pressures and assists in developing understanding of the links between causes and effects.
The suggested way of bringing together information is to use the Summary Assessment Table, shown as Table 9.2. For most options, this should be derived from completion of individual sector tables. It should be noted that the activity sectors shown in Table 9.2 are indicative and may be changed depending on the option and its likely impacts. In some instances, sectors might be omitted while some sectors might require further segmentation to permit the necessary level of analysis. An example of a completed summary table is shown in Table 9.3.
Table 9.2: Potential EALIs - Summary Assessment Table
|
Year of Assessment |
Summary of Impacts | |||
| (year): | Local | (year): | ||
| Sector | Gains / Gainers | Sector | Gains / Gainers | Sector |
| Manufacturing andProcessing | ||||
| Locally Traded Services | ||||
| Externally Traded Services | ||||
| Inward/Mobile Investment | ||||
| Tourism | ||||
| Day Trips/Shoppers | ||||
| Residents | ||||
| Sector Interactions/Synergies | ||||
| Total Gross Impacts | ||||
| Net Impact | Overall ImpactsLocal: National: | Summary of Distributional ImpactsLocal: National: | ||
Table 9.3: Completed Example of Potential EALIs - Summary Assessment Table
|
Year of Assessment |
Summary of Impacts | |||
| (year): 2006 | Local | (year): 2006 | ||
| Sector | Gains / Gainers | Sector | Gains / Gainers | Sector |
| Manufacturing andProcessing | 1200-1300 jobs£70–90m inGDP | None | as local | Very limited –loss estimated upto 100 jobs |
| Locally Traded Services | Zero | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Externally Traded Services | Zero | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Inward/Mobile Investment | 500–1000 jobs£40–80m GDP | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Tourism | Zero | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Day Trips/Shoppers | Zero | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Residents | 500–1000additionalresidents | Zero | Zero | Zero |
| Sector Interactions/Synergies | 200–500 jobs£15–40m | Zero | 100–200 jobs£10–20m GDP | Zero |
| Total Gross Impacts | 1900–2800 jobs£125–210mGDP | Zero | 1300–1500 jobs£80–110m GDP | loss of 100 jobs,up to £10m GDP |
| Net Impact | Overall Impacts Local: 1900–2800jobs; £125–210m GDP National:1200–1400 jobs; £70–100m GDP | Summary of Distributional ImpactsLocal: potential for benefits inregeneration areas affected by theoption, and also at peripheries ofTTWA National: minimal losses incompetitor companies, likely to beshort term as external marketsexpanding | ||
Table 9.4 should be completed to set out those impacts which have been examined in detail and quantified. An example of a completed sector table is shown in Table 9.5.
This two step approach is suggested because a review of the qualitative version should help practitioners in identifying which impacts are most important (in gross terms) and hence to determine where to focus efforts to derive quantitative estimates of impacts.
Taking the individual sectors first, for each sector of activity, the assessment (shown in Table 9.4 and completed as an example in Table 9.5) should:
Once this analysis has been completed for each identified sector or driver, the results should be summarised using Table 9.1; the completed example shown as Table 9.2 suggests how these findings might be summarised and presented.
Table 9.4: Sector Table: Qualitative/Quantitative Analysis of First Round Impacts (Manufacturing and Processing)
|
Sector |
Manufacturing and Processing | ||
| Sources / Types ofImpact | Qualitative | Quantitative | |
| Market /CompetitivenessContext | |||
| Labour Market Impacts | |||
| Land / PropertyImpacts | |||
| ProductMarketImpacts | Local | ||
| National | |||
| OverallImpacts | LocalGainers | ||
| LocalLosers | |||
| NationalGainers | |||
| NationalLosers | |||
Table 9.5: Completed Example of Qualitative/Quantitative Analysis of First Round Impacts (Manufacturing and Processing)
|
Sector |
Manufacturing and Processing | ||
| Sources / Types ofImpact | Qualitative | Quantitative | |
| Market /CompetitivenessContext | High % of firms & jobs in highly competitive markets where changes in transport costs will have potential impacts. Principal markets in England and Europe: local accessibility poor & journey times very unreliable, impacts on need for non–optimal working times & use of vehicles / drivers | Total of 3,500 manufacturing jobs in local TTWAs, 2,500 – 2,700 in volume / low margin sectors suffering from localtransport related constraints | |
| Labour Market Impacts | Labour shortages in skilled & semi-skilled trades currently constraining output in 60 – 70% of firms accounting for around 80% of total employment. Labour pool area constrained because of local accessibility / costs / travel times. Potential to tap under/unemployed labour in wider TTWA | Potential to recruit / train /employ 200 – 300 additional workers in short – medium term | |
| Land / PropertyImpacts | Half of all major firms seeking additional land, 3 have alternative locations in Scotland, 4 considering non Scotland expansions. Land severely constrained by access, planning and cost factors | Potential loss of around1,000 jobs which could beretained if land can be made available locally | |
| ProductMarketImpacts | Local | None expected; non Scottish firms have very limited market presence & surge of imports considered very unlikely: no displacement impact expected. | Zero |
| National | Principal markets are external; potential for expansion of sales through lower cost access to markets and access to labour which currently limits output and adds to costs. Very high % of Scottish output within TWWAs examined. | Expansion of output andemployment: est’d GDP annual value of £20m, (excluding any multiplier effects); 200-300 jobs inshort–medium term | |
| OverallImpacts | LocalGainers | Two principal sources of impact: • output &employment impacts through combined labour & product market impacts • substantial output & employment benefits through retention of existing manufacturing activity which otherwise would relocate due to limited access and land for expansion Gainers are those with skills or semi skilled living in wider TTWA plus some jobs to people in regeneration areas – requires job access and training schemes by LEC | Output impacts estimatedGDP annual value of £20m, excluding multiplier effects Plus up to 1000 jobs retained, accounting for estimated £50 – £70 million |
| LocalLosers | No local losers identified | ||
| NationalGainers | As above, plus possible multiplier impacts within wider TTWA where there are unemployed resources | As above | |
| NationalLosers | Limited expected losers as almost all production concentrated in the group of TTWAs examined | Very limited potential displacement within Scotland | |