OLABISI ONABANJO UNIVERSITY, AGO – IWOYE

FACULTY OF ADIMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT
2019/2020 SESSION
B.Sc DEGREE
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Programme: Transport Management

Course Code: TPM_TLM 316

Course Title: Elements of Transport and Society

Credit Units: 2

Semester: Rain

……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Course Outline

Objective

This course aims to encourage students to think about the role of transport in the society critically. It

provides a comprehensive overview of the theoretical approaches and empirical evidences on the

relationship between transport and society. Case studies are drawn extensively from different parts of

the world. Particular emphasis is placed on understanding the role of government in shaping the

transport-development relationship and in promoting transport sustainability.

1. Role of transport in Societies

2. Modes of Transport

3. Historical Development of Transport

4. Cultural influence on modal patronage of transport

5. Factors Influencing Transport Choice

6. The Social and Distributional Impacts of Transport

7. Some Principles of Healthy Transport

8. Economic Valuation of Healthy Transport

9. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Health and Environment Factors

10. Barriers to Healthy Transport

Main Reading List

Atkins (2010) Assessing Social and Distributional Impacts in Transport Scheme

Appraisal
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/scienceresearc
h/social/socialdistributionalimpact/sdi3.pdf Last accessed 02.11.10

Banister, D. and Bowling, A. (2004) Quality of life for the elderly - the transport dimension, Transport
Policy 11(2): 105-115.

Ndikom, O. B. (2008). Elements of Transportation Management, Bunmico Publishers.

Course Evaluation

(a) Class Attendance – 5% (c) Assignment – 5%

(b) Class Test - 20% (d) Examination – 70%

Course Instructors

Dimeji R. Sonde Ph.D

Mr. Adegbayi Hassan

 LESSON ONE

ROLE OF TRANSPORT IN SOCIETIES

Every country of the world has a different potential and therefore people do not find everything they

need for life in their nearest environments. They are forced to transport their goods (raw materials,

information) and themselves as well. The globalization of the economic system and growing

specialization of individual regions increase this need.

Therefore, transport is one of the fundamental pillars of current economics. However, it is among

economic restrictive factors as well, since the quality of transport systems limits a number of economic

processes. Although the trend of increasing economic demands on transport systems already started in

the era of industrialization, it has accelerated since the second half of the 20th century in connection

with the gradual transition to the free market and global economics. A lot of economic processes,

ranging from commuting to work, through supplying raw materials and energies, up to the distribution

of goods to consumers are directly connected with transportation. Transport plays an irreplaceable role

in the social sphere as well. It enables people to communicate, meet each other and exchange ideas.

Since the time immemorial, transport and habits in using transport, have represented a certain status in

the social hierarchy. In modern society, which tries to overcome the social barriers, an equal access to

transport is one of the main principles. However, a lot of groups of inhabitants, such as disabled

people, elderly people, or low-income inhabitants are access handicapped, which highlights their status

on the edge of society. It is necessary to adopt the transport system to their needs so that they can be

more integrated in society.

Transportation is a non separable part of any society. It exhibits a very close relation to the style of

life, the range and location of activities and the goods and services which will be available for

consumption. Advances in transportation has made possible changes in the way of living and the way

in which societies are organized and therefore have a great influence in the development of

civilizations. This chapter conveys an understanding of the importance of transportation in the modern
society by presenting selected characteristics of existing transportation systems, their use and

relationships to other human activities.

Transportation is responsible for the development of civilizations from very old times by meeting

travel requirement of people and transport requirement of goods. Such movement has changed the way

people live and travel. In developed and developing nations, a large fraction of people travel daily for

work, shopping and social reasons. But transport also consumes a lot of resources like time, fuel,

materials and land.

Economic role of transportation

Economics involves production, distribution and consumption of goods and services. People depend

upon the natural resources to satisfy the needs of life but due to non uniform surface of earth and due

to difference in local resources, there is a lot of difference in standard of living in different societies.

So there is an immense requirement of transport of resources from one particular society to other.

These resources can range from material things to knowledge and skills like movement of doctors and

technicians to the places where there is need of them.

- The place, time, quality and utility of goods

An example is given to evaluate the relationship between place, time and cost of a particular

commodity. If a commodity is produced at point A and wanted by people of another community at any

point B distant x from A, then the price of the commodity is dependent on the distance between two

centers and the system of transportation between two points. With improved system the commodity

will be made less costly at B.

- Changes in location of activities

The reduction of cost of transport does not have same effect on all locations. Let at any point B the

commodity is to be consumed. This product is supplied by two stations A and K which are at two

different distances from B. Let at present the commodity is supplied by A since it is at a lesser distance

but after wards due to improvement in road network between B and K, the point K becomes the supply

point of product.
Social role of transportation

Transportation has always played an important role in influencing the formation of urban societies.

Although other facilities like availability of food and water, played a major role, the contribution of

transportation can be seen clearly from the formation, size and pattern, and the development of

societies, especially urban centers.

- Formation of settlements

From the beginning of civilization, the man is living in settlements which existed near banks of major

river junctions, a port, or an intersection of trade routes. Cities like New York, Mumbai and Moscow

are good examples.

- Size and pattern of settlements

The initial settlements were relatively small developments but with due course of time, they grew in

population and developed into big cities and major trade centers. The size of settlements is not only

limited by the size of the area by which the settlement can obtain food and other necessities, but also

by considerations of personal travels especially the journey to and from work. The increased speed of

transport and reduction in the cost of transport have resulted in variety of spatial patterns.

- Growth of urban centers

When the cities grow beyond normal walking distance, then transportation technology plays a role in

the formation of the city. For example, many cities in the plains developed as a circular city with radial

routes, where as the cities beside a river developed linearly. The development of automobiles, and

other factors like increase in personal income, and construction of paved road network, the settlements

were transformed into urban centers of intense travel activity.

Political role of transportation

The world is divided into numerous political units which are formed for mutual protection, economic

advantages and development of common culture. Transportation plays an important role in the

functioning of such political units.

 - Administration of an area

The government of an area must be able to send/get information to/about its people. It may include

laws to be followed, security and other needful information needed to generate awareness. An efficient

administration of a country largely depends on how effectively government could communicate these

information to all the country. However, with the advent of communications, its importance is slightly

reduced.

- Political choices in transport

These choices may be classified as communication, military movement, travel of persons and

movement of freight. The primary function of transportation is the transfer of messages and

information. It is also needed for rapid movement of troops in case of emergency and finally

movement of persons and goods. The political decision of construction and maintenance of roads has

resulted in the development of transportation system.

Environmental role of transportation

The negative effects of transportation are more dominating than its useful aspects as far as

transportation is concerned. There are numerous categories into which the environmental effects have

been categorized. They are explained in the following sections.

- Safety

Growth of transportation has a very unfortunate impact on the society in terms of accidents.

Worldwide death and injuries from road accidents have reached epidemic proportions. - Killed and

about 15 million injured on the road accidents annually. Increased variation in the speeds and vehicle

density resulted in a high exposure to accidents. Accidents result in loss of life and permanent

disability, injury, and damage to property. Accidents also cause numerous non-quantifiable impacts

like loss of time, grief to the near ones of the victim, and inconvenience to the public. The loss of life

and damage from natural disasters, industrial accidents, or epidemic often receive significant attention

from both government and public. This is because their occurrence is concentrated but sparse. On the

other hand, accidents from transport sector are widespread and occur with high frequency.
For instance, a study has predicted that death and disabilities resulting from road accidents in

comparison with other diseases will rise from ninth to third rank between 1990 and 2020. Road

accidents as cause to death and disability could rank below heart disease and clinical depression, and

ahead of stroke and all infectious diseases. Significant reduction to accident rate is achieved in the

developing countries by improved road designed maintenance, improved vehicle design, driver

education, and law enforcements. However in the developing nations, the rapid growth of personalized

vehicles and poor infrastructure, road design, and law enforcement has resulted in growing accident

rate.

- Air Pollution

All transport modes consume energy and the most common source of energy is from the burning of

fossil fuels like coal, petrol, diesel, etc. The relation between air pollution and respiratory disease has

been demonstrated by various studies and the detrimental effects on the planet earth are widely

recognized recently. The combustion of the fuels releases several contaminants into the atmosphere,

including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, and other particulate matter.

Hydrocarbons are the result of incomplete combustion of fuels.

Particulate matters are minute solid or liquid particles that are suspended in the atmosphere. They

include aerosols, smoke, and dust particles. These air pollutants once emitted into the atmosphere,

undergo mixing and disperse into the surroundings.

- Noise pollution

Sound is acoustical energy released into atmosphere by vibrating or moving bodies where as noise is

unwanted sound produced. Transportation is a major contributor of noise pollution, especially in urban

areas. Noise is generated during both construction and operation. During construction, operation of

large equipments causes considerable noise to the neighborhood. During the operation, noise is

generated by the engine and exhaust systems of vehicle, aerodynamic friction, and the interaction

between the vehicle and the support system (road tire, rail-wheel). Extended exposure to excessive
sound has been shown to produce physical and psychological damage. Further, because of its

annoyance and disturbance, noise adds to mental stress and fatigue.

- Energy consumption

The spectacular growth in industrial and economic growth during the past century has been closely

related to an abundant supply of inexpensive energy from fossil fuels. Transportation sector is

unbelievable to consume more than half of the petroleum products. The compact of the shortage of

fuel was experienced during major wars when strict rationing was imposed in many countries. The

impact of this had cascading effects on many factors of society, especially in the price escalation of

essential commodities. However, this has few positive impacts; a shift to public transport system, a

search for energy efficient engines, and alternate fuels. During the time of fuel shortage, people shifted

to cheaper public transport system. Policy makers and planners, thereafter gave much emphasis to the

public transit which consume less energy per person. The second impact was in the development of

fuel-efficient engines and devices and operational and maintenance practices. A fast depleting fossil

fuel has accelerated the search for energy efficient and environment friendly alternate energy source.

The research is active in the development of bio-fuels, hydrogen fuels and solar energy.

Other impacts

Transportation directly or indirectly affects many other areas of society and few of them are listed

below:

Almost all cities use 20-30 percent of its land in transport facilities. Increased travel requirement also

require additional land for transport facilities. A good transportation system takes considerable amount

of land from the society.

Aesthetics of a region is also affected by transportation. Road networks in quite country side are visual

intrusion. Similarly, the transportation facilities like flyovers are again visual intrusion in urban

context.
The social life and social pattern of a community is severely affected after the introduction of some

transportation facilities. Constructions of new transportation facilities often require substantial

relocation of residents and employment opportunities.

 LESSON TWO

MODES OF TRANSPORT

Transport occurs in a lot of forms which can be characterized according to various attributes and needs

in terms of infrastructure, means of transport, or service transport infrastructure.

We could define nodes which provide transport services and which create the transportation network

through connection with the infrastructure. Movement of the means of transport in the transportation

network is assured technically and organizationally by the transportation infrastructure. Each transport

relationship is defined by its origin, i.e. its origin and its destination.

There are many ways to classify transport. The most common way is to consider the environment, but

there are more parameters which could be considered such as the object of transportation (passenger

transport – freight transport), number of people transported (individual – mass), frequency (irregular –

regular), access of public (private – public), transport distance (local – regional – long-distance),

location of the trip origin and trip destination in relation to geographical units (interurban – interstate –

intercontinental), and spatial relation of the origin and destination of the analyzed area (inner – outer –

transit). Transportation of the information which is provided by telecommunication services is usually

not included in the classification.

Figure 1: Basic classification of transport.

The transportation networks for individual types of transport are described and classified on the base

of various parameters, the most common being the network length, density, shape and configuration of

infrastructure, number of the main nodes, route deviation, coherence of the network, and the load of

traffic volumes.
 LESSON THREE

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF TRANSPORT

Historical development of society and the history of transport have always been closely related to each

other. The quality of transport in various periods reflected the level of society development, but on the

other hand, it was transport which gave a boost to society’s growth in many time periods. The

technical advancement in the production of vehicles allows following the technological development

of production industries in different time periods.

There had been no forms of motorized transport until the end of the 18th century and the main driving

gear of land transport was the traction power of animals, while wind power was used on water.

Transport speed was very low, as well as the number of the total quantity of transported goods. Owing

to the fact that water transport was more effective, as there was no quality road network, the vast

majority of cities grew up near waterways, either on the seacoast or close to big rivers. Obviously,

there were some exceptions, such as ancient Rome. Apart from agriculture bound to the fertile

lowlands of big rivers like the Nile, the Euphrates or the Indus, the basis for all ancient civilizations

was trade.

The majority of transport relations occurred only on a local scale; the international trade was marginal

and was mainly restricted to luxury goods, such as spices or jewellery.

The Middle Ages were characterized by the growing importance of trade and the progress in the field

of sea navigation. The voyages of the Arab and Viking ships were followed by the development of

trade in the North and the Baltic Sea, controlled by Hansa, and in the Mediterranean Sea, which was

dominated by Italian city states. Their naval traditions were then followed by the Spanish and

Portuguese, who gained the upper hand in the world seas at the turn of the 15th and 16th century

thanks to the great geographical discoveries. The colonial trade flourished, which brought new kinds

of commodities and raw materials to Europe; mainly precious metals and spices became the main

import articles.
The slave trade flourished as well and a huge amount of European goods found their markets in

colonies. In the 17th century the leading role in the naval trade is passed into the hands of the English,

Dutch and French. The colonial trade stimulated the further economic development of manufacturing

in Europe.

The biggest revolution in transport since the invention of wheel was brought about by the invention of

the steam engine in the mid-18th century. During the 19th century it became well established in all

kinds of industry and transport. While the steamships started to rule on the world’s rivers and oceans,

transport overland was quickly mastered by railway.

The railway held back all other forms of sea transport, shortened travel times and changed the

perception of distance between big towns to figures unimaginable. Steam was later replaced by the

combustion engine which allowed the automobile transport advancement and a short time later the

birth of air transport as well. After World War I, road and air transport became significant competitors

to railway transport, first in the USA, and in Europe a few years after. Thanks to transport, the

individual regional economic markets gradually started to become interconnected, creating a world-

wide one. A big development in air transport came after World War II., mainly after the introduction

of the jet airplanes, which made regular intercontinental passenger flights possible. This allowed to

reach various parts of the world within a few hours.

It allowed regional development of regions which had been on the peripheries until then; namely the

industrial countries of East Asia, led by Japan and Korea, and new tourist destinations in the Caribbean

Sea, the Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. Since the 1960s the world’s powerful countries have started

exploring the space. In spite of the fact that the first "space tourists" have already embarked on an orbit

around the Earth, the regular usage of space transport is conditioned by further technological progress.

It’s goal needs to reach the cost reduction of space devices in such a way that their price would be

reduced to a price of similar terrestrial devices. It would also allow the change in the composition of

the cargos transported to space because, in comparison with present conditions. We cannot expect a

growth in the quantity of transported scientific, communication, or army satellites, therefore only the
volume of commercial transportation is to be increased. Another trend which can be expected in the

future is further increase in the total volumes of transportation and density of transport networks,

unification of transport routes and their concentration in transport corridors. More and more demands

are being placed on accelerating and improving transport services. Approximately 30 years ago the

world community asked about the responsibility for the exploitation of non-renewable resources and

the condition of the environment.

Transport plays a significant role in the consumption of some of the non-renewable resources, mainly

oil, and also in increasing air pollution, therefore transport is one of the crucial aspects in the

conception of sustainable development. Searching for environmentally friendly forms of transportation

has become a necessity which will require gradual renaissance of rail transport and the development of

new drives for road transport.

Individual Modes of Transport

The individual modes of transport are characterized by certain advantages and disadvantages which

influence their use on the transport market. The categorization of the individual transport modes in the

following text corresponds with the basic categorization of transport mentioned in Figure 2. To see

how individual transport modes are used in the transport market, we need to compare the transport

performances on various levels, e.g. a national level, local level, transport of certain goods, etc. The

individual transport modes usually compete with each other. The competition depends on the aspects

of price, speed, availability, frequency, safety, comfort, etc. Multi-modal transport covers only a small

part of the market so far.

EU- 27

USA

Figure 2: Modal split in passenger transport in 2006 in EU-27 and USA.

A large share of individual automobile transport compared to other modes of transport is characteristic

for developed countries regarding the field of passenger transport. In Europe public transport has a

proportion of 25 %, compared to 75 % of individual transport, but the difference is even higher in the
USA, because individual motoring reaches a proportion of 85 %. What is typical for the transport

system in the USA, compared to Europe, is its minimum use of railways and city transport and a

greater use of air transport. Up until the 1960s railway had dominated in the field of freight transport.

Its market proportion has started to decrease significantly in favour of truck transport since that time.

The current proportion of rail transport regarding the total overland transport reaches only 16 %. In the

countries of Eastern Europe this trend became more obvious after 1990. Railways were unable adapt to

the quick social and economic changes in a sufficiently short time, and therefore, over several years,

the modal split changed completely in favour of more adaptive and operative truck transport.

Road transport plays a main role in passenger and freight transport nowadays, especially for short and

medium distances. Compared to the railways, it has an advantage of higher operability and

availability; a disadvantage is a lower degree of organization in its operation, a higher negative

influence on the environment, and, above all, low traffic safety.

In spite of this fact, road transport dominates in the transport market in the majority of developed

countries, mainly in the freight sector. Its position is still being strengthened thanks to the building of

high capacity multi-lane motorways, which create new main axes of the road network. The motorway

network is then completed hierarchically with roads classified into categories which are based on their

significance in terms of function and technical condition. In the developing countries, on the other

hand, an insufficient road network frequently consisting of unpaved roads predominates. The

construction of motorways, when considering its size and high terrain demands is demanding in terms

of horizontal and vertical alignment, which results in higher land use, amount of necessary building

work, as well as the total price.

 LESSON THREE

FACTORS INFLUENCING TRANSPORT CHOICE

Individual travel decisions are influenced by a range of economic, physical, social and psychological

factors. These factors may be real or perceived, within individuals’ direct control (for example, car

ownership) or outside it (for example, shop location, distance to school, provision of public transport

or cycling facilities, zoning policies, media messages, tax policies etc.) External factors are the result

of actions and decisions by people and institutions outside the household and provide the context for

individual travel behaviour.

Understanding how these influences operate and accounting for them is essential if measures aimed at

modifying travel patterns are to be successful. Transport policy to date has mostly sought to change

individual travel behaviour by modifying infrastructure capacity and/or by pricing (road, fuel)

strategies. However, Government action aimed at reducing car travel will have little effect if the

weight of external or structural factors is so strong that individuals feel that their current behaviour is

the only one possible.

This could occur, for example, where a person’s place of residence is not serviced by public transport,

he/she is provided with a company car with subsidised fuel and parking, and the only shopping

available is at a large retail complex some distance away. In these circumstances, an individual may

feel that they have no choice but to use a car to meet their travel and lifestyle needs. Furthermore, if

individuals have never experienced any other mode of travel, their perceptions of those forms of travel

can be very distorted which can act as a barrier to change.

The OECD has recognised the importance of understanding individual travel behaviour in order to

reduce the environmental impacts of transport.

The key factors influencing travel patterns are common to most countries. However, the weight and

direction of influence that specific factors have on travel decisions varies. Australia’s high

level of car ownership, the sprawling nature of its capital cities, and the policy emphasis on road

infrastructure capacity, are not only strong influences in themselves but also have a bearing on the
degree to which households have experienced other means of transport besides the private car. Media

advertising and taxation policies also exert pressure on decision–making in favour of car use.

Governments and policy-makers who seek to modify Australian travel behaviour need to be cognisant

of the overt and covert messages delivered via different policies – not just transport policy – and of the

contradictions inherent in those policy messages. Australian governments and policy-makers who

decry the adverse environmental impacts of excessive car use while at the same time implementing

taxation policies which subsidise or encourage private car travel cannot expect either public credibility

or success.

Car ownership

Car ownership is, not surprisingly, the principal determinant of car use. The need to get the most value

out of what can be a large investment, leads to the near exclusive use of the car, even for trips where

other modes are more cost or energy efficient. The relatively low cost of fuel in Australia and

favourable taxation policies on company cars reinforces this trend.

Car use can become so routine that “choice” is not an issue as people act automatically without

considering any alternatives. Habitual travel is particularly noticeable in the case of short trips.

The automotive and associated industries (i.e. vehicle manufacture, component suppliers, sales and

repairs, oil, rubber, road building, advertising) are a large contributor to the economic wealth of

Australia, and of Victoria in particular. The industries benefit directly from society’s use of motor

vehicles and have a strong vested interest in ensuring continued car use. The economic might of the

car industry and the jobs it creates directly and indirectly, constitutes a formidable force encouraging

car ownership at the public policy and individual level.

As well as determining vehicle technology, industry can influence car purchase decisions and

behaviour – when and what type of car to buy and how it is used – through marketing and research.

Perception of modes

Travel choices can be made on the basis of perceptions rather than reality, particularly where there is

no or only limited experience of certain modes of transport.

Car drivers systematically perceive the car’s characteristics (for example, cost, travel time, ease of use)

as being better than they actually are and consistently judge public transport, and to a lesser extent,

walking and cycling, as being worse than they are. This has been identified as one of the principal

barriers to changing travel behaviour.

A study in Melbourne found that those people who were either not using public transport or had not

had much experience with it, tended to have fairly negative attitudes towards it. Those with more

experience of the system viewed it more favourably.

In many outer suburbs of Australian cities where housing is scattered and cars are assumed, travel

options are severely limited and children and young adults are losing the opportunity to experience

anything but car-based mobility. As this occurs from generation to generation, people lose knowledge

of non-car travel and develop new car-based cognitive maps of their surroundings, further reinforcing

the inevitability of car use.

People’s perceptions of different forms of travel are strongly influenced by advertising and the media.

Cars, for example, are promoted as a means of obtaining high status, personal freedom and comfort,

and are associated with images of power and sexuality. The advertising industry portrays cars as a

means of escape, generating distorted images of the world (for example, by emphasising contented

drivers on free, open roads when most cars are used in crowded urban settings).
 LESSON FOUR

COST OF DIFFERENT TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES

Relative costs of transport modes are an important consideration in travel choice but the cost figures

used do not always reflect the true costs of the modes of transport being compared.

Motorists when asked about the cost of driving to work often refer to car parking and fuel expenses but

fail to include the running costs of the car concerned. As a result, car travel appears to be financially

attractive relative to public transport.

However, road transport also generates external costs: that is, costs not borne by transport users but by

society as a whole. The most obvious are health impairment because of air pollution, accidents and

noise, and time losses due to road congestion.

Car users are not aware of, and do not bear, the full costs of car travel in terms of damage to health and

the environment. Reports from the British Lung Foundation reveal that motor vehicle users only pay

about one-third of the costs they impose on society.

In an evaluation of the Dutch city of Groningen’s urban policies in 1988, it was estimated that people

who used a bicycle to replace short car trips saved the city $405 each per year in external costs.

In Victoria, the annual external costs of car use have been calculated at around $4,000 per car in 1994.

This amounts to 25.9 cents per kilometre in Melbourne with similar results likely in other Australian

capital cities. The total social cost of driving (i.e. personal running costs plus the external costs of

driving) has been estimated to be 73.4 cents per kilometre for an average Melbourne car in 1994.

In addition to the more commonly cited external costs, there are other hidden costs associated with the

complete life cycle of the motor vehicle that are seldom accounted for when assessing the cost of car

travel. These include:

- emissions and factory waste from the processing of materials used and the assembly of each car;

- emissions from repair, servicing and disposal of cars;

- emissions and pollutants from leakage, evaporation, energy use and spillage associated with oil

extraction, refining and distribution;

- disposal of waste oil and fluids from cars and of contaminated water from car washes;

- emissions and pollutants from the building and maintenance of roads;

- cost of traffic policing, emergency services and street lighting;

- the opportunity cost of land used for car-related activities.

To obtain an accurate picture of the cost of car use, the social account should include not only the

direct and more obvious external costs but also the hidden costs associated with the construction of

motor vehicles and of the infrastructure and upon which they rely.

The picture is more muddied by the current taxation system which tends to encourage car use by

reducing the cost of car travel for the motorist. According to the Australian Tax Office, $1.77 billion

was claimed for motor vehicles in 1994-95.

The use of company cars as fringe benefits in salary packaging is popular in Australia.

Employers and employees can minimise taxation payments when a car is provided in place of the cash

equivalent. As a result, there is a financial incentive to provide company cars to employees and to

change the cars every few years.

Provision of a company or subsidised car, together with free or subsidised parking and fuel, not

surprisingly encourages car travel by executives and other recipients. Official estimates are that

company and government cars comprise 40% of peak hour traffic. Travel data for 1994 suggest that

company car trips represent about 18% of total car trips at any time of the day of which about one-half

(9%) are work-related and the other are management or optional company car trips. This adds

significantly to road demand. Company car trip duration and distance were found to be slightly longer

than private car trips.

The unequal treatment under the current fringe benefits tax (FBT) regime of cars and public transport

tickets included in employee salary packages places public transport at a serious competitive

disadvantage. Currently employers pay FBT of only 10% of the cost of a vehicle but 95% of the cost

of a yearly public transport ticket. As a result, the FBT payable on three yearly public transport tickets

worth $3,600 equals that paid for a $30,000 car. By contrast, employers in the US can provide public
transport tickets worth $100 a month without incurring any tax liability. The rail industry is arguing, as

a minimum, for the same FBT treatment for public transport tickets as applies to salary packaged cars.

The implementation of taxation policies to encourage cashing out of company cars is possible (for

example, creating an FBT tax neutral environment). However, the powerful motor industry lobby

would strongly resist such a move because of its potentially adverse effect on the sale and production

of cars. Instead, and in contradiction with its greenhouse gas strategies, Australia appears to be moving

in the reverse direction judging by the high level of Cabinet support reportedly given to the proposed

exemption of corporate car parking from FBT recommended in the Ralph report.

Changes foreshadowed under the tax reform package will provide an additional incentive to car travel.

The replacement of the wholesale sales tax with the GST will reduce the cost of buying a car by

around 6%, increasing sales by an estimated 50%. The cost of running company cars will also be

cheaper as business can claim a seven cents a litre tax credit on petrol used for “business purposes”,

and FBT applies to only 10% of the vehicle’s purchase price. By contrast, the 10% GST surcharge will

be applied to the full cost of all public transport fares.

The taxation of fuel has so far only poorly reflected environmental and health concerns of motor

vehicle usage. Although the reduction in diesel fuel prices in Australia under the tax reform package

will now be less than originally proposed, Australia is moving in the opposite direction to countries,

such as Britain, which are increasing fuel taxes. In its March 1999 Budget, the British government

increased its road fuel tax by almost 12% and is proposing to increase fuel duty by 6% above inflation

each year in an attempt to stem traffic growth. The Netherlands has introduced proposals to increase

the price of petrol in urban areas and reduce the use of car-based remuneration packages.

In some European countries, an attempt is being made to integrate ecological aspects into taxes. In

Finland, Norway and Sweden, for example, sales taxes are differentiated according to the emission

standards of the cars while in Sweden, Austria, Germany, Finland and Greece, recurrent annual

charges are differentiated according to engine size and other factors affecting fuel use.
As it currently operates, the tax system in Australia encourages car travel by subsidising car use, rather

than taxing it to compensate for the external costs which car use imposes on society. At the same time,

public transport which generates significantly fewer external costs and provides a service that is vital

to poor and disadvantaged groups, is being made financially less attractive as a travel option through

the imposition of a tax surcharge on fares. To the transport user, the cost of motoring is effectively

being reduced while the cost of public transport is being increased.

Faced with these misleading price signals, individuals with a travel choice could be expected to

substitute car travel for public transport. In a situation where most motorists do not take account of

vehicle operating costs in cost comparisons of travel modes, much less external (and hidden) costs and

benefits, the end result is excessive use of car transport and of much of the road network.

In the case of freight, an attempt is made to recover road spending related to heavy vehicles (over 4.5t

gross mass) by way of a fuel charge (part of the diesel excise) and a fixed annual (registration) charge.

The charges are set to ensure that heavy vehicles pay their way for the costs they cause roads and

bridges. The situation with respect to light commercials and smaller rigid trucks is uncertain but it

seems unlikely that the environmental and health costs imposed by the high use of these predominantly

diesel powered vehicles in urban areas are recovered through registration or fuel charges.
Availability of public transport

As much of the fixed public transport infrastructure was constructed at a time when Australia’s capital

cities were more compact, inner city areas have on the whole relatively good access to train and tram

networks. The picture is significantly different in many residential areas on the middle and outer

fringes which have been developed around the private car. Public transport in these areas is generally

limited making car ownership virtually a necessity.

Developed when most employment was located in the city centre, public transport infrastructure is

more geared to trips from suburbs into the CBD. Although once existing, circle train routes have long

since been dismantled. As a result, public transport options are not so readily available for ‘cross-town’

journeys which have increased in demand with the development of regional retail/commercial

complexes and the decentralisation of work places.

Even when public transport services are available, off peak services can be infrequent and distances to

stations or bus stops can be significant. In outer suburbs reliant on buses, both peak and off-peak

services can be lengthy, indirect and with frequent stops. Whereas tram and train services on Sundays

in Melbourne have been improved considerably, most weekend bus services are either non-existent or

very poor.

The number of travel options available to people with disabilities was reduced with the replacement of

certain train services in Melbourne with light rail and the removal of conductors on trams. Standard

buses are not accessible for people in wheelchairs while older people have difficulty using trams

because of the steep gradient of the steps. People with young children and baggage have also expressed

difficulties in using public transport.

Public transport in many rural areas has been substantially reduced with the closure of rail lines and

limiting of services. This has particularly affected regions with ageing populations and single parent

families. According to a Victorian Auditor-General’s report, replacement of the Horsham/Dimboola,

Mildura, Bairnsdale and Leongatha rail lines with privately operated bus services has resulted in a drop

in patronage with no reduction in the cost of operation.

The opportunity to combine cycling with other modes of transport is limited due to the inability of

buses and certain trains to accommodate bicycles. Restrictions on the carriage of bicycles on trams and

the difficulty of fitting bicycles on heavily used peak hour trains provide further disincentives to mixed

mode travel.

Safety

Despite the well-publicised number and frequency of fatalities occurring in road accidents, there is no

evidence that the risk of death or injury deters car usage.

On the other hand, risk of a road accident is a prime deterrent to cycling. The major reason cited by

non-riders, who have toyed with the idea of cycling, is fear of injury on busy roads where cyclists are

forced to compete for road space with vehicles.

The view that cycling is dangerous is widely held, with people harbouring genuine fears for their

personal safety (or that of their children) on the roads. However, the scale of risk for cyclists is

somewhat exaggerated. In Britain, the fatality rate is only 1 in every 25 million kilometres cycled. The

injury rate for cycling is significantly lower than that for soccer, netball and basketball, squash and

football.

Research has shown that people who ride consider the risk of cycling as less than people who do not

cycle. Non-riders traditionally have experienced road travel from a motor vehicle and fear being

without the ‘protection’ of a metal shell. Cyclists view the road environment differently and have the

experience to balance perceived risk against actual risk.

Safety concerns also dominate decisions made concerning whether or not to walk. The principal

reasons established in surveys for people not walking are difficulties in crossing busy roads with

speeding traffic; the prospect of tripping and falling on cracked, uneven surfaces; difficulties of

walking along cluttered pavements; and fears of assault, particularly on poorly lit and deserted streets.

The speed of motorised traffic is a principal factor influencing the safety concerns of cyclists and

pedestrians. The general urban speed limit in Victoria of 60 km/h applies on all urban roads
irrespective of whether they are classified as arterial or local roads. This is high by international

standards; in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Japan and West Germany a 30 km/h limit applies on

residential and shopping streets.

The risk and severity of an accident rises with increased vehicle speed: a pedestrian has a 90% chance

of survival if hit at 30 km/h but only a 20% chance of survival if the impact speed is 50 km/h.

European research indicates that a 1 km/h reduction in average vehicle speed brings a 3% reduction in

accident frequency.

As most adult cyclist and pedestrian accidents occur on main roads while child road accidents occur

mostly on residential streets, lowering the speed limit on both main and local roads could reduce the

accident rate significantly. This is supported by evidence from overseas. Given this, it is perhaps not

surprising that those countries with low vehicle speed limits in urban areas also have a high incidence

of cycling and walking.

Travel time and convenience

Spatial constraints have gradually been replaced by temporal constraints in the framing of travel

decisions. As individuals have become involved in an increasing number and diversity of activities,

the amount of time needed to travel to and from these activities has become of growing concern. The

perception of speed is particularly important for people with busy work and personal schedules.

A key driving force behind car travel is the convenience it offers in giving control over time and space.

It provides independence and enables freedom of movement at any time to any place. In addition, car

travel is perceived to be fast, reliable, flexible and comfortable.

Factors influencing public transport travel decisions are journey speed (frequency and speed of

service), connectivity (ease and speed of transfer between modes and lines), reliability, and

accessibility (physically and in terms of information). Public transport is less competitive off peak

when service frequency is cut.

People with young children and those carrying heavy or bulky items are less likely to use public

transport because of the difficulty of manoeuvring prams and baggage. Concerns about safety

(particularly at night and on train stations which are unstaffed and poorly lit), the discomfort

associated with over crowding at peak hour, and the inconvenience and time involved in changing

modes also deter public transport use.

Convenience and quick travel time are amongst the main reasons given by cyclists for choosing to

ride. Other major reasons are fitness, environmental friendliness and enjoyment. Cycling offers time

savings in congested traffic conditions and convenience in the form of door-to-door travel and ease of

parking. Rain, limited freight capacity and lack of end-of-trip facilities (showers, lockers, parking) act

as deterrents to cycling. Other barriers perceived by current non-riders are low comfort, limited

function, slow speed and necessity of physical exercise.

Availability of parking

The availability of cheap or free parking at individuals’ destinations can be an important factor

influencing car use. Conversely, high parking charges or extreme difficulty in securing parking can act

as a deterrent to driving. In these circumstances, people may decide to car pool, take public transport,

or drive to an inner suburb, park, and then walk or catch public transport into the city centre.

Conditions for walking and cycling

Regular use of cycling and walking as a means of travel depends in part on the availability and

proximity of facilities and conducive environments for these activities. Street design, lighting,

aesthetics and accessibility contribute to how safe people perceive walking and cycling to be.

Communities designed solely around the motor vehicle provide strong barriers to involvement in non-

motorised forms of transport. Those people who opt to ride or walk are required to accept the risk to

personal safety generated by car-based planning; most regard the risk as too great and choose not to

engage in these activities. Road safety is a major hurdle to be overcome for that sector of the

population who is interested but has yet to be converted to walking and cycling.
Where facilities have been provided to encourage non-motorised transport (for example, bicycle lanes,

safe main road cycle crossings, off-road paths, extended pavements, traffic calmed streets etc), walkers

and cyclists have followed. Cities in the Netherlands, Germany, Austria and Denmark are testimony to

this with their high rates of bicycle and walking trips relative to more car dominated cities. The

Netherlands which has a similar urban population to Australia, has invested $1.5 billion in bicycle

infrastructure compared to a figure of less than $80m in Australia.

Research over the past 20 years has shown that provision of designated road space for cyclists makes

both cyclists and drivers more predictable and more comfortable with each other’s presence. A 1993

report commissioned by the US Federal Highway Administration concluded that cities with higher

levels of bicycle commuting have on average 70% more bikeways per roadway mile and six times

more bike lanes per roadway mile. A 1996 study on the impact of bicycle lanes in Santa Barbara,

California, found that there was a 47% increase in cyclists on streets where bike lanes were added

compared to just 1% on streets without bicycle lanes.

In Melbourne, provision of dedicated space for cyclists on main roads (for example, Royal Parade, St

Kilda Road), construction of off-road paths such as the Main Yarra Trail, closure of streets to traffic

and reduction in speed limits (for example, Swanston Walk) has generated a sizable increase in cyclist

and pedestrian numbers. It suggests that there is a strong latent demand for walking and cycling that

can be readily tapped given the right environments.

Distance to school

The rationalisation and amalgamation of schools, and parents opting to send children to schools other

than neighbourhood schools, has increased the distances which many children are required to travel to

and from home. Time pressures on parents, more complex routes to school, children carrying more

books and equipment, and the perceived threat to children’s safety from having to cross busy roads and

from ‘stranger danger’, have caused many parents to restrict their children’s independent travel

(walking, cycling and public transport), opting for car travel instead.
The share of school trips made by car in Perth has increased from 29% in 1986 to 62% in 1998.

In 1993, approximately 50% of all children at 4 primary and secondary schools in Sydney’s

southern suburbs were driven to school while, in Melbourne, 52% of children travelled to and

from primary and secondary schools by car in the same year.

The increase in car travel to schools has resulted in growing traffic congestion around schools.

By attempting to avoid danger, parents have inadvertently created additional danger for their

children from the increased traffic. Air pollution levels around schools from the increased

number of vehicles create further health hazards for students.

Travelling to school on a school bus is more common in rural areas. Research presented to the

Victorian Road Safety Committee indicates that a child travelling to school by car is seven times

more likely to be killed or injured than when travelling on a bus. UK statistics also indicate that

the risk of a car accident for a child travelling to school is considerably greater than the risk of

abduction or assault.

Traditionally a popular form of travel to school, cycling has now declined to the point where

bicycles in the school grounds in any quantity are an uncommon sight. Security difficulties have

resulted in some schools actively discouraging children from taking bicycles to school.

The extent to which travelling to school by car has become the accepted form of transport is

evident from the current Transport Accident Commission (TAC) advertising campaign in

Victoria. In one of its ”Don’t Drink and Drive” advertisements, TAC poses the question “How

will you get the kids to school for the next 6 months?” at the prospect of a woman losing her

driver’s licence for driving with a blood alcohol level over the legal limit.

The main reasons provided by parents in the UK for using a car to take their children to school

are convenience (going to work, going shopping, saving time etc - 46%); too far to walk (29% -
but 80% lived within 1 mile of school); bad weather (20%); safety (5% - with assault or

abduction by far the main fears).

Children’s preferences, however, do not necessarily mirror those of their parents. Surveys in the

UK show that there is unmet demand among young people for more independent travel and

greater freedom. In a recent survey of nearly 500 ten and eleven year olds in Dorset, 76% said

they would prefer to walk or cycle to school with only 15% opting for car travel.

Residential and commercial/retail development

Low density residential development in Australian cities has been planned around the private

car; where available, public transport services are limited and provided as an ‘add-on’.

This is particularly the case in outer areas of the major capitals which have attracted large

numbers of younger families because of the relatively lower cost of housing, the larger land sizes

available for purchase and the perceived cleaner environment. These housing location decisions,

however, have generally been accompanied by an increased need to travel for personal and

business purposes.

Errands and shopping are prominent considerations in individual travel decisions. The

construction of large regional retail/commercial complexes surrounded by car parking has

contributed to the decline of more locally accessible strip and corner shops and encouraged a

modal shift from public and non-motorised transport to car travel.

Car use is closely related to density. Cities and parts of cities with densities less than 20 people

per hectare (characteristic of Australian cities) are heavily car dependent and are experiencing a

rise in car use. Provision for cars is land intensive, taking up one-third of the space of the average

city. Roads, highways, garages and parking lots were estimated to occupy about 10% of all

arable land in the US in the late 1980s.

The density of most Australian capital cities is increasing with the rise in multiple occupancy in

suburban areas and the growth in supply of, and demand for, residential accommodation in

central city business districts. These trends, particularly the interest in central city living, could

reduce the dependence on car travel for a small percentage of city residents but, in the absence of

other measures, is unlikely to have a significant effect on car usage for the population as a whole.
 LESSON FIVE

THE SOCIAL AND DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS OF TRANSPORT

Casualties and Injuries

Casualties and injuries were probably the most commonly cited form of transport related social

impact discovered in the literature.

The World Health Organization (WHO), for example, recognises road traffic injury as part of the

global burden of disease, and predicts that by the year 2020 it will rank third amongst leading

causes of disability adjusted life years (DALYs) lost; an overall increase in rank from ninth in

1990. As a consequence, this issue has received notably more attention by scholars in public

health departments, than those in the social sciences per se.

The distributional effects of road traffic casualties and injuries, particularly with respect to

lower-income groups and neighbourhoods, are well documented within the literature. ‘Accidents

are not random across the population’; instead, they are intimately connected with disadvantage

at individual, neighbourhood and global levels. As these scholars argue:

‘Accidents’ reflect and reinforce social differences: they are less accidents and more

manifestations of wider and deeper inequalities in society that reflect the relative power of a

vehicle-dominated as opposed to a pedestrian-dominated culture. The five main social groups

that are more likely to be involved in traffic casualties and injuries: men; young people (esp. 15-

29year olds); visible minority groups; people with lower levels of educational attainment; and

people from lower socio-economic backgrounds.

To this we would add, however, the longstanding and now burgeoning literature on the

vulnerability of children from low-income households in traffic accidents and fatalities (as

distinct from young adults) and further recognise that the distribution of traffic related injuries
and fatalities is highly variable at a global level, with many scholars documenting their rise in the

developing world and subsequent decline in developed or ‘high-income’ countries.

It is important to recognise the intersectionality of these patterns and others for accidents more

generally are also prevalent within the various social groups in particular. In their review of child

pedestrian fatalities in the Province of British Columbia, for example, an over-representation of

males, Aboriginal children, and children from low income families. In addition, children in the

lowest socioeconomic status (SES) bracket in Canada are four times more at risk of pedestrian

death than children in the highest SES bracket.

It is also instructive to note that the majority of the literature in this area is focused on road

traffic accidents5, though there is variable interest in accidents derived from other modes of

transport, such as light rail, streetcars and trams, aeroplanes and within the shipping industry,

though many of the evaluations of these other modes tend to be concerned with occupational

accidents.

Noise Levels and Nuisance

Noise and nuisance related issues derived from transport are another well-studied set of social

impacts. The heightened public sensitivity to noise arose in many European cities during the

latter half of the nineteenth century, and was derived in large part from the significant increases

in traffic associated with urban industrialization. The influx of horse-drawn carts, pedestrians and

cyclists, streetcars, railroads and automobiles to industrialising cities was a notable contributor in

this regard, and the side effects of urban noise were being treated by medical health departments

as an important health issue by the 1880s, in particular for their association with ‘nervous

behaviour’. Without doubt, noise was assigned a special position among urban nuisances for

physiological reasons. Many argued that unlike other sensory organs, the ears could not be sealed
and were therefore unprotected against all sorts of penetrating noises. Whilst noise is often

regarded as a nuisance associated with contemporary urban living, the issue is also widely

recognised as a significant public health burden, particularly for its association with sleep

deprivation, cognitive impairment (in children), high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and

fatal heart attacks. Traffic-related noise annoyance is also correlated more broadly with lower

Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQOL). The World Health Organization (WHO) attributes

traffic-related noise to the annual loss of 1 million ‘healthy years’ of life through ill health,

disability, and early death; a statistic that applies to western countries of the WHO European

Region alone.

The main contributor of environmental noise is road traffic, and whilst many of the studies in

this area consider the effects of car-based travel, a growing body of literature considers noise

exposure as derived from other modes of travel; as well as other elements in the urban

‘soundscape’.

The distributional effects of traffic-related noise exposure are well documented within the

transport literature. They recognise that long term noise exposure from rapid transit makes

vulnerable those segments of society that the system principally serves; thus, school-age

children, elderly people and people of low-income would necessarily be more vulnerable to these

negative impacts. Road traffic-related noise exposure revealed that women reported significantly

higher levels of noise annoyance and thus lower health-related quality of life than men. Children

have also been recognised as particularly vulnerable to the negative health effects associated

with traffic noise (especially aircraft noise), as exposure has been associated with cognitive

impairment and issues with reading comprehension and the impact of aircraft noise is viewed as

more significant than road traffic noise.

Despite the wealth of studies that consider the impact of traffic noise on residents, it is visual

aesthetics not acoustic properties that dominate in urban planning policy and guidance. The

importance of this issue within the UK, however, has arisen in the form of the Noise Policy

Statement for England, which recognises the adverse health and quality of life impacts associated

with noise exposure (but does not elaborate as to the distributional effects associated with this

type of impact); and Ambient Noise Strategy, a much more rigorous document that acknowledges

the inequalities regarding noise exposure, such as for children and other disadvantaged groups.

Air Pollution/Air Quality

Although less studied within the social science literatures on transport, traffic-related air

pollution is another important social impact with often, severe adverse health impacts on the

population, such as asthma, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, and reduced life expectancy.

In addition to the widely recognised health impacts, traffic-related air pollution can also

adversely affect the quality of life in urban areas and can further damage the image, reputation

and economic performance of cities. As road transport is recognised as the largest contributor of

emissions within the transport sector, many of the studies in this area necessarily focus on road

traffic-related air pollution.

 LESSON SIX

Poverty was also found to be a strong predictor of exposure to ozone and fine particulates for

those individuals aged 65 and older. In comparing compact and sprawling regions, they found

that exposures to ozone and fine particulates were higher in the former at the neighbourhood-

level.

Not unlike other social impacts identified in this working paper, the majority of empirical studies

found in the literature focus their analyses on air pollution emitted from road traffic, an

investigation of the health impacts of particulates derived from transport infrastructure

construction, for an examination of traffic-related air pollution exposure for commuters using

buses, cars and cycle routes).

Accessibility

Reduced accessibility to essential services has become an increasingly important emergent area

of research over the last ten years, particularly within the transport geography and transport

policy fields. Although a fluid and highly-contested concept, accessibility is broadly defined as:

The extent to which land-use and transport systems enable (groups of) individuals to

reach activities or destinations by means of a (combination of) transport mode(s).

Four main components of accessibility are identified within this literature: i) a physical

component (availability and physical access to transport facilities); ii) the level of service

provided by the system (in terms of travel time, cost, and comfort); iii) the spatial distribution of

transport services and activities and their spatial and temporal constraints (including the option

value of preserving accessibility to public transport, irrespective of use); and iv) cultural

diversity
i) Availability and Physical Access to Transport Facilities

The physical component of accessibility, most notably the availability and physical access to

transport facilities, is arguably the most commonly cited and influential in the literature,

accessibility became widely accepted as a transport policy goal within the UK Government

largely due to the Social Exclusion Unit’s (2003) seminal report Making the Connections, which

recognised transport as a social policy issue and specifically established the linkages between

lack of access to transport and the exclusion of members of society from important life-chances.

The role of transport in enabling people to participate in various activities, such as employment

and learning opportunities, and to make use of local services, such as healthcare, food shops, and

recreational and leisure facilities, received particular attention. Lack of access to transport

facilities is not the only element of accessibility as defined here; writing on the needs of disabled

individuals, for example, recognises that difficulties are defined in terms of:

Mobility, which can be related to deficiencies in the transport system or to a particular

impairment affecting access level.

The distributional effects of the physical component of accessibility are well documented in the

literature. Specific groups identified by the SEU in this regard include: teenagers, the elderly, job

seekers, and people living in rural areas. Poor access to public transport in north east England

has posed problems for women in accessing employment opportunities; the car is viewed as

crucial in enabling women to participate in the labour market. The availability and physical

access to public transport in rural areas (and resultant car dependency) have also been recognised

as important issues for the elderly, women, young people and rural residents more generally.
ii) Level of service (time, cost, comfort)

The operating hours of transport systems have been criticised for adversely affecting the ability

of socially disadvantaged groups to access such important services as: before-and-after school

activities, health care facilities, supermarkets and food shops, employment opportunities and

higher education. Extending the operating hours of transport systems could therefore be an

important element in reducing social exclusion.

The benefits of extending the operating hours of public transport, however, are only realised

within certain scheduling parameters and minimum service levels. In their evaluation of the

patronage impacts of improvements to bus service levels, for example, for bus use to be

improved, the minimum level of service that public transit routes must offer is a seven day a

week model with half-hourly (or better) service.

Structured interviews with new bus users following the expansion of services did reveal,

however, that new evening users were principally young people, under 30 years of age. Further

research into this area would thus benefit from greater attention to these distributional effects.

The cost of public transport services has also been cited as an important dimension of

accessibility, as this has been documented as a factor in transport-related social exclusion. The

role of concessionary bus fares for the elderly and people with mobility.

The benefits of these schemes, however, are debated within the literature. In their estimates of

demand for concessionary bus schemes for the elderly over a 15-year period, for example, the

increases in ridership will be attained over the short-to-medium term, but that this will be

tempered over the longer term due to the ‘dampening effect’ caused by subsequent increases in

car ownership by the eligible age group. The limited utility of concessionary schemes for many

elderly people, for whom barriers other than cost contribute to their social exclusion. These
scholars further suggest that bus operators in Scotland and Wales are being over-reimbursed for

these schemes, leading to larger questions about their utility from a policy perspective.

iii) Transportation Choice/Option Values

Transport facilities offer people choice of travel mode and route throughout the day. Many

scholars identify ‘option values’ as another important social impact of transport, defined as:

‘People’s willingness to pay for the continued availability of a transport facility, to preserve the

option of using this facility in the future’. A common example is the willingness of car owners to

have access to public transport facilities for those situations in which car access or use is

compromised.

Option values are further recognised as most likely having a role when transport modes or

infrastructures are either significantly diminished or improved. The concept is well-known and

applied within environmental economics, but has recently been extended into the field of

transportation.

iv) Cultural Diversity

The potential impact on cultural diversity, notably the benefits to Third-World countries derived

from new transport facilities that support large-scale tourism, is another element cited. The

majority of tourists are inhabitants of developed countries who are used to modern transport

infrastructure, and so deficiencies in this infrastructure can adversely affect the ability of

developing countries to attract visitors. Our review of the literature within the time period of

interest revealed a limited number of studies considering the role of transport and mobility with

respect to tourism in developing countries, as well as in the EU, who acknowledge that the

literature on the role of transport infrastructure on tourism is ‘scarce’, and further recognise that

the social impacts of transport-related tourism are even more so. The studies that we did uncover,
for example, are necessarily focused on the broad role of transport infrastructure in tourism and

how the existing supply of transport infrastructure is (or is not) enhanced to accommodate an

influx of tourists. This theme in general would thus be an important area for further research, as

would the distributional effects associated with transport facilities and large-scale tourism.
 LESSON SEVEN

Personal Safety and Security

Feelings of personal security and safety can also be associated with perceptions of reduced

accessibility, although the literature often deals with these issues in isolation from each other.

This is particularly important in terms of accessing public transport, as the presence and fears of

crime affects the decision to use public transport.

The construction of a new public transport link can also heighten fears that crime will be

increased in station neighbourhoods (e.g. from lower to higher income areas, though their

research found no evidence of this in practice).

The issues surrounding safety and security also relate to another social impact of transport, the

aversion of particular forms of travel behaviour. The perception of risk from crime at public

transport stations has a negative effect on patronage levels, and so an important part of successful

modal shift would necessarily involve addressing concerns about crime.

There are important gender differences to the perception of fear and personal safety on public

transport stations, with women more likely to limit or alter their travel behaviour based on their

fears and concerns as passengers. Five key issues in this regard were outline: adequate lighting

and visibility at transport stops and stations; the appearance of trains and stations (e.g.

cleanliness); reliability of service; the presence of CCTV cameras versus police officers (with

women preferring the latter); and previous experience with crime. These scholars also identify a

number of other socioeconomic factors as being important, with older men and women; people

with disabilities; people of low income; and visible minority groups more likely to be fearful of

crime at transport stations.

As at 1998 in the UK, the Department for Transport (DfT) implemented the Secure
Stations Scheme, an accreditation process applicable to all rail and underground stations policed

by the British Transport Police (BTP). Station design is one of four main accreditation criteria6

(which includes Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) as well as security

systems), as is station management, the collection of crime statistics, and surveys of users to

demonstrate that passengers feel secure. However, there are no empirical studies that measure

whether design (CPTED) measures implemented at railway stations are effective in reducing

crime. Moreover, transport surveillance systems, which are one of the preferred mechanisms

used to help address concerns about personal and public safety, generate a whole other range of

social impacts. These include: the implicit presumption that people are to be denied anonymity;

the lack of balance between human rights and security concerns; and a number of control issues

that can emerge with respect to abuse of surveillance systems, data holdings and security;

‘function creep’, and a lack of credible audits of the systems in place.

Aversion Behaviours

Related to fears for personal safety are aversion behaviours, which refers to certain social groups

modifying their own or others travel behaviours due to such concerns as personal safety (e.g.

‘stranger danger’) or risk of traffic accidents. One of the major trends observed in travel

behaviour modification over the last few decades, for example, is the unwillingness to let

children play outside or to walk and cycle, and a subsequent reliance on parental chauffeuring,

particularly for the journey to school. The loss of independence associated with increased

chauffeuring is not confined to urban areas, and is a significant issue for rural children as well.

These scholars have also highlighted the contradictions inherent in the motivations of many

parents. Traffic danger as a reason is a paradox, since most of the local traffic around the schools

is often generated by the parents themselves. By taking their children by car, other parents may
feel obliged to do the same to avoid the risk of their children of being involved in traffic

accidents by letting them walk or cycle.

There are important health implications arising from this form of behaviour modification, as a

decline in active travel is viewed as a contributing factor in rising rates of child obesity. Further

health implications are derived from the increasing polarisation of children in low-income

families, who are still more likely to play outside near busy roads and walk to school and so are

more vulnerable to accidents (see accidents above), and those in middle and upper-income

families, who have greater access to motorcars and so are more likely to be ‘protected’ from

accidents as passengers. As Malone observes, the decrease in children’s independent mobility

has resulted in what she refers to as the ‘bubble-wrap generation’, and is a response that largely

appeases the anxieties of middle class parents.

The unwillingness to let children be outside and participate in active forms of travel also has

important temporal implications. The amount of time that children spend in cars is having an

influence on their attitudes towards them, and will ultimately lead to a new generation of adults

who are completely socialised into car use and ownership, as ‘drivers of the future’. Parents are

the largest influence on the travel behaviour of many children, and this influence can even

outweigh any awareness children may have from educational programmes about the benefits of

sustainable travel. As confirmed in this report:

Children might have positive attitudes towards sustainable travel, but if their parents are not

signed up to the same agenda children will experience conflicts between their attitudes and what

they can actually do individually. Any proenvironmental attitudes which once were strong may

be lost as new habits take hold.

Thus, the travel behaviour modification evident now in relation to young children will have long-

term health and sustainability implications for the next generation of drivers (and transport

planners).

As we have argued in the case of other social impacts it is important to recognise the

intersectionality of various aspects of identity (e.g. age, gender, race, class) when understanding

how behaviour aversion is distributed amongst children as a group. As indicated previously, the

distributional effects of this social impact vary by class, with middle class children more likely to

be part of the ‘bubble wrap generation’ than children living in lower income households. Mode

choice for the journey to school also varies by ethnicity of the child, with Caucasian children less

likely to be walked to school and more likely to be driven to school than children from other

ethnic groups. As indicated earlier, geography can have an influence on the distributional effect

of behaviour aversion, that rural children have less independent mobility than those living in a

mid-size town.

There is also an important gender and inter-generational component to this type of behaviour

aversion, in relation to the adults responsible for chauffeuring children. It is principally mothers

who drive their children to and from school and to other extracurricular activities. The car is

central to the experience of being a ‘good mother’ and enabling children to have access to these

activities.
 LESSON EIGTH

Public Safety (Dangerous Cargo)

Whilst on the subject of transport safety, it is worth noting that one of the few researchers to

focus explicitly on the social impacts of road-based transport of hazardous materials (hazmat) for

residents of poor and minority neighbourhoods. As she observes, other themes that predominate

in the literature include the nature and causes of incidents; and modelling risk-minimizing routes.

People of colour and low-income individuals are more at risk of exposure to hazardous materials

spills due to their greater likelihood of residing near a hazmat route; and/or near industrial land

uses, including the shipment’s origin or destination.

Based on spill frequency data in Southern California, analysis reveals that transport related spills

tend to cluster around shipment origins (including intermodal facilities and transfer points), and a

raised incidence of spills is evident within two kilometers of intermodal facilities.

The distributional effects of public safety in relation to the transport of hazardous materials have

also been assessed, was concludes that Latino residents in Los Angeles are disproportionately

affected as a community group. The finding is related to wider settlement patterns across the Los

Angeles metropolitan region, such as suburbanization or ‘white flight’, which intersect with race:

Because white metro residents are so spread across space (and others are less so), many white

residents have the opportunity to live far from the nuisance which communities of color, much

more densely settled, do not have to the same degree.

The distributional effects of public safety in relation to shipping hazardous waste have also been

evaluated at a global level. For example, the inequity inherent in the export of end-of-life

vessels, many of which are loaded with hazardous waste, to developing countries for ship-

breaking. These scholars note that countries such as India and Bangladesh, who are favoured
destinations for shipbreaking, not only lack the regulatory and physical infrastructures to process

toxic waste in an environmentally appropriate manner, they do not have the public health

infrastructure in place to address resultant health impacts associated with handling toxic waste.

Given the significance of this issue and the dearth of literature that recognises the social impacts

of hazardous materials’ transport, we would suggest that this is an important area for further

research.

Community Severance

Community or social severance is widely recognised as another important social impact

associated with transport. Whilst the development of the concept has evolved considerably over

time since its initial definition in the 1920s define severance as:

The existence of a real or perceived barrier to people's movement through an area that is created

by the transport infrastructure (such as roads or railways) or traffic.

Whilst physical severance is arguably the most commonly recognised but emphasise was that

there are important psychological and social dimensions7 associated with this form of social

impact. These include: fears of accidents and feelings of intimidation associated with busy roads,

which may ultimately prevent people from accessing certain facilities and the lower quality of

life associated with the loss of social interaction amongst neighbours (particularly children),

resulting from concerns about busy roads, respectively. The health dimension associated with

severance, which includes such aspects as reduced access to facilities and services for disabled

people, and reduced social support derived from lack of interaction was recognized.

An important distinction is also made between primary severance (e.g. caused by the initial

barrier itself), and secondary severance; an additional barrier derived from the lack of adequate,

accessible and operational mitigation measures. Examples of this latter form of severance
include: poorly designed mitigation measures (such as crossings); poor maintenance leading to

such physical barriers as those formed by flooding or icy areas; and the neglect or lack of

maintenance of an area leading to such problems as graffiti or rubbish, ultimately deterring

pedestrians through fear of crime.

Whilst a number of articles discovered in our literature review made reference to severance as an

important social impact, there were comparatively fewer studies that focused on this issue

explicitly, and those that made little or no reference to its distributional effects. In their

qualitative research with local authority practitioners, Five main social groups who are most

adversely affected by severance: individuals without cars; those with restricted mobility (e.g.

wheelchair users, older people, people pushing prams and buggies); school children; and

individuals who are not reached through the usual methods of consultation, such as elderly

people and carers of young children). Students and women of low-income as other members of

society who are potentially more affected by community severance as derived from increases in

bus fares. There remain, however, few empirical studies on this aspect of transport and so

opportunities exist to extend this literature considerably.

Forced Relocation

Forced residential relocation is a social impact associated with the construction phase of

transport infrastructure. There are a number of important social, economic and health

implications for residents who have been forced to relocate due to development projects. These

include: being able to socially adapt to a new place of residence and ‘host society’; dealing with

the act of moving itself, for those longstanding residents who may have never moved previously;

securing a post-migration livelihood and gainful employment; and mental and physical health

impacts arising from such aspects as reduced social networks and social support systems.
Our review of the literature did not uncover many studies that focus on residential relocation as a

result of transport construction projects per se, as those that consider forced relocation are

typically focused on neighbourhood renewal and relocation schemes more generally, sporting

events, or other types of construction projects, such as dams. Two studies that we did locate

during the time period of interest are focused on transport-related resettlement processes in

developing countries. It is in the developing world where the majority of Development Induced

Displacement and Resettlement (DIDR) take place.

Similar to other issues in this working paper, the distributional effects of forced relocation are

under-explored within the literature. The resettlement of 60,000 residents to accommodate

railway expansions and upgrades in Mumbai, for example, focus their analysis principally on the

process of resettlement, not the characteristics of the residents undergoing relocation. These

scholars do, however, recognised the particular disadvantages for women, who are more likely to

rely on local employment opportunities and thus lose these as they relocate to more distant

neighbourhoods; and children, as schools in the resettlement areas are not always able to

accommodate the influx of new students. Aside from emphasising the low-income nature of the

people being resettled, there is little in the way of elaboration as to how this process affects

particular groups.
 LESSON NINE

Uncertainty of Construction

Related to the issue of relocation is the uncertainty that residents face in light of the construction

of transport infrastructure. Our review of the literature uncovered one study that focused

explicitly on the role of uncertainty with regards to transport-infrastructure, and that is Marx’s

(2002) study of the impact of port facility expansion on local village residents in Doel, Belgium.

His research design involved surveying 159 households (416 residents) regarding their decision

to remain in the village under three different port expansion scenarios: an ‘uncertainty scenario’

(e.g. where residents knew the port would expand, but not to what extent); and two scenarios

with varying degrees of ‘hypothetical certainty’ (e.g. where residents were told that only a

planned dock would be constructed or that a dock with additional industrial facilities would be

constructed, respectively). Marx’s (2002) research revealed that uncertainty has a significant

impact on the decision to move for residents: only 35.8% of households were sure of staying in

the village under the ‘uncertainty scenario’ (this compares with 44% of households being certain

of leaving and a further 20.1% of households having doubts about remaining in the village). He

further concluded that uncertainly would have a significant impact on the village as a whole: not

only would it result in a loss of services and amenities for those residents who choose to remain,

it would compromise the ability to attract new residents to the area, contributing to further social

and economic decline. The distributional effects of uncertainty in relation to transport

construction also emerged within this study. Marx’s (2002) survey revealed that elderly residents

living in single-person households were most likely to remain in the community, whilst younger

residents and those in larger families were more likely to relocate.

Despite the importance of this issue and significance of these findings, we were unable to find

any other studies that focused explicitly on the role of uncertainty associated with transportation

projects. Accordingly, we could argue that this is an important opportunity for further research,

particularly with respect to the distributional effects of uncertainty.

Visual Quality

A smaller subset of the literature as reviewed for this working paper investigates visual quality

and aesthetics as a form of social impact, in terms of the presence of vehicles themselves and the

presence of transport infrastructure more generally. The relative lack of attention to this area of

study is remarkable, given the significance of the experience of motor vehicle traffic in modern

urban life, and the ways in which urban form and the aesthetic character of cities have been

radically transformed to accommodate car based travel. For example, transport schemes were an

important component of the City Beautiful planning movement in America. Two main themes

are observed within this literature: vehicle aesthetics and their impact on the pedestrian

environment; and transport-related landscaping features (including signage and other forms of

‘street furniture’) and their impact on active travel and safety (via accident rates).

The aesthetics of motorcars (e.g. paintwork, body shape, windscreens and headlights) are

essential features in their popularity with drivers. And yet these scholars also recognise the

adverse visual impact that vehicle aesthetics have on the landscape and the ways in which they

dominate street frontages, particularly in suburban environments. Whilst there are few empirical

studies available in this area for comparison, The impact of vehicles on the pedestrian

environment is instructive, in that it revealed that the size of motorcar has an adverse impact,

with large vehicles with high roof-lines (such as SUVs), being notable in this regard.

Agglomerations of vehicles, such as lines of stationary/parked vehicles and lines of moving

traffic, were also found to be ‘visually claustrophobic’ to research participants. The size and

design of vehicles in the contribution to a positive aesthetic environment for pedestrians, but

further cite a number of other transport related features that contribute to ‘aesthetic degradation’.

These include: wide junctions that create ‘no-go’ areas for pedestrians; road markings (e.g.

hatchings and coloured surfaces); and street furniture, such as street lamps and signage. These

scholars argue that a more positive aesthetic environment for pedestrians would be achieved by:

removing vehicular traffic from heavily pedestrian areas; reducing the size of street furniture and

integrating it into the existing fabric; and more creative design of pedestrian environments.

Roadside landscaping has also been studied in relation to public safety via driving behaviour and

accident rates. In their before-and-after study of ten sites in Texas, and that roadside landscaping

treatments resulted in a significant decrease in crash rates at eight sites, and overall decreases in

tree collisions were observed. These data were described, however, as ‘very coarse’ and it was

recognised that further research was required before landscaping treatments could deliberately be

employed as an accident mitigation strategy.

The safety impacts of particular roadside features, such as gateway monuments (e.g. freestanding

roadside structures or signage), have also been studied. In their before and after study of crash

data in relation to the construction of seven gateway monuments at five sites in California, for

example, monuments do not have a negative impact on traffic safety. Whilst these scholars

recognised that their findings cannot be used as a basis for advocating gateway monuments as

safety treatments, they confirmed that these particular roadside features were not detrimental to

safety; thus contradicting a common assumption made by traffic engineers that roadside

landscaping generates traffic hazards.

As noted previously, the literature pertaining to the aesthetics of transport (as a social impact)

tends to be focused on motorcars and related environments. There are few studies that examine

the aesthetic feature of other sorts of transport infrastructure. There is also little examination of

the distributional effects of these visual impacts. As a consequence, further research into these

areas is required in order for policy makers to better understand how the aesthetic aspects of

vehicles, signage and street furniture affect various segments of society

Historical and Cultural Resources

An emphasis within the literature in this area is the effects of road and rail traffic induced

vibration on heritage buildings. Traffic-induced vibration does not represent, in general, an

immediate hazard to buildings, but in time it can worsen the state of a building or even lead to its

failure. Given the aesthetic value of these structures, even cosmetic or minor damage to historic

buildings from traffic-induced vibration is viewed as significant and affecting the quality of life

in cities.

There is something of a tension observed within the literature in this regard. Certainly,

transport’s earlier impact on these resources was rather poor, with cities the world over having

lost many of their architecturally significant buildings and historic neighbourhoods through the

introduction of expressway schemes and related urban renewal initiatives following the Second

World War. At the other end of the spectrum, however, roads and road landscapes are

increasingly being recognised as having cultural and historical significance themselves and

therefore being listed and protected.

The studies cited above are typically focused on measurement and prediction techniques to

better understand how vehicle size and type, distance to road or railway, and level and speed of

traffic affect particular historic buildings; the wider distributional effects upon society are not
considered. This is therefore one of a number of opportunities for further research, as we

elaborate in the final section of this working paper.

Two main guidance documents within the UK recognise the importance of transport

infrastructure on built and cultural heritage: the Highways Agency’s (2007) guidance note for

Historic Landscape Assessment (HLA); and the Department for Transport’s Design Manual for

Roads and Bridges. Both sets of guidance notes provide details for preliminary (scoping), simple

and detailed assessment processes as part of their environmental assessment framework. Whilst

these documents recognise the importance of built and cultural heritage to people who access and

use such sites, there is no elaboration as to how various groups within society value or access

heritage resources.

Physical Fitness

Thus far, we have focused on the types of social impacts which are predominantly associated

with the dis-benefits of the transport system; transport impacts can also have positive social

effects. The issue of positive social impacts derived from the perceived health benefits associated

with walking and cycling is one example of this within a relatively new, yet burgeoning

literature, particularly with regards to the influence that the design of the built environment has

on mode of travel.

Whilst the health benefits associated with an increase in physical activity are widely

documented, there remain a number of unresolved issues as to whether the introduction of new

transport infrastructure, or other changes to the built environment, can reliably or predictably

lead to an increase in active travel for residents.

The introduction of a cycle-walkway as part of this scheme also appeared to have little impact on

the physical activity levels of research participants. Similarly, monitoring of 14 recently

completed home zone pilot projects in the UK reveals that residents did not spend more time in

their streets following the remodelling, despite overwhelmingly citing aesthetic improvements to

their neighbourhoods. Whilst neither study examined the distributional effects of these

remodelling schemes, the advantages for children, as parents became more likely to let their

children play outside.

Furthermore, not all scholars are in agreement as to whether a reliance on walking or cycling for

transport offers only health benefits. For example, in her research with single-mothers in the

Midlands, recognises the disadvantages associated with walking:

For some segments of the population, walking is compulsory and a source of both physical

fatigue and psycho-social stress. At best, it could be said to have contradictory health effects for

such groups: positive features include exercise while negative effects create fatigue and stress. At

worst, walking may be health damaging.

Thus, the extent to which walking may provide health benefits or dis-benefits relates to the

degree of choice of travel mode, with those individuals who walk or cycle for pleasure

experiencing the former whilst those without alternatives experiencing the latter. As access to

private transport is necessarily related to socioeconomic status, there are clear class dimensions

to the health benefits of active travel. Three main negative health effects associated with

compulsory active travel: psycho-social pressures associated with managing the demands of

children whilst walking; physical fatigue as a result of long journeys; and limited access to health

care and retail services, including hospitals and food shops. Her research thus is indicative of one

of the major tensions observed within the literature, between sustainability (which ultimately

seeks to secure modal shift and discourage car use) and social exclusion (which recognises the

social and health benefits of car use).

Intrinsic Value/Journey Quality

The intrinsic value of travel and the enjoyment that people can experience from travel itself as a

potential social benefit. The focus on the travel experience and travel for its own sake (as refer to

as ‘autotelic’, or undirected travel), is a relatively new area of study and one that completely

contradicts the traditional assumption within transport, namely that all travel is a derived

demand. Difference between two types of ‘autotelic’ travel: unnecessary trips (where there is no

particular destination in mind); and necessary trips with ‘unnecessary activities’, such as those

where more distant destinations are visited and a longer-than-necessary journey is undertaken.

Not all autotelic trips are undertaken by car, in fact the literature on the physical fitness benefits

of transport is categorised as autotelic walking and cycling, yet the car does feature within this

type of travel and has thus been recognised within urban planning as a form of travel that should

be reduced if transport problems are to be addressed. However, there is a ‘modal imbalance’

with respect to the recognition of, and engagement with, the emotional experience of travel. As

he elaborates:

Unlike transport planning, the car manufacturing industry has known and used the ‘emotional

appeal’ of their products since their invention. Over time, car design and marketing has made

ever greater use of the non-rational dimension of travel, with good results … For public

transport, the opposite development can be observed. Its character as a ‘collective’ service

already leads to a different emotional profile and limits its possibilities to compete with the car

… This has without doubt affected its position negatively – in its perception among the citizens

as well as professionals.

The distributional effects of the intrinsic value of travel have received less attention within the

literature relative to other social impacts of transport, and so remain an opportunity for further
research. Some of the studies reviewed for this working paper, however, suggest that certain

segments of society are more likely to engage in undirected driving. For example, the age,

education, and number of children under 18 years of age are correlated with this type of travel. In

addition, Car drivers in the Netherlands revealed that male and younger study participants

exhibited symbolic and affective motives for car use, rather than intrinsic motivations
 LESSON TEN

SOME PRINCIPLES OF HEALTHY TRANSPORT

The goal of healthy and sustainable transport is to maximize access, personal mobility and

healthy physical activity. Technical components of a healthy and sustainable transport network

vary by locale, local needs and travel patterns. However, the following policy components are

considered to be some of the most important.

• Vision of social equity. Urban transport systems should provide high quality mobility to all

urban residents who need access to jobs, schools and commercial districts, regardless of whether

they own a private vehicle. Such mobility should minimize health risks from pollution and

injuries, and enhance opportunities for healthy physical activity and communal interactions

across all sectors.

• Transport demand management. Rather than "predicting and providing" more road capacity

for economic development, demand management asks: "what are the mobility needs of people

and goods, and how might those be answered in the most healthy, efficient, equitable and

environmentally sustainable manner?"

• Integrated transport. Integrated systems optimize connectivity between, and comparative

advantages of, different modes e.g. NMT for dense urban areas; public transport for high-volume

travel to high-demand destinations; and private transport for very low volume, point-to-point

trips served inefficiently by other modes.

• Prioritizing non-polluting modes. Public transport and NMT generate fewer health and

environmental impacts per unit of travel. These can be prioritized in a demand management

policy using both physical design and economic measures.

• Separated NMT networks. High quality pedestrian and cycling networks, separated from

vehicular traffic, can help reduce injury risk and enhance the mobility of poor and vulnerable

populations, such as children. Good NMT networks also provide additional incentives to use

public transport since usually this is accessed by those modes.

• Dedicated public transport corridors. This is a key spatial design feature that can improve

public transport service and efficiency in crowded urban areas. Dedicated public transport can

include light rail or rapid bus transit (the latter may be less expensive and faster to implement);

or a mix of rapid bus transit, light rail and metro services – as appropriate to local travel needs

and volumes, needs for connectivity and mobility, and urban land-use patterns. When separation

is impossible, traffic-calming measures should be used to slow motorized vehicle speeds so that

the lives of pedestrians and cyclists are not endangered.

• Active community environments. Urban space should be allocated to community social and

activity space (e.g. parks, squares and playgrounds, pocket gardens, pedestrian alleys and rights

of way). These support mobility, physical activity and social interactions in a safe and non-

polluted environment.

• Managed, integrated land use. Land-use policies that cluster and integrate new housing,

services and activity centres around public transport/NMT networks can help to reduce the

excessive "trip generation" that often accompanies urban development, thereby enhancing

sustainability and health.

• Improved vehicle standards and technology. Policies that support unleaded fuels, lower-

sulfur fuel; alternatives to diesel, such as CNG; improved standards or retrofitting of older

vehicle engines; and better vehicle maintenance and monitoring, can help to lower pollution

emissions, particularly from the most polluting vehicles. Improved safety design of vehicle
fronts, especially for cars and buses, can reduce pedestrian and cyclists’ injuries significantly.

Policies that encourage the phasing out of older vehicles can help to remove vehicles that are

among the most polluting and at greater risk of break-downs which can, in turn, be a factor in

traffic accidents and injuries.

• Economic tools. Economic tools such as fuel taxes, congestion charging or parking pricing

may be used to generate revenues for less polluting modes and to raise the price of polluting

modes to reflect health and environment "externalities" that the market typically does not

capture. Also these tools may be used as incentives to phase out older vehicles.
 LESSON ELEVEN

ECONOMIC VALUATION OF HEALTHY TRANSPORT

Unsustainable patterns of transport generate health and environmental costs, or "externalities,"

for which the user of the mode seldom pays. Urban dwellers breathe the pollution generated by

car commuters entering the city. Pedestrians become injury victims in traffic-congested streets.

Many such environmental and health costs are not internalized into conventional fuel and vehicle

taxes. Some environmental impacts are indirect. If highly-polluted streets become unpleasant for

pedestrians, residents and businesses, real estate values may decline and crime may rise – with

economic consequences.

There are gaps in the quantification of transport externalities in developing countries. However,

it has been estimated that the external costs of transport in the European Union, while large and

uncertain, amount to about 8% of GDP. The externalities of private car travel, including

accidents, noise, air pollution, climate change, nature and urban effects, are estimated to range

between €45 and €86 per 1000 passenger kilometres, compared to €20 to €24 per passenger

kilometre for rail.

Conversely, there is much qualitative evidence to indicate that healthier transport systems may

be beneficial to the macroeconomic development of cities – reducing unwanted externalities and

capitalizing on a synergistic range of potential social, economic and health benefits. Cities with

excellent public transport and NMT networks may be more energy efficient, experience less

sprawl and pollution and spend a smaller overall share of GDP per capita on transport services.

Investments in efficient mass transit, as well as pedestrian and cycling networks, may enhance

not only public health but also a city's attraction as a place to live and do business. And on the

micro-level, modest improvements in neighbourhood mobility can help poor residential areas.
Healthier transport investments can be affordable, even for poor cities. Visionary policies

spurred the development of high capacity bus systems in Latin American cities such as Bogotá

and Curitiba (see case studies), based largely on revenues raised locally through petrol taxes and

other economic instruments.

Poverty reduction

Poor people tend to be the most vulnerable to environmental pollution – often they live in areas

of very high traffic volumes and as pedestrians or cyclists may be more exposed to risk of injury.

Also they may be the most damaged economically by urban transport development that

emphasizes only private modes:

As average incomes grow and car ownership increases, the patronage, financial viability, and

eventually quality and quantity of public transport diminishes. Motorization, which is permitted

by the growth process, may thus also make some poor people even poorer. In particular, in the

absence of efficient congestion pricing for road use, piecemeal investment to eliminate

bottlenecks will almost certainly benefit the relatively wealthy at the expense of the poor .

By providing better mobility to all population sectors, sustainable transport can have direct

benefits for poverty reduction. Healthier transport can spread the health and environmental costs

and benefits of transport more evenly across different population sectors.

Owning a motor vehicle requires substantial capital investment and a significant portion of a

household’s monthly budget to cover fuel and vehicle maintenance, so good public transport can

be cheaper for daily travel. Households that have difficulty affording even a bus or tram ticket

can enjoy a reasonable range of mobility when cycling is a safe and accessible option. Safer

travel can reduce a breadwinner’s risk of sudden injury or disability that could trigger a family's

decline into poverty. Economic measures that reduce the cost of public transport and ensure
access to safe and efficient NMT (e.g. through reduction of duties/increased credit for cycling),

may thus support poverty reduction goals.

 LESSON TWELVE

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT FACTORS

Cost-benefit analysis of health and environmental impacts can improve understanding of

tradeoffs inherent in different kinds of transport investments. Over the past decade, case studies

have been conducted in both developed and developing cities to estimate the health and

environmental benefits of reducing air pollution levels. Generally these are based on the body of

epidemiological evidence about quantifiable links between PM10/PM2.5 pollution and mortality.

In Mexico City, for instance, it was estimated that every 1 μg/m3 reduction in average annual

PM10 concentrations would save approximately US$ 100 million per year, largely as a result of

reduced hospitalization and health costs.

Barriers to healthy transport

"The car is a status symbol everywhere and more so in developing countries. To own one shows

you are successful. It is like wearing jewels.

Social perceptions

Since private motorized transport is most accessible to wealthier socioeconomic groups, car

ownership may be perceived as a symbol of personal and social success. It is probable that

vehicle owners represent the most politically powerful social sectors and therefore are likely to

resist policy attempts to curb private car use if the health and environmental benefits of

"managed transport" are not well-communicated and understood.

Conversely, walking or cycling may be associated with lower status. Often public transport

patrons represent weaker socioeconomic sectors and may feel too powerless to advocate for

system improvements. In some countries, women face gender barriers to the use of public

transport and cycling. In some Latin American countries and in Africa most cyclists are men,
elsewhere equal proportions of men and women cycle e.g. China and Viet Nam. For women,

cycling can promote gender equity by enhancing their sense of social safety and easing weight

bearing tasks which can result in musculoskeletal illnesses and disabilities.

Land use: the challenge of sprawl

A wide body of evidence from developed countries indicates how lower density, single purpose

and/or spatially disconnected forms of land use may generate longer trips and greater

dependency on private transport, as well as new patterns of travel. Suburban shopping centres

and residential communities, accessible primarily by car, are increasingly common in developing

countries, as well. Such land use patterns may pose a powerful emerging barrier to healthy

transport. Compared to more compact areas built around defined urban centres, such land use

creates barriers to efficient non-motorized and public transport. This in turn has direct and

indirect impacts on health and the environment, in terms of energy consumption air and water

pollution; physical activity in daily travel; and preservation of agricultural land and green spaces

on the urban periphery.

Since only a small proportion of the population in most developing cities has direct access to

private cars, spatially disconnected commercial and residential developments also may be a

powerful generator of equity gaps in mobility and access to housing, jobs and services.

Implementation of healthier transport policies requires a strong policy vision, not only for the

transport system per se, but also for urban land use. Generally, compact, mixed-use

developments linked to walking, cycling and public transport networks ensure maximum

accessibility between homes and services for all social sectors, minimal travel distances and a

minimum of health and environmental impacts such as air and noise pollution.
Socio Economic and Socio Demographic Factors

Socio economic factors are more critical to analyse to determine any kind of relationships on

travel patterns. Socioeconomic characteristics consist of age, income, household size, and car

ownership. Trip maker such as socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ethnicity is

included in travel because of two reasons-

One, because they may directly influence travel behaviour, and two, because, as proxies to more

difficult to observe factors, such as preferences, tastes, choices, resource constraints and social

conventions. Income and vehicle access are for example good indicators of an individual’s

access to resources, whereas, gender, age and ethnicity variables provide partial hints to

individual’s tastes and travel preferences.

Income

House hold income, or when normalized to family sized household income per person, has a

strong impact on the mode choice. Upper-income households and persons are thought to place a

higher value on the comfort and convenience associated with the private auto, particularly for

non-work trips. Ownership of the vehicles and the access to license also plays a major role in

travel behaviour, regardless of what the purpose of the trip is. There was an observation that the

rich in the city travel more as compared to the poor. The poor ones would always like to stay

nearer to their workplaces and reduce their travel costs, which is very unlikely in the case of the

rich ones. They would live far away from their workplaces, and drive to their workplaces. Also,

sometimes when the poor use the public transits, access to it is another major issue, as because,
still in many places the feeder services are not that strong and expensive also if compared to

what a normal poor person can afford for travel.

Hence the travel behaviour and mode choice is very well reflected upon by the income factor.

Age

The relationship between age and travel behaviour is multi-faceted. Young children, for

example, are far less likely than adults to make any type of independent trips. Teenagers on the

other hand, want to travel anywhere and everywhere without and specific agenda, they probably

need a reason to get out of their homes. Adults tend to travel out for necessity or for recreational

purposes. Older people have the desire to walk or bicycle and spare their time in a qualitative

way, but there might be physical constraints. Hence attitude towards specific modes also varies

generationally, with older generations more familiar with, if not predisposed towards transit.

Gender

Relationship between gender and travel behaviour is also a major factor that determines the

mode choice. What may be true for some men and women may or may not be true for the others.

Many women than men, for example, are less willing to take up trips or take modes as they

perceive them as unsafe. There are also incidents of memory biases in terms of seeing or hearing

something extremely unpleasant that might restrict women from taking public transport.

Also, clothing of women, in different cultures can impact a lot on the choice of transport. For

example, in Indian contexts, how comfortable will it be for a woman to run around for public

transport in sarees? Safety aspects also can be taken into account such as , what if the pallu gets
accidentally stuck somewhere? Hence it is important to keep in mind the gender related issues as

well, such as transport and street infrastructure to ensure women’s high user group and make

them as comfortable as it can be.

Employment Status

Employed people might have greater demands on their time and thus, prefer quicker and more

convenient modes of transportation, as private car, compared to slower or less convenient modes.

Also, the location of their work places has a great impact on the mode choice and again the

affordability and time compared to their income is a strong determinant of the same.

Household consumption and housing type

If a household is a family, interrelationships might have a large impact on every individual’s

choice. If household members are unrelated, they may share information, or tastes but their

behaviour is generally expected to be less interdependent. The greater the number of children in

a family, the more likely the adults is to avoid transit because they have to pay a fare for every

person.

Finally, a household’s dwelling unit type and housing tenure have traditionally been seen as a

taste variable that may indirectly impact mode choice. Living in a single family dwelling or

owning ones dwelling are expected to increase that likelihood that a person drives.

Universal Accessibility

An individual’s ability determines their choice of mode to a large extent. The kind of

infrastructure to accommodate through abilities of a person is very important to make a city’s

transport system inclusive. Not only long-term disabilities, but other infrastructure that

accommodates short term problems, such as if we have luggage, if a women is carrying a baby,
or the sense of safety and security due to the presence of the street infrastructure, the rate at

which a public space is used etc.