Why Alexei Dingli’s artificial intelligence system will not only not improve Malta’s traffic problems. It will make it exponentially worse.

Two different solutions to Malta’s traffic problems made the news recently. The first that a company spearheaded by Prof. Alexiei Dingli won a 1.3M Euro investment to use artificial intelligence technology to improve traffic congestion on Malta’s roads by optimising traffic flows and routes. The second that a group of 20 university students and lecturers actually solved the problem by means of a “bicycle bus.”

Which one genuinely works best? And why?

The Efficiency Paradox

Making something more efficient increases its use. Making traffic more efficient means there will be more traffic.

If this sounds counterintuitive, I am confident that in a few lines it will not.

Take for example a 200g block of cheese and a 500g block of cheese. Buying the larger piece is “more efficient” — cheaper per 100 grams and requires fewer shopping trips. In reality though, what happens is that it typically gets eaten in a shorter period of time. We know this through experience. When it feels like there is a surplus, we are more likely to take more.

This is widely known, but rarely spoken about, in economic circles as the Jevons Paradox, summarised as:

The Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced.

There are numerous relatable examples.

This effect was first described by economist William Stanley Jevons (hence the name) when he postulated in the 1800s that more efficient use of coal would result in increased consumption. We now know this to be true with catastrophic consequences to our planet and well being.

In Malta, there is already real life and tangible experience of how this has panned out with respect to traffic. Over the decades, successive governments have attempted to “tackle” the traffic problems with tactics like widening roads, bypasses, flyovers, tunnels, and better paving. Not once has this resulted in a decrease in traffic and congestion. This is because when you “add a lane” to a road to decrease congestion, it incentivises more care use not less. More car sales not less. And less use of public transport or car-sharing not more.

And with information technology itself we have seen how the promise of the much hyped “paperless office” first promised in the seventies has only resulted in an exponential increase of paper use largely as a result of computers and printers making it so much more efficient to produce and print vast amounts of documentation.

Meeting the Problem

The real challenge, which neither Prof. Dingli nor successive governments have risen to, is to ‘meet’ the problem rather than tackle (one of) its symptoms.

‘Meeting the problem’ means taking stock of the full scale of what’s going on, its effects, and its root causes. And then crafting a strategy to address that and not just tactically ‘fighting’ a part of it.

The traffic problem in Malta includes not just the difficulty of reliably getting from point A to point B using private cars, it also includes, in no particular order:

• Air pollution more than double the recommended threshold (where even the recommended threshold is arguably too high). This has a serious detrimental effect to both human health, food crops, and biodiversity.
• Directly contributes to Malta having one of the highest rates of obesity in the EU.
• Reduced road safety for cyclists, further disincentivising non-car use. Without a doubt a segment we should be aiming to increase not vice versa.
• A reduction in the effectiveness of public transport, which is also in turn further disincentivised.
• Together these items increasingly make Malta an unattractive tourist destination, a sector on which the island’s economy relies heavily on.
• Ever-increasing expenses for motorists themselves who spend more money on fuel and parking facilities.
• Degradation of the built and natural environment as more and more land and public spaces are encroached on or taken up by new roads, petrol stations, and parking areas.
• Increasingly denying children the ability to safely enjoy outdoor play.
• Significantly contributes to the overall degradation in quality of life, wellbeing, and mental health in Malta’s population that spends a large proportion of their day rushing, being angrily stuck in traffic, and worried at being late.

This is not even an exhaustive list. However with just this starting point, and with the efficiency paradox in mind, it is not hard to see how “using AI to improve traffic” will not only make some items worse. It doesn’t even begin to address some of the more important issues.

Real Solutions

Real solutions to Malta’s traffic problem require a focus on directly and significantly reducing the absolute number of cars on the road.

(This includes, by the way, electric cars. Electric cars do not present a real solution to any of these problems. The only problem they are in a position to tackle is the air pollution issue and even that in only a minimal way given that electricity in Malta is not generated in a pollution-free way—and will not be for a very long time, if ever.)

Reducing cars on roads, besides tackling the immediate issues of pollution and stress, will result in reducing the burden the health system, increasing happiness and wellbeing, create more fulfilling work environments and school experiences, and give people back the ability to spend quality time with children, elders, and community.

Doing this would require the implementation of forward thinking degrowth policies. A few examples and suggestions of which might be:

• Completely free public transport for all
• Subsidised taxi services
• Car buyback schemes
• Free or subsidised bicycles and bike repair shops
• A reduction in the number of lanes available to cars, enforced by the erection of barriers or bollards
• Free priority transport for teachers, nurses, doctors, and other essential workers.
• Removal of subsidies for petrol and diesel
• Tolls for usage of certain roads and/or at certain times
• Education and incentives for employers to build in working hour flexibility
• A four-day working week
• Environmental tax on new cars
• Investing in improving public transport and diversifying routes and vehicles
• Conversion of parking lots into green spaces, leisure areas, skate parks, sports facilities, and play parks

Can AI play a part in all of this? Without a doubt. AI can assist cyclists, enabling increased physical activity. AI can optimise the public transport network and routes. It can help predict where and when essential workers will be most needed.

It can help create the friction needed to reduce cars on the road instead of making it more likely that jumping into your car remains the default option.

---

Photo by Geronimo Poppino on Unsplash