The Internet is the future of the computing revolution, as it has quickly become fundamental to the ongoing evolution of computer technology.

No less an authority than IBM has indicated that they believe that by the year 2000, almost half of the global revenues derived from information technology — including hardware, software and services — will be focused on technology related products.

What happens when most computer companies on the planet, recognize the Internet to be the defacto technology of the information age, one which will see the emergence of a giant global computer to which we all will be connected? Quite simply, it means that even as we continue to introduce basic computer technology into the classroom, that technology is changing to become fundamentally related to the Internet. More importantly, even if we choose to avoid the Internet, we cannot — it will soon be ubiquitous.

We must be aware that the enormous investment dollars and research money pouring into anything Internet related means that the technology of the Internet today is but a pittance compared to what we will see tomorrow. Already, research scientists in billion dollar companies, and brilliant young men and woman working out of small start-up businesses, are figuring out the fundamentals of how to send multimedia information through the Internet. In reality, the Internet of today will transform itself tomorrow into a high speed system capable of supporting video and audio teleconferencing — and by doing so, will help to usher in capabilities that we cannot even image.

The impact on education will be dramatic. There will be an increased emphasis on tele-learning, as education itself becomes less dependent upon a physical classroom. On-line research will be common, as the Internet comes to supplement (but not replace) the existing books, encyclopedias and research reports of today.

How can we take advantage of these many new capabilities? How do we ensure that we continue to deliver the fundamentals of education as technology continues to invade the classroom at a relentless pace? What must we do to ensure that we provide our youth with our guidance and wisdom, so that they don’t lose some very important human traits as our world becomes increasingly technology dependent?

The Business World Signs On

The most significant point perhaps, is the reality that the business world is quickly coming to embrace the Internet, in ways that were not even imagined as recently as three years ago. It is fair to say that the economy of the future will increasingly be dependent upon the Internet.

Take a look around today. On-line banking, electronic commerce, customer support activities, inter-organization project teams that utilize the Internet for communications — these are but a few of the things which are happening today that are precursors to the type of economic and on-line business activity which will occur tomorrow. Even net-skeptics are stunned by the rapid rate of adoption of the Internet throughout the business community.

There can be no doubt that we are on the crest of a huge new wave of computing, in which the computers that business organizations use will reach out to the computers of their customers, suppliers, trading partners and business associates — through the Internet.

As this occurs, our world of business will be transformed — and the survivors in the economy of tomorrow will have the necessary skills and capabilities to survive in the economy of tomorrow.

What must we do to ensure that our youth can survive in this networked economy? What skills must they have? How will they be able to cope? How can we increase the likelihood that they will have a job or career? What will be the career of tomorrow? These are not frivolous questions.

You may make global phone calls at favorable, low rates; prepaid phone cards can help you call who you want to and at what time you want to, without problem, delay.

Undeniably, the most important trend to affect the way we teach the youth of today is the fact that we are now seeing the emergence of the first generation in the history of mankind to have grown up with the Internet.

This is an extremely important and significant development — after all, I know of five year olds who see a Web address on television, and who then run to their computer to check out the site. We have an ever increasing number of these children who are likely to be using the Internet at home, as the number of Canadian families with home computers — currently nearing 50% according to Statistics Canada — get on-line.

Clearly, the ‘net-generation’ child is upon us — an individual who suffers from none of the fear, intimidation and concern with the computer keyboard as have their confused and bewildered adult contemporaries.

The result? In the classroom, we are already seeing the emergence of an entire generation of kids who often know far more about computers and the Internet than the teachers. We see teachers raising alarms about the technology, without having a fundamental understanding of the technology itself. We see judgments made with respect to the Internet, by a group of people who have not taken the time to learn what is really going on.

The result? We have the bizarre situation in which teachers are attempting to instruct their students in the fundamentals of education, while those same students charge off at lightning speed into the future using what they recognize to be the tool of tomorrow. We have educators who try to dismiss the Internet — and kids who ignore them all the while, perhaps rightfully considering them as dinosaurs locked in the comfort of their yesterdays. We have a generational disdain — due to the fact that teachers of today cannot quite seem to accept that the world of tomorrow is going to be very different than it is today.

So what is to become of the teacher as this trend continues — and as their students come into the classroom with essay material gathered from the Internet? What will the teacher do when students ask questions about how to properly cite an Internet source in a bibliography? How will he or she react when their net-savvy students begin a classroom debate about the accuracy of some particular on-line site.

Shall they run in terror, pleading for the world to slow down? Will they blindly cast out and seek to shut down the on-line activities of their students, stating that the vast resources of the Internet should not be used for homework and research?

Or will they embrace the Internet, and indicate a readiness to subscribe to its wonder and charm while counseling against its risks and weaknesses?

Simply, the youth of today have embraced the Internet as their own — and we who purport to teach them, must accept that reality as fact.

You may make global calls at so low and favorable rates; international phone cards will help you call who you need to and when you need to, with no problem, delay.

With all the recent merger frenzy, it’s become obvious that the corporate types have finally clued in to the Internet, e-biz and e-commerce. Yet to their horror, they realize that while fabulous opportunities exist on-line, a Pandora’s box of challenges has also emerged. In particular, it seems that they can no longer control the distribution of their products.

I’d hazard a guess that given the flurry of recent lawsuits, some media moguls have decided that the only way to deal with the Internet is to sue anyone and everyone who is challenging their business models.

The music industry has been busy suing various groups involved with MP3, the music format that makes it easy to distribute digital forms of music. The movie, television and entertainment industries are busy suing Toronto-based on-line broadcaster iCraveTV.com, charging it with “brazen theft.”

There are new lawsuits against computer geeks who have managed to figure out how to get around the copy protection scheme found on DVD-ROMs, which is arguably the hottest new entertainment technology on the planet.

Things are getting nasty: Just the other day, a 16-year-old Norwegian kid who figured out the mathematical equations behind the DVD code found the police banging at his door.

A battle royal is under way, and it’s fascinating entertainment. On one side, we have the entertainment companies, finally ready to take advantage of the opportunities of the wired world, and ready to use lawyers to defend their turf.

On the other side, there’s a ragtag army of computer geeks, bound by the global reach of the Internet, and impassioned by their collective distaste for anything that puts constraints on how they might use their computers.

I don’t know about you, but my money is on the geeks.

Regardless of the deep, troubling and complex issues at work here, the reality is that the folks who control the computer code will be the ones who will control the future. Any attempts to prevent the distribution of information by legal means in this digital world — whether it be music, movies or television signals — will ultimately be doomed to failure.

To understand why, you need to immerse yourself in the mindset of the technical community, instead of simply pondering the press releases from the other side.

One of the best starting points is to visit Slashdot (http://slashdot.org) — it uses the tag line “News For Nerds. Stuff that Matters.” It’s a geek perspective on the issues of the day, including the many legal battles. (Investors take note: It is probably also the best place to understand new technologies before they come out. The entire
Slashdot community knew what Transmeta was up to before any public announcement was made.)

Often weird, slightly adolescent, extremely irreverent and often not understandable, it is still a goldmine of information as to how the Internet of the future will shape up.

There are countless other sites similar to SlashDot. Techdirt (http://techdirt.com) is but another example of these on-line communities.

You come to realize that all these lawsuits are viewed as nothing more than an amusing challenge to the geek community. The on-line mindset, when confronted by a legal letter or restrictive computer code, is to play a version of a popular quiz TV show. “I can crack that secret code in three steps, Alex,” goes the response to the challenge.

Instant communities, such as OpenDVD (http://www.opendvd.org/), are emerging in which the geeks passionately defend their right to open up technology or share information — and where they counter the PR spin from the corporate or entertainment world. This community often acts in bad taste, poking fun at the futility of lawsuits in the digital age. I just visited a Web site and bought a T-shirt that contains the entire secret DVD code printed on the back. What chance does Hollywood have in this battle, when its crown jewels are protected by a mathematical equations that can be printed on the back of a T-shirt once the geek community has figured it out?

Ordering prepaid telephone cards it’s reliable, low cost and convenient key for long distance and global calls for most of people all over the earth.

As the world economy becomes wired together through the Internet, every small business, regardless of their size, will find it necessary through the next few years to purchase and implement increasingly sophisticated computer and networking technology.

Suppliers and customers will deploy sophisticated procurement networks — and you will have to be part of them. Reduced profit margins will force you into offering your own online commerce capability in order to stay competitive. Global competition will require that you implement effective, technology based customer support tools to maintain your customer base.

Yet if you are like many entrepreneurs, you will make decisions about these technologies in a vacuum, without enough insight to make the proper decisions. It is a common problem — over the years, I have met far too many entrepreneurs who don’t take the time to clearly understand the technology that they get involved with. The result is a lot of bad decisions, and wasted money.

Telecommunications guru Peter Keen, in his seminal 1988 work, “Competing in Time,” noted that “creating an organizational strategy for telecommunications requires a new style of business thinking among senior managers, who must also have some insights into key aspects of the technology itself.”

Substitute the word “telecommunications” with “e-biz,” and you’ve got a strong statement to guide you. To ensure that you set your organization in the right direction in the future, you should be prepared to get more familiar with technology.

Take the emerging world of e-commerce. As a small business, you are probably wondering what is involved in setting up your own “store” online. Before you begin to listen to the many companies pitching you an e-commerce business solution, you should understand the range and complexity of choices that will need to be made.

Should you have someone build a site on your behalf, hosted on your own computer system? Or should you simply rent space on one of the many emerging “roll-your-own” e-commerce sites available? What is the difference between the two approaches in terms of cost, complexity, support, flexibility, and your appearance to the outside world?

It is only by exploring e-commerce technology directly that you can begin to get insight into such issues. To do so, you should visit a number of sites online which let you create a store for a trial period, and then cancel without penalty. There are quite a few you might try out, such as SunCommerce (www.suncommerce.com), Yahoo (store.yahoo.com), iCat (www.icat.com), GeoCities Geoshops (http://www.geocities.com/join/geoshops/) and others. Then, take some time to talk to a fellow entrepreneur who has created a store using their own computer systems. By comparing the two approaches and assessing what you have learned, you’ll end up making a better decision as to your own needs.

How can you do this? Waste time! For a long time, I’ve set a goal of constantly exploring and trying out new technologies. I often set aside Friday afternoons as a “play-day,” a period of time in which I would actively explore new, emerging technology. Rather than feeling guilty about “wasting” such time, I’ve come to appreciate that it is an important R&D process that helps me to make intelligent technology decisions.

Spending time on technology exploration doesn’t mean you have to become a raving cyberdweeb spewing bits and bytes at your next neighborhood BBQ. But it does mean taking some time to ensure that you can make the best decisions possible for your small business.

Using a international call cards will be a good manner to communicate with your family, kids, friends, loved ones and employees.

THE RELATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENTAL POLICY FOR AGRICULTURE AND MOBILITY

Agriculture has been the main economical stimulating factor for ages. Since the second part of the last century it has been changed from a prosperity source to an important money drain for governments (and so for societies).

A good example is Europe: Agricultural subsidies occupy these days the major part of the budget of the European Community. Agriculture has become the main problem by incorporating more countries in the EC. Agriculture has become a source of trade conflicts with other economical zones on the globe, thus damaging other local industries. Agriculture has developed itself into both environmental and animal hostile directions.

Having its own agricultural food production is a very positive facet for a country. This will always be the case. Especially in a world that has planned to use the fossil energy resources within 100 year from now. Most farmers are not pleased by the source of their current income: Governmental subsidies. They want to earn their own income in the profession they like: Being a farmer.

The governmental subsidies to farmers must end quickly, but without causing social problems, in the interest of all parties concerned. How to do this without other (just replacing) subsidies by governments who want to get out of debt instead of getting deeper into dept?

The answers for the problems of the agricultural industry are as simple as they are complex. If farmers are allowed to develop 1% of their soil for housing, this will give them an extra income which helps them to step out of the current rat race of more of the same for less money. This solution costs governments nothing and when combined with balance reduction of the agricultural subsidies per farmer on an individual basis, it even will release governmental budget pressure. A balancing per farmer by a standard balancing formula, will also make it an individual decision for each farmer: Staying depending on subsidies or creating an independent future.

Environmentally concerned people may be against this development at the moment. But we need to digest the work of Schumacher, the first ecological economist of the world, with major governmental impact in the 50s and 60s of the last century on the UK government. In one of his books Schumacher describes his resistance against housing in agricultural regions. His conclusions after years of thinking on this problem was: It’s not a question of yes or no, but more about the how of no. If the housing is done in a green way, it contributes to environmental diversity instead of disturbing environmental areas.

The landscape model in town and country planning has been overlooked by governmental officials, which have a unnatural drift to ordening everything in straight lines. The green border is nonsense invented by uncreative people. The compact city model is criminal to children, who get robbed of the last playgrounds and developmental environments they have. The compact city is an invention of professional environmental activists, who purposely only picture one side of the story and who have no vision whatsoever about the importance of the biodiversity of the areas concerned. Current agricultural areas are not quite bio-diverse. We don’t need more bare industrial areas. We need industrial areas that are green. Only then economy and environment will become friends. A widely planned and diverse green decorated landscape model is much more environmentally adapted and friendly than the non diverse agricultural landscape.

Agricultural subsidies will disappear. If farmers get the possibilities to build for a start 1% of their soil (with a 90% green norm on this 1%), farmers will no longer need subsidies and will stop producing more of the same for lowering prices. Each farmer will become a project developer, including on-location infrastructure. This will reduce the budget pressure on local authorities. The market will solve the agricultural, housing problems and contribute in solving some environmental issues. If only 1% soil destination change is allowed the current house prices will not come under any pressure.

On the difficult question “What kind of living environment people prefer?”, a simple answer is possible, in the form of just this one question: “What is the housing condition of the wealthy?” This simple truth is the final breakthrough for a more living countryside based national planning. This simple truth is also a big facet of the solution of the traffic congestion problems. Information technology will move the work place of an increasing number of people to their home offices. These people like for a major part a modern relaxed country style way of living (if there would be commercial de-central community facilities within range). This simple truth also matches perfectly the current trend of two part time working parents in an increasing number of families.

An active government that does not walk miles behind the technological developments (and we don’t mean big brother technology, but the general technological direction) will be granted a solution to the traffic issue in the same way it has grown: Just by itself. This seems contradictory, but active knowledge and passive behaviour can be a good marriage: Travelling a river is much easier that digging a channel. Even more so when the channel never will be used as planned by technological and societal changes.

Traffic congestion is a product of a post industrial society. The now developing digital society may have traffic congestion before the Amsterdam Internet Exchange (the digital hub of Holland), but that problem is already solved by realizing other Exchanges in Groningen, Rotterdam and Enschede and by much other peerings. As with container traffic and the Betuwe Rail Road or the waterways solution: The market solves this kind of problems better, quicker and at a lower price than any government ever can do.

Should a government invest in digital infrastructures for home/work integration? No that is not necessary: The market gives these facilities for comparative prices pointed to market needs. The only thing governments will need to do is developing laws ensuring continuity for digital traffic. Connections and domains need owners’ right protection. Domains and connections must be protected legally in case of bankruptcy of suppliers and must also be protected by law against governmental and big market parties influence.

Should a government do nothing? No they have to react actively and in the right direction. They must chose not to solve the problems of yesterday. Active things governments can do are stimulating both the digital look on home work places and other geographical spreading issues. But this needs nothing more than governmental (Postbus 51 in Holland) media spots and a supporting website. Any other action is a waste of money and will damage the image of the government. The government doesn’t understand actual technology and never will: This is a fundamental difference between 9 to 5 working governmental officers and 7 till 24 working tech-nerds and entrepreneurs.

What can a government actively do? Creating a legislative basis and support for decentralisation. By reducing the legislation barriers of countryside development. By giving suburbs the legal possibility to use the main cities’ name. And there are many more possibilities. More on active policies concerning stimulation of living suburbs can be found on www.planck.us/future/agriculture and other issues analysed on this site. Planck is willing to help departments with creating this concept of developments adjusting to rising instead of descending. The best thing the Dutch Government can do is dealing with the future in stead of solving the past.

Governmental officials that don’t see the current developments, should not be in office, but that would be a problem, because their would be only a few left. Governmental officials that want assistance in grasping technological developments, can hire members of the Planck team or of other technological/societal analysers in the area of active knowledge operation.

Governmental officials that are in charge of solving the traffic congestion problems can hire companies like www.best-policy.info and www.press.nl to communicate arguments to both politicians and civilians. Press Sure is specialized in attracting media in a way media want to be attracted. Best Policy is specialized in communicating with politicians in a way politicians and their parties and other main movements in society are open for issues: By communicating analysed and motivated facets of each involved issue in road pricing. This will result in less resistance against fuel tax, because other solutions are so much worse.

There is one minor disadvantage to fuel tax as a road pricing method. There is no route or time of day grading possible. However this one missing facet is compensated by many other positive facets and the effect will be the same: The number of cars on the road is less a time and route problem (these are daily static values for people and companies) and more an overall mobility issue.

Fuel tax also reduces the CO2 national emission severely. This is necessary to prevent that the Dutch government does not realize the Kyoto emission norms. When these norms are not realized the Dutch government can face severe penalties on the extra emissions caused by signing this international agreement, which is so important for the world (and for sure for low lands like the Netherlands), and which has been accepted by most countries.

But fuel tax will not be necessary. Governments that anticipate right to the coming ICT wave will see traffic congestion disappear like snow before the sun. It’s clear that this solution is better than expensive digital road pricing and even cheap fuel tax (even if the last solution gives the 100% of the pricing, without almost any costs).

CONCLUSIONS ON ROAD PRICING

We mentioned it already: Approximately in 2007 the traffic congestion problem will be solved by the coming ICT wave. The hardware (pc and gsm) is already years among us. The infrastructure (cable and adsl) is already there, the software environment (Novell Directory Services, Microsoft Active Directory and total web based company structures like asp, dotnet, php, js and many other standards) is being implanted now.

The effects of the combination will result in growth of the missing link: The acceptance and realisation of more home based production in digital and communication based jobs. This will result in a decrease of traffic in the rush hours, which will result in the disappearance of traffic congestion in these rush hours.

Mobility must not be punished. It must be steered, or (better if possible) prevented. Governments are at risk concerning this issue, potentially cutting their own roots. It is save to state that their licence to govern is directly connected to the way they will solve the mobility issue. Both the proof of their determination to solve it and the proof of their determination not to create an over controlled society are at stake.

The home office will never replace completely the city office. But people will attend the city office only one instead of the full five days a week. This home office development will solve within 5 years all traffic congestions on all roads. Traffic congestion is caused by that small percentage “too much cars”. The home office development will reduce this too much cars situation completely. What must governments do to stimulate this development?

We think that the actual development does not need any governmental support. It’s just the way information technology will take us. The government can provide some conditional incentives. Clear tax rules (or reductions) for home office equipment and for house space used for office purposes. Maybe there is governmental stimulation needed concerning information about home work technology. Concept information and technology awareness can be broadcasted for a short time. Plus a supplier independent database structure with no governmental opinion, but with user rated solutions. Also a reform on countryside or agricultural land policies will support this major development.
THE BEST PRACTICAL NO LOGGING ROAD PRICING SOLUTION

If government decides not to take the road of stimulating an ICT based economy, but stick to road pricing as the main facet of governmental traffic reduction policies, the big question that then pops up is, why this must be done by a method with high social and economical risks for both civilians and companies. Reducing or damaging their autonomy by movement logging equals taking severe social and economical risks.

There is a simple road pricing method that not enters the autonomy of civilians and companies. It’s called fuel tax. After this word is dropped, further discussion is usually no longer rational. This is the trigger word for shutting down all political cohesion. But let’s look on this issue rationally.

The implementation costs E 0. That is something we cannot say of any other road pricing solution. The reason is that the administrative infrastructure already is functioning. From each litre of fuel the government gets already its share. This E 0 implementation cost is a strong argument in a political climate where each major spending of money is difficult. The complete administrative and ICT infrastructure for fuel tax is already available and working. There is no implementation risk or trouble.

The operation costs E 0. That is something we cannot say of any other road pricing solution. The reason is that the administrative infrastructure is already functioning. From each litre of fuel the government gets already its share. This E 0 operational cost is a strong argument in a political situation where each major spending of money is difficult. Any other road pricing system will not result in a 100% usable fee. Costs of other solutions can go up as far as 50% of the revenue. The complete administrative and ICT infrastructure for fuel tax is already available and working. There is no implementation risk or trouble. Any other solution will relatively be a waste of tax payers money, and that’s a construction no tax payer and no government is waiting for.

The implementation time can be short in theory. But then the first practical implementation problems start. It has to be done within the whole European Union. Otherwise people in border area’s will go by car over the border to buy fuel. Maybe this is a good test case whether the European Parliament is able to handle important issues which are a benefit for all member states.

Like in all things preventing is always many times better than curing afterwards. This is also applicable to the subject of traffic congestion. Much better than controlling traffic congestion based on actual mobility needs, is preventing congestion by active mobility needs changing policies.
There are some policy changes that will have huge effects on traffic congestion. Some of these have no or less social resistance, others have huge social resistance. The bottom lines will be: First: Will traffic congestion really be solved. Secondly: Can this be done with other road pricing based on digital movement logging, also the worst practical solution. In our opinion there are much better pro-human and pro-freedom ICT based solutions to solve traffic congestion than Big-Brother-like governmental movement registration. The fact that such a major issue is discussed without any warnings whatsoever, illustrates the poor vision of governments on both positive possibilities and negative dangers of ICT for societies.

A renewed look on the functions of the city regions is necessary. There are some central serving functions concentrated in some places which can be done better (read: without traffic congestion problems) elsewhere. An example is European holiday or short distance European business flight traffic. This traffic exists now the year round and not just in quiet holiday months. More such flights using regional airports can fulfil these mobility needs better than national airports, especially because national airports also have air traffic congestions, thus doubling travel stress and travel time. This concerns governments, dealing with major public functions like airline licences, but it also applies to all companies as regards both production plants as well as office farms. Some accountancy firms have relocated themselves. They left the cities and put major office buildings in the dormitory suburbs. A town like Almere, which has space enough, profits on a large scale from this development. This process of moving functions and companies to attractive suburbs has just started and has a long way to go. Each move in this development reduces traffic congestion.

A total new look on phone numbers and geographical locations is also necessary. Companies move to Amsterdam, just to be located in a global capital (or for example to Arnhem to be located in a regional capital). The three digit numbers (like 020) must be released for each company that wants it. All companies in the neighbourhood of major cities must be allowed to use the city’s name. The legal use of Amsterdam-Almere (instead of plain Almere), or Amsterdam-Laren (instead of plain Laren), or Amsterdam-Schiphol (instead of plain Schiphol) will give decentral locations the trigger they need to attract companies of which the employees want to do better things with their time than unnecessarily partaking in congested traffic. This super effective secondary naming must be legalized as soon as possible.

A better traffic congestion information is called for. The current information screens above the highways with alternative routes work fine for users of that highways. But graphical presented traffic congestion will prevent people to drive to these roads. Current voice based low effect information will be replaced by website, i-mode and cruise control based easy to interpret graphical information. Extra travel time of roads will be displayed exactly.

Theoretically there is some traffic congestion prevention that can be realized by flex work. But this development will not start automatically. It needs promotion of the concept. It needs more human office environments. Companies that export, import or service companies in other time zones can realize a head start on competitors by flex work. For flex work some tax discount is necessary as a starting stimulating factor. Holland as international business country can economically benefit from this development. Doing business with companies in other time zones will be stimulated by this. But business communication becomes more and more email mediated and this has less time zone connections than phone communication.

Another way to reduce traffic congestion is by improving or adjusting the current legislation. Traffic congestion can still be much reduced by better traffic management and adequate congestion prevention. In cases where there are no external parties involved and the governments (or her contractors) are the only parties, legislation is maybe too heavy a word. Definition of optimal handling / response scripts is then a better wording. The purpose is to ensure that problem solutions are based both on the practical situation of locations and the best theoretical possibilities. Now many situations are managed by incident management, which results in unnecessary slow restoring of the road throughput. In case there are other parties involved (like in ship legislation), the only way to adjust current situation handling is by legislation.

Traffic accidents cause each day a lot of traffic congestion. A flexible legislation, resulting in action scripts to deal with accidents more quickly, as well as measures preventing them, is needed. In the USA lots of traffic congestion in the rush hours is caused by broken cars on the highways. In Holland this problem is almost absent thanks to the APK legislation. In the USA this problem is treated in a very American way by a tax reduction on buying a new(er) car. Back to Holland: A lot of traffic congestion is caused by traffic accidents. Traffic accidents aren’t preventable, they just happen and they happen more during the hours when the traffic increases. A quick accident removal response method will solve traffic congestion substantially.

Lost freight from trucks causes each day a lot of traffic congestion. A flexible legislation or action script on solving and preventing these incidents, should lead to a better and quicker response on lost freight on the roads, which damage the road throughput. A quick lost freight removal response method will solve traffic congestion substantially. But there is also a typical legislation solution. Legislation that holds truck owners and/or truck companies responsible for the damage caused by the lost freight of their trucks. They would cover this by insurance, but claims will reduce their no-claim bonuses and therefore it will certainly have effect on better truck loading practice.

Road maintenance and road extensions are also a major source of traffic congestion. The good part of this type of traffic congestions is that they are by nature temporary, and that the roads afterwards have a higher throughput than before. But there is a lot of unnecessary traffic congestion caused by road works. Here also more throughput optimalization knowledge is needed than the common road building or road maintaining company has shown to the road customer the last years. Road work contracts must have traffic throughput clauses. Governments and road work companies must initiate together a task force that is specialized in maximum throughput knowledge. Companies like Saan maybe can develop to specialize in this area. The current road work management, focused on the work mainly and not on continued traffic throughput during the works, can easily be replaced by good road works purchase management and purchase contracts. Traffic congestion by road works doesn’t cry out for adjusted legislation, it simple needs better governmental management.

Some change in shipping priority rules will also prevent some daily traffic congestion. This traffic congestion solving and preventing issue can be easily attained by adjusting the ship priority legislation on some items. There are just some new ship rules needed.

Thousands of cars waiting for one recreational ship that passes a highway bridge is a situation we can not sell anymore in the current time-is-money society. The traffic congestion on the A1 (Amsterdam / Amersfoort) near Muiden is a perfect example of a few pleasure yachts causing irritation among a very large numbers of car drivers. Freight ships, however, prevent a lot of road traffic and must hold their priority position in the bridge legislations.