Abstract

There is a growing body of international evidence available that shows highway construction fails to solve issues of congestion and improvements to the local economy. There is also evidence that due to changes of land use and expectations of being able to travel from the land opened for development that traffic is induced to the highway network. Alternative methods of managing travel demand; such has Voluntary Travel Behaviour Change (VTBC) initiatives have been delivered internationally. A significant VTBC scheme, called the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF), was delivered in the United Kingdom between 2011 and 2015. This paper focuses on the people who delivered these initiatives, rather than the individuals required to change their behaviour. This is to understand how transport planners’ views influence the type of VTBC initiatives that were delivered. The study included a survey of 69 bid managers for LSTF projects and interviews with 17 council officers. The survey found that 80% transport planning officers understood the concept of induced traffic compared to just 10% of the wider population. It was also evident that the sample group was a homogenous group, where their views on issues such as climate change, congestion and the factors that influence how we travel were remarkably similar. The findings show that despite the evidence that highway construction does not provide a solution to travel demand, the decisions about which schemes are funded remain with non-transport experts, such as government ministers and local politicians, and this invariably leads to highway ‘solutions’ being chosen which limit the potential success of any VTBC initiative to create long-term change to travel behaviour. Document type: Article

Abstract

Changing mobility behaviour towards activities and actions that have a less detrimental impact on the environment, public health and society is an objective of transport policy jurisdictions globally. In line with a burgeoning body of research examining behaviour and social change, this paper explores the governmental systems that influence mobility behaviours through a social practice lens. This paper blends two social practice theoretical models, the ‘3-Elements Model’ and ‘Systems of Provision’, as a means of understanding the delivery of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF), a central government grant scheme for English local authorities. We examine how the meanings, materials and competences within the practices of bid writing by local authorities and scheme selection by government influenced the distribution of funding to local authorities. The research starts from the principle that, where funding is provided by central government, in the case of this research that of the UK, an opportunity is created for mobility practices to change. The significance of funding is not easily theorised by the 3-Elements model but is more helpfully explained when that model is blended with the wider Systems of Provision model to create a model of practice ecology. Our theorisation allows for a rigorous exploration of the ‘practice scaffolding’ which shapes how people travel. Policymakers are recommended to consider a practice ecology approach when developing mobility management schemes to tackle air quality, climate change and obesity issues more effectively. Document type: Article