How Technological Changes have Affected Road Transport

Posted: January 4th, 2023

Transportation Today

Student’s Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Transportation Today

How Technological Changes have Affected Road Transport

Looking at the history of transport, one is likely to realize the technological innovations that have revolutionized the area over the years. Enlargement in machinery has allowed people to go past their own regions to discover new places and widen their region of power. Even in the classical era, new tools and innovations such as snowshoes and foot covering increased the distances people could cover by walking (Duc, 2014). As fresh findings and creations were applied to transport, the time people used travel time was reduced while the capacity to move additional and heavier goods increased (Duc, 2014). Technological innovations by researchers in the field have helped to lower the cost of transportation and improved its efficiency. Surface transportation, by road, has advanced over the centuries. It is one of the major modes by which people and goods move from one point to the other (Duc, 2014). Buses, trucks, motorcars, motorcycles, bicycles, and pedestrians use roads that are recognizable routes of travel, usually covered with concrete, gravel, or asphalt (Duc, 2014). It is apparent that technological transformation has impacted road transport in significant ways throughout its history.

Human beings who moved loads from one location to another were responsible for forming the earliest tracks. Other than people who contributed towards the formation of trails, donkeys, oxen, and horses became important in forming tracks (Duc, 2014). Carts pulled by animals started to emerge around the 4^th and early parts of the 5^th millennium, and later spread to the Indian and European regions before spreading to the Asian-Pacific region (Duc, 2014). The Industrial Revolution created an avenue for innovators encompassing John McAdam who is renowned to be the first designer of the structures the contemporary roads take, which he did using readily accessible resources such as stone and gravel (Duc, 2014). The roads were tarred in the 20^th century, and the forms of transport developed as seasons changed.

The development in technology has had significant influence on road transportation, and today people and goods can move from one location to another without much inconvenience. Growth in technology improves the safety of road users, which makes this mode of movement increasingly appealing to people. Manufacturers can now produce more efficient airbags, seat belts, child safety seats, brake lights, and brake pads among other components of vehicles (Gossling, 2017). Many agencies are also able to monitor the movements of road users, thereby increasing efficiency (Gossling, 2017). The agencies, for instance, are able to use software applications to record the average driving speed and provide statistics on drunken driving or the use of seat belts to improve the efficiency of road travel. The development of more effective road lights and the incorporation of other effective features further improve road safety. Today, several companies develop electric cars that offer numerous advantages to users, including the reduction or even elimination of fuel costs, reduced emissions, and reduced cost of maintenance among other gains (Gossling, 2017). Other than the development of electric cars that are more efficient compared with those that use petrol, technological advancement has introduced self-driving cars that increase the chances of navigating safely (Gossling, 2017). Technology also transforms how pedestrians use roads with modern forms of construction allowing space for pedestrian walks and foot bridges that are constructed by using the latest technology to make them appealing as well as long-lasting.

Economic Effects of Regulations and Deregulation on Surface and Air Transportation

Air transport includes the use of carriers that move while being suspended on air, as it happens with airplanes, while surface transport covers movement on land. Throughout the last century, the U.S. permitted surface transportation to grow unfettered in an environment where competition flourishes freely (Bereskin, n.a). The late 1980s, however, witnessed increased competition and increased violation of market regulations and powers, and this led to the formation of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to serve as the initial countrywide regulatory body. Before the development of the ICC, the only effort to control surface transportation had been at the state level, although the railway sector had challenged most of these legislations. In 1887, President Cleveland approved the Interstate Commerce Act was and it ended prejudiced charges (Bereskin, n.a). The Great Depression of 1933, coupled with escalated competition, pushed the legislators to consider deregulation in the 1950s, and the passage of the 1958 Transportation Act allowed for lessened regulation (Bereskin, n.a). The main results of the deregulation of surface transportation allowed the railway and road systems to compete effectively, and as a result, the economy started to experience significant growth because goods and people could move from one place to the other with great efficiency and speed (Bereskin, n.a).  Regulation, however, still exists in certain aspect of surface transport, especially on matters concerning safety.

The regulations and deregulations in air transport had substantial economic effects. Prior to the formation of the Airline Deregulation Act in 1978, the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) was in charge of nearly all aviation activities, including the entry, exit, and the price rate of airline operations, as well as other related operations such as consumer issues, mergers and acquisitions (M&As), and inter-carrier pacts (Smith & Cox, 2010). The economic liberation witnessed in the 1980s in various areas, including air travel, created the need for deregulation, especially due to the increasing realization that a politically regulated economy has no positive effects on the continuing public desires and interests (Smith & Cox, 2010). Decisions regarding operations and investments were controlled by the regulations of the CAB. Airlines were able to compete with each other only in terms of frequency, catering, and staff because of the limitations regarding entry points and routes. (Smith & Cox, 2010). The deregulation efforts, however, created a scenario where the operators competed on various other aspects, which had significant effects on the economy. Investors from various parts of the world entered the U.S., and foreign operators established their branches across the country, which improved revenue from tax, and helped the economy to blossom in the long run.

The economic effects of regulation and deregulation on surface and air transport apparently have some similarities and differences. One of the similarities in the economic effects on the two modes of transport is that they increase with the increased movement of people from one place to the other. Economic growth due to improved forms of moving from one point to another implies that developing infrastructure and forming proper policies on transportation could have positive effects on the way the gross domestic product (GDP) competes with other countries. The effects, however, differ in the way the different policies contribute towards their development.

Direct and Indirect Costs and the Advantages and Disadvantages of Airline Deregulation

The previous section paints the picture that airline deregulation is the act of eradicating the government-placed entry and price regulations on airlines and allowing the airline firms to serve certain routes. The Airline Deregulation Act (1978) introduced a new set of guidelines that would have both direct and indirect costs, as well as merits and demerits. One of the direct impacts of deregulation is that the base fare in tickets has fallen steadily since the passage of the Airline Deregulation Act. The inflation adjusted in 1983 to determine the dollar yield for airlines has dropped from 12.4% in the late 1970s to 7.8 cents in 1998 (Monk, 2002). Along with the growing U.S. population and the escalating need for workforce mobility, these emergences were some of the influencers for rapid increase in passenger miles traveled, expanding from 255 million passenger miles in 1979 to about 752 million miles in 2006 (Monk, 2002). As such, the airlines in America serve as a trade organization and some thinkers assert that deregulation has offered advantages to the average person (Monk, 2002). The other direct impact of deregulation in the airline sector, other than competing, is based on frequency, food, quality, and cabin crew. Companies could offer quality services based on many other factors. Actually, the primary motive for deregulation was to promote competition between airline firms, resulting in drop of prices (Monk, 2002). As a consequence of the deregulation, obstacles to entry in the airline sector for a potential new firm lowered substantially, resulting in many new operators entering the industry, thus heightening the level of competition.

After the lessening of the laws, the quality of good and the services companies offered could be determined several dimensions, including the comfort of the form of transportation, the miles attained, and the promptness of services among other qualities. Increased competition in the airline sector is perceived to be a direct effect of the deregulation because carriers saw the need improve their global presence by entering new markets and introducing better ways of serving customers (Monk, 2002). Some evaluators, nevertheless, feel that the deregulation caused deterioration in the quality of airline services, mainly because of the redesigning of airline routes, misunderstanding with airline workers, price wars, bankruptcies, and sector consolidation (Monk, 2002). Some of the other disadvantages that surfaced after the deregulation include increased unexpected delays and overcrowding that have overwhelmed the segment in the past years. Alfred Kahn who is a deregulation advocate also realized that the unanticipated delays and congestion were caused by an increase in travelers’ volume because of fall in the travel fare (Monk, 2002).

The deregulation in the airline sector is attributed to other indirect effects that were either beneficial or detrimental to operators. The sector witnessed an increase in the number of workers and experienced unrelenting but less speedy growth throughout the 1990s (Monk, 2002). Consequently, between 2000 and 2008, the same sector shed nearly 100,000 jobs due to increased worker cost among other issues (Monk, 2002). The collapse of some companies that could not put up with the increased scramble for the global market, and the new customer desires are also some of the effects of the deregulation in the airline sector. The collapse of such firms could also be caused by acquisition in the attempt by other operators to widen their scope.

Congestion in Boston City and Possible Recommendations

Increasing congestion in urban areas is attributed to the growing population and rural-urban migration. Congestion in an urban setting could refer to the breakdown in the flow of traffic, reduction in the speed, and the widening in crowding that develops when the road users exceed its capacity (Colak et al., 2016). Many airplanes can also cause traffic in the sky if the airports are already experiencing traffic congestion, and the aircraft cannot land at the anticipated time (Colak et al., 2016). The problem of congestion is a serious issue for cities in the U.S. and around the globe and one that is fast worsening. Some of the factors that are perceived as the major trends that have worsened congestion in urban settings in recent years include increased urbanization, improper policies, and inadequate investment in infrastructure, advanced urbanization, and economic growth among other factors (Colak et al., 2016).

Both public and private infrastructure in the U.S. experience increased congestion because of the growing need for transportation and rapid urbanization, especially in Boston that is one of the highly congested cities in the country. The public infrastructure in this case refers to the utilities that are available to everyone and are created by the state or federal government, while private infrastructure refers to those developed by private developers (Dubail, 2019). A 2019 Urban Mobility Report was released at the Texas A&M University by the Transportation Institute. It was based on the readings of traffic recorded after every 15 minutes, which revealed that drivers in the city of Boston spent approximately 80 hours in traffic every year, thus putting it at the 6^th position in terms of congestion and traffic delays (Dubail, 2019). Boston takes the 7^th position nationally in terms of excess fuel used per commuter due to congestion, and the 8^th in the yearly dollar cost of the congestion to the drivers moving around the metropolitan area. One of the factors that may be the cause of traffic congestion in Boston is the availability of various modes of transportation. The city has airports such as the Boston Logan International Airport, the Norwood Memorial Airport, and the Laurence Hanscom Field among others. Some of the railway stations in Boston include the South Station Train Terminal, the North Station, and the Back Bay, while the bus stations include the South Station Bus Terminal and the Greyhound among others. Some of the renowned ports in the city are the Port of Boston, the Royal Caribbean Cruise Port, and the Ports American Inc. The cities with the worst traffic according to the report that come before Boston include Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington DC, New York, and Atlanta (Dubail, 2019). The urban congestion in Boston calls for quick intervention to prevent further complications that could have far reaching implications.

The need to invest in Boston’s transportation infrastructure in an effective and strategic way cannot be overemphasized. Traffic congestion not only affects the productivity of the city and the nation but also impacts the quality of life, economy, and competition at the global level. (Dubail, 2019). The city planners, in their attempt to regulate congestion, should encourage people to turn to autonomous vehicle technology, and offer real-time feedback on traffic (Colak et al., 2016).  Embracing other approaches such as car-sharing and replacing automobiles with drones could also help to reduce congestion (Colak et al., 2016). An effective way to know that the interventions yield the expected results would be to monitor the amount of time drivers take on the roads. Decreased durations would imply that the approaches are effective and worsening situations could imply that more needs to be done to address the conditions that subject people to increases noise and air pollution besides consuming a lot of time.

How Cargo Carrying Capacity Innovations and Security Policies have influenced the U.S. Trucking and Rail Service Sector

Local and federal authorities have developed regulations to define the ideal capacities of trains to prevent unwanted accidents that could occur due to overloading. Usually, the guidelines on freight capacity would differ from one state to the other, depending on the number of empty or loaded containers or cars in the train (Stover, 2001). A usual freight car would weigh 30 tons and could carry an additional 100 tons for 135 tons per loaded container (Stover, 2001). The formation of the Rail Passenger Service Act in 1970 offered clear guidance on carrying capacity with the legislation stating that a conventional long-haul freight can weigh anywhere between 3500 tons to 18,500 tons or even more, depending on the number of cars loaded on the train (Stover, 2001). The innovations in train development have influenced movement in this area with developers creating systems to identify overloading and to allow for additional load, especially in situations that are unavoidable. Such directives and innovative initiatives have lowered the number of accidents that could occur due to excessive loading and ineffective regulation.

The Interstate System provides an avenue for the federal law to regulate the maximum gross weight for trucks and axle loads. The federal regulations require a maximum of 81,000 pounds gross vehicle weight, 21,000 pounds on one axle, and 33,000 pounds in a tandem axle (Federal Highway Administration, 2019). These limits set by the Federal Highway Administration, which functions under the U.S. Department of Transportation, govern the regulations and laws that affect the truck weight and size on portions of the National Highway System that do not fall under the Interstate System (Federal Highway Administration, 2019). Federal standards also exist for the width and length on the National Network, which comprises of the Interstate and some passages created and designated by the state. The federal laws, however, do not offer any guidance for the vehicle height limits (Federal Highway Administration, 2019). All states have directives in place to achieve compliance with the federal weight and size requirements, and in some scenarios, states have regulations that permit the weights and sizes on highways that do not fall under the Interstate Highway System in excess of the present federal weight and size limit (Federal Highway Administration, 2019). Based on these provisions, developers of trucks have embarked on creating carriers of different shapes and sizes, with most having the desire to achieve as much space as possible. The regulations governing the truck capacity have improved efficiency in the sector because of the ability to prevent accidents that could occur when the trucks are of disproportional size and width and carry loads beyond their capability.

How Internal and External Factors Result in an Unsuccessful Logistic Strategic Plan

Before paying much attention to the topic, it is important to understand some of the key terms that form part of the analysis. Internal factors as used in this case refer to the inner strengths and weaknesses that an institution or organization displays. Such internal factors can strongly influence how an institution achieves its goals, and they might be perceived as strengths if they yield appropriate impact on the business but as weaknesses if they produce unfavorable effects (Allison & Kaye, 2005). External factors, on the other hand, refer to the outside factors that could influence an organization or an institution. It is important to understand how the various external factors can impact the capacity of an institution to attain its objectives. Strategic planning, as applied in this case, refers to the establishment’s process of making its strategy clear to all stakeholders and making decision on sound allocation of resources to achieve the strategy (Allison & Kaye, 2005). It differs from an operational plan that offers a clear view of how a department or team will contribute towards the attainment of the organizational objectives (Allison & Kaye, 2005). Usually, the operational plan defines the daily duties needed for the organization to run.

Several internal and external factors could lead to the failure of a logistic strategic plan. A logistic strategic plan would outline how an organization or institution would handle the movement of people and goods from one point to the other, and how the institution plans to handle all aspects. It is always good to develop and nurture mechanisms that would result in a successful logistic strategic plan. Otherwise, the approach may fail to give the desired outcome. One of the internal factors that could lead to the failure of the logistic strategic plan is the leadership approach in the organization (Allison & Kaye, 2005). Usually, leaders who employ democratic and transformational leadership styles achieve the desired outcome in developing the strategic plan as opposed to leaders who use authoritarian and dictatorial techniques. Authoritarian leaders evoke criticism from the subjects who may not cooperate to attain the goals and objectives (Allison & Kaye, 2005). Another internal factor that could derail the development of an effective logistic strategic plan is poor communication among stakeholders (Allison & Kaye, 2005). It is easier to attain the desired results when the team members employ proper communication styles such as assertive approaches that give both parties in a conversation equal opportunities to present their views. It is also important how the leaders motivate the members of the staff to work hard to achieve the organizational strategic goals and objectives. The group is only likely to achieve the desired aspirations if the members of staff get inspiration from the team leader using various possible motivational approaches (Allison & Kaye, 2005). Other than the internal factors that could impact the attainment of a successful logistic strategic plan, the team leaders as well as the workers must consider how the external factors could affect the attempts to develop an effective strategic plan (Allison & Kaye, 2005). The political regulations, for example, could affect the development of a suitable logistic strategic plan if the laws were not friendly and put many restrictions on the developers of the plan. The logistic strategic plan could also fail if it lacks competitive features that would make it excel in an environment where other organizations also strive to develop their own plans. The leaders, therefore, should be keen on the internal and external factors to avoid any shortfalls that could affected the development initiative.

References

Allison, M., & Kaye, J. (2005). Strategic planning for nonprofit organizations. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Bereskin, G. (n.a). Regulation, deregulation, and reregulation in the surface transportation industry. Retrieved from http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/millennium/00097.pdf

Colak, S., et al. (2016). Understanding congested travel in urban areas. Natural Communication, 7, doi: 10.1038/ncomms10793

Dubail, J. (2019). Here’s how metro Boston ranks nationwide in traffic congestion. Retrieved from https://patch.com/massachusetts/boston/here-s-how-metro-boston-ranks-nationwide-traffic-congestion

Duc, G. (2014). Transport and mobility history: Between modal competition and coordination (1918 in our days). Neuchatel: Editions Alphil.

 Federal Highway Administration. (2019). Compilation of existing state truck size and weight limit laws. Retrieved from https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/policy/rpt_congress/truck_sw_laws/index.htm

Gossling, S. (2017). ICT and transportation behavior: A conceptual review. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, doi: 10.1080/15568318.2017.1338318

Monk, D. (2002). The lessons of airline regulation and deregulation: Will we make the same mistakes in space. Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 57(3), 715-753.

Smith, F., & Cox, B. (2010). Airline deregulation. Retrieved from https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/AirlineDeregulation.html

Stover, J. (2001). The Routledge historical atlas of the American railroads. New York, NY: Routledge.