HAVE YOU EVER heard of Betteridge’s law of headlines?
It’s one of those loose news media ‘laws’ that any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered with the word: ‘No’.
This article will focus on claims from business groups that Dublin’s new transport plan could cost the city as much as €400 million.
And while we would be hesitant to spoil the surprise for readers as to whether Betteridge’s law applies, there are certainly some question marks around the claim.
But first, to back up a bit – what’s all this about a transport plan?
Readers may be aware of the controversy which has erupted over the Dublin Transport Plan.
The plan itself is basically a scheme which aims to remove private car traffic from the city and make it easier for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport to move around.
To do this would involve restricting car access in certain parts of the city centre, such as along the quays.
A key aim was to cut down on ‘pass through traffic’ – that is the number of motorists who drive through the city centre without stopping, which the National Transport Authority has estimated at approximately 60%.
Public consultations held by Dublin City Council (DCC) demonstrated overwhelming support for the plan, with even a majority of motorists in favour.
The plan was approved by councillors in November, with the first measures to be rolled out starting from August.
That is, until a concentrated push from the Dublin City Centre Traders Alliance, which includes retailers Brown Thomas Arnotts, several car park owners and a small number of other business groups.
The group claimed the plan could damage city centre retail, resulting in Minister of State Emer Higgins, calling for the plan to be pushed back.
The delay was initially to be until “after Christmas”, although this has slowly morphed to “at least March or April” of next year.
This was supposed to allow time for an economic impact analysis commissioned by the Dublin City Centre Traders Alliance.
On Friday, the report was published, with dire warnings of €400 million being ‘lost’ from the Dublin economy and almost 2,000 jobs losses.
It was also immediately dismissed by many, including economist Barra Roantree, who said the report had various flaws.
The key findings of the report, which was carried out by Pat McCloughan from economic consulting firm PMCA, was that the Dublin Transport Plan would mean that retail spending in 2028 would be €141 million lower than it otherwise would have been.
This is where a variety of other claims come from, including that there would be almost 1,800 retail jobs lost and a knock-on economic impact of up to €400 million.
This is also the source of the key point of contention.
Because the report does not actually find that lower private car traffic will cause the €141 million drop in retail spending.
It actually estimated that retail spending will fall because of more cycling.
The report estimated that if transport trends were left to progress naturally, by 2028 8.7% of people travelling in to shop in Dublin city centre would go by bike. However, the Dublin Transport Plan aims for this number to be 13%.
It then estimated that this would lead to a lower number of people using different forms of public transport, such as buses, trains and the Luas – 60% if nothing is changed, versus 56.8% under the Transport Plan.
Based on figures showing that cyclists tend to spend less money shopping compared to those on public transport, PMCA therefore said the Dublin Transport Plan would cause lower retail spending.
Which then has the knock on impact discussed before, such as job losses.
Rather than endorsing the use of private cars, the report could instead perhaps be used to argue prioritising public transport over cycling, if one was so inclined.
The problem here is that the PMCA report assumes transport is a zero-sum game – lower *percentages* of people using public transport does not necessarily mean that less people will use it overall.
Both cycling and public transport could rise – cycling could just rise by a bigger number.
An important point worth noting – in both scenarios, the PMCA report estimated that the Dublin Transport Plan won’t really have a difference either way on the percentage of retail shoppers who drive.
It estimated that by 2028, 16% of retail customers will get to shops by private car (down from 20% in 2024). This estimate remained the same in both scenarios, ie, whether the Transport Plan happens or not.
The Dublin City Centre Traders Alliance is correct that private car users tend to spend more in shops versus those cycling or on public transport.
The PMCA report estimated that private car users who travel into Dublin city centre to shop typically spend €141 per trip. This compared to €52 for cyclists, €81 for bus passengers, €94 for those on the Luas and €116 for those who travel by train.
However, the fear from the Traders Alliance that fewer cars = less retail spending = job losses does not appear to line up with previous studies.
Many of these have found that a smaller number of shoppers driving is more than offset by the rise in the number of shoppers travelling by public transport.
Think of it this way – while 10 car drivers will have a higher average spend than 20 bus passengers, the 20 bus passengers will spend more overall.
This was the finding of a 2021 EY study commissioned by the National Transport Authority to look at the impact of bus corridors.
“Evidence suggests that those travelling to shops via car spend on average more per trip,” it said.
“However due to the frequency of visits by bus, bike or walking, the average total spend is much higher for this cohort.
“As such, local businesses could benefit financially from greater access to customers through these modes of transport.”
This is perhaps demonstrated by its analysis of those who arrive at shops by walking.
Pedestrians spent an average of just €29 per trip when they went to a shop – far lower than the €117 average of those arriving by private car.
But over a four-week period, it found pedestrians spent a total of €331 compared to €309 by drivers.
Citing a study carried out in London in 2012, the EY report found: “Car drivers spend more on a single trip, while walkers and bus users spend more over a week or a month.”
The Traders Alliance may be best served by focusing on the facts highlighted in reports such as the EY one – more customers means more money, no matter how they arrive at your shop.
The PMCA report shows that private car traffic is going to fall on a proportional basis in the coming years, whether the Dublin Transport Plan happens or not.
The upshot is that improving public transport – the ultimate aim of the Transport Plan – is likely the best way of improving retail sales.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say