Paul from Paris

I’m an avid urban cyclist, and I’ve posted on some of the safety challenges that Paris cyclists face and what they and the authorities are doing to meet them.

To end 2009 on an upbeat note, this post notes approvingly an effort to boost awareness and safety.

When you consider recent cycling fatalities in Paris, you find that death often follows a collision between a cycle and a truck. These are likely candidates for genuine accidents, where neither cyclist or truck driver is at fault. What happens? The cyclist enters a trucker’s blind spot and literally becomes invisible before a turn or lane change.

Cyclists’ awareness have been increased with decals on Vélib rental bicycles that inform cyclists of the problem in general and illustrate how it can occur.

The picture with this post shows another aspect of the safety campaign. In the photo, a Paris city garbage truck has a “blind spot danger” sticker that points out the danger for bicycles and motorcycles.

I applaud the initiative. It’s a real-time warning for cyclist, and a reminder for drivers (every time they get into their vehicle) and truck crews (whenever they move around the vehicle).

Incentives influence market choices.

This statement should be unexceptional, hardly newsworthy. But an onslaught of end-of-the-year news reports in France suggests otherwise.

More than 2.2 new passenger cars will be sold in France in 2009. This figure is up from a recent average of 2.0-2.1 million vehicles. It ties sales in 2001 (2.25 million), and approaches sales in 1990 (2.3 million).

Sales are up for all French automakers, with double-digit jumps in December sales compared to same-period sales in 2008.

Incentives have everything to do with this.

France has a cash for clunkers program: for cars more than 10 years old, and provided that the beneficiary buy a new car by 31 December 2009 (it being understood that the new vehicle can be delivered later, in 2010), the beneficiary will receive € 1,000. About 570,000 people are expected to benefit from the program in 2009. Starting 1 January 2010, the amount of the payment will fall to € 700.

France also has a sliding-scale, ecological bonus-malus program: cars that emit little CO2 are entitled to a bonus (usually from 200 to 1,000 euros); those that emit more than 130g CO2/km are subject to an eco-tax. CO2 emissions are a proxy for fuel efficiency, so the measure also favors fuel-efficient cars. Although originally presented as tax-neutral, car buyers have strongly favored smaller, fuel-efficient vehicles.

Finally, car-makers have added additional “bonuses” or price cuts that match or multiply the state-run programs.

With all these incentives, I’m not surprised that new-car sales in France have risen in 2009. But some questions remain:

• What will be the effect of the €300 drop in payments effective 1 January 2010? In France, cash for clunkers isn’t an all or nothing proposition; the payment amount will drop gradually. The ecological bonus-malus system will be fine-tuned but will stay in place. Few new cars sell for less than € 6,000, so the €300 drop represents a price change of less than 5%: for a small car selling for € 9,000, the dip represents 3%. Is this amount really enough to drive consumer choices?
• What price effect have the state-run programs had on new-car spending? Do consumers decide, beforehand, to spend a predetermined amount (for example, € 15,000), then bargain for the most car they can get at that price? In which case, have automakers been able to move buyers towards marginally more expensive vehicles (for example, a € 16,500 car), or vehicles with more options (for example, a special interior treatment priced at € 1,000)?
• Why do so many consumers wait until the end of the bonus period before they buy a car? One could just as easily expect an uptick in sales towards the beginning of the year, when bonuses are paid; or in the autumn, when new-model cars come out. Are consumers saving up? Have they considered the new car as a Christmas present?
• How many consumers behave opportunistically? Under the French plan, a beneficiary must hold title to an old vehicle for at least six months before she benefits from the program. Have families arranged for the 85-year-old grandmother to transfer her old car to her 25-year-old granddaughter, in order to help the granddaughter to buy a new vehicle? More fancifully, have families been trying to insure out-of-commission clunkers sitting on cinder blocks in a garage?
• What do plans to help the automotive sector reveal or hide about consumer spending generally? Is consumer spending up, or is it down; and how much do changes in automotive spending account for the broader change in consumer spending? For instance, when consumers buy a new car, do they cut their beer and pretzel budget? Or is the purchase of a new car a marker of renewed or buoyant consumer confidence (with beer and pretzel sales remaining strong)? If consumers are making trade-offs when they buy a new automobile, what purchases do they cut back?

I found a gift in the mail: the 2010 edition of Europe and you: A snapshot of EU achievements, courtesy of the European Union publications office.

Sixty years ago, Europeans –millions of Europeans– were hungry and cold. Europe was beset by the challenges of economic reconstruction and the threats of the cold war. The smartest heads and steadiest hands concurred: the situation was bleak, war was likely (if it hadn’t already begun, in a subterranean way), and future prospects were dim. Grandiosity or triumphalism were absent from public discourse.

The European Union has achieved more than its founders would have dared imagine. The point today seems obvious, but it’s not: customs duties and other barriers have been removed within the EU, and imports face common treatment regardless of point of entry. Economic activities can be organized on a grand scale, and market behavior is policed to curtail collusion or abuse. Many of the EU’s 500 million inhabitants can cross national borders without showing any document, much less having to seek a visa. The Euro figures among the world’s leaing currencies.

Surprisingly, none of this is mentioned by so much as a single word in Europe and you. This “snapshot of EU achievements” instead teeters between grandiosity and lack of self-confidence:

• Is the EU really fighting dementia, or hunger in the world’s poorest countries? Of course not. Scientists and relief organizations do that work. The EU may fund their efforts, but writing a check is not the same as doing the work, especially when the check-writer is a custodian of public funds.
• Has the EU contributed to lower mobile phone rates, or to better terms for credit card holders? Arguably so, through legislative action and effective economic policing. But do these accomplishments deserve a place among the top ten EU accomplishments? They’re several orders of magnitude smaller than what the EU actually has done but does not discuss.

I spent the Christmas weekend with my wife’s family, with many children present.

Amidst the festivities, a box caught my eye. It bore the name of R2D2, the celebrated “‘droid” from the “Star Wars” pictures, with a legend: nom de machine (machine name).

The box was otherwise a mystery. It had no address or brand or other indication of content or sender. There was a bar code sticker, but that could have been anyone’s. “R2D2 Nom de machine” actually were the only words written anywhere on the box. The legend and the writing on sealing tape were in French, suggesting that the box was put together in France. But I haven’t the faintest idea of what it contained. The box was too small to have housed the R2D2 featured in the “Star Wars” pictures, and none of the children present had the good ortune to receive an R2D2 replica, doll, or disguise as a gift.

I admire the box maker for including this pleasant surprise on its box.

For years –decades!– I’ve been sending greeting cards at the holiday season. In the USA and UK, the custom is to send cards before Christmas; in France, people send cards after the New Year.

Amidst news chatter about the Copenhagen conference and calls to “save the planet”, and because the environment does matter, I decided to do things differently this year:

• Instead of sending a printed card by the post, I send a pdf –of the card I otherwise would have printed– by e-mail;
• Skeptical whether this would have any impact on the environment, I figured out what I otherwise would have spent (for printing, for postage), rounded up, and made a contribution to an worthy environmental organization: the World Resources Institute, “an environmental think tank that goes beyond research to find practical ways to protect the earth and improve people’s lives”. WRI is a thoughtful, responsible (4 star rating on Charity Navigator) group, global in its vision, modest when speaking of its accomplishments.