Suchergebnisse

Draft paper for the BIEE Seminar on the energy White paper: An Academic Critique, to be held at Imperial College, 25th September 2007. Transport is making a very limited contribution to carbon emissions reduction targets in the UK, and this paper argues the case for a substantial shift in thinking away from the concentration on technological alternatives to one that combines technological efficiency with behavioural change. It presents a critique of the UK approach to energy and transport, commenting on the approach and measures used, and their effectiveness. The focus here is on the 2007 Energy White Paper, the Climate Change Programme and the Environmental Audit Committee report on carbon emissions from transport. The necessary policy measures are available, but at present there is not sufficient political and public support for effective action. Technology on its own will not be enough.

The transport sector has been singularly unsuccessful in becoming low carbon and less resource intensive. This book takes an innovative and holistic social, cultural and behavioural perspective, as well as covering the more conventional economic and technological dimensions, to provide a more complete understanding of the mobility and transport system and its progress towards high carbon mobility. The book uses this platform to explore the means to achieve low carbon mobility through outlining alternative pathways, through an investigation of theories of change, and through alternative visions

At the decision-making stage, a large-scale infrastructure project is essentially a broad concept, and this means the expert analyses will differ from each other and become contested over time, leading to the emergence of rival narratives. It is only where there is a limited range of expert analyses that the bases for decision-making will remain relatively clear-cut. Over time the contested nature of expertise can significantly inhibit the construction of effective narratives, either for or against the project, and also make decision-making more complex and problematic. Decision makers may also seek greater clarification through the construction of narratives that rise above these disputed areas of expertise, and the scientific evidence becomes less important. This paper examines the changing nature of contested expertise through a comparative analysis of political decision-making between UK trunk roads policy and the case of High Speed Rail 2, through the framework of epistemic communities.

Over the last fifty years there has been much interest in cities – in their planning, design, degradation and regeneration – and in the last ten years, in particular, much discussion around sustainability, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Within this, there are aspirations towards sustainable travel. Progress however appears intractably difficult to make in the transport sector as the private car, largely fuelled by petrol or diesel, remains the mainstream mode of use and choice. In almost all cities we are experiencing increasing emissions in transport, the city fabric is often adversely impacted by planning for the private car, and many people complain of the daily grind of the commute as the worst part of their daily lives. Our travel behaviours are in crisis. This paper considers the different baselines, projections and opportunities for five very different contexts: from London and Oxfordshire (UK), Delhi (India), Jinan (China) and Auckland (New Zealand). The likely possibilities for reducing transport CO2 emissions are examined relative to the aspirations of the IPCC (2007) and Stern (2007, 2009). The IPCC's central scenario (A1F1), assuming high economic growth and increased globalisation, estimates resultant world temperature increases of 4°C-6.4°C and expected sea level rises of up to 59cm, with hugely variable impacts globally. A central issue, therefore, is in the gap between the current business as usual (BAU) projections and the strategic policy ambitions to reduce the likely impacts of climate change. Scenarios are developed, assuming an equitable 0.5 tCO2 per capita in transport CO2 emissions, for each case study by 2050. The political deliverability of low carbon transport futures, however, remain a major obstacle to progress (Hood, 1986; Freund and Martin, 1993; Dunn and Perl, 2010). The growing body of scenario analysis and modelling of impacts by policy tool or package of tools is useful, but in the end redundant, if political deliverability is not possible. ...

Transport is making a very limited contribution to carbon emissions reduction targets in the UK and this paper argues the case for a substantial shift in thinking away from the concentration on technological alternatives to a revised approach that combines technological efficiency with behavioural change. The paper presents a critique of the UK approach to energy and transport, commenting on the limited approach and measures used and their effectiveness. The necessary policy measures are available, but at present there is not sufficient political and public support for wide-ranging, effective action. Technology on its own will not be enough. This message is then reinforced with a more local perspective in London where considerable efforts are being made to make London a sustainable city, but even here where opportunities are present, it is the growth in travel and in particular in aviation, that makes transport-based targets very difficult to achieve.

Due to its central role in the UK air transport system the future of Heathrow holds the key to the future of UK aviation and for meeting the government goals to secure air transport contribution to the economy along side its accessibility benefits to the UK regions while lowering its adverse impact on the environment.

New technologies are playing an increasingly important part in shaping the development of city transport and the wider built environment. Relatively litt le att ention has, however, been given to how the technologies evolve in social and political terms, so that the public are not just seen as the passive receivers of new technology. Technological transitions are not only about the technology, but also about the social and political implications of innovation and how people respond to the new mobility. Participatory exchange and the policy process are essential parts of that approach. This paper explores the dynamics of how a technological innovation failed as a niche-innovation in terms of the socio-technical transitions framework. It uses the case study of the Mobike dockless bicycle hire scheme in Manchester to illustrate the reasons for failure. These included poor participatory practice in the earlier stages of the scheme, together with the inability of the innovator to respond appropriately through participatory exchange, including the direct participation of the public through the technology, in the implementation stage.

The role of governments in the regulation of potentially beneficial low carbon practices, such as car sharing, has proved difficult, as there are many different actors involved and as existing practices can be undermined. The mobility sector provides clear evidence of these dilemmas, as a wide range of users need to be engaged in the discourse over the innovations, and as existing governance structures may be unsuitable for addressing both the opportunities and limitations of innovation. This paper focuses on the sustainability implications of shared mobility and the need for new approaches to governance. A qualitative study of car sharing in London is used to examine the ideas, incentives, and institutions of the key actors involved in this sharing sector. The elements of change and continuity in the emerging sharing economy indicate the different possibilities for enhancing sustainable mobility. Any search for an alternative governance regime should take account of the ideational factors that would require an understanding of the different incentives needed to accommodate the full range of actors involved with the sharing economy.

The ride-hailing company Uber has achieved extremely rapid global expansion by means of outmanoeuvring governments, regulators and competitors. The rise of the company has been based on a deliberate strategy of acting as a market disruptive innovator through a user friendly technology and making use of the 'sharing economy'. These attributes are not unique, but are distinctively augmented by a relentless expansionary ambition and an ability to maintain the capacity to innovate. Uber has generated great political controversy, but the challenge for governments and regulators is to embrace the benefits of the disruptive innovator, while adopting an approach that takes into account the full range of impacts. For Uber, the challenge is to maintain its expansionary style as a disruptive innovator, while also redefining on its terms the political and public debate. The case study of London provides important insights into the dynamics of these processes.

With the emergence of behaviour change on political and intellectual agendas in passenger transport, the question of how to understand and intervene in habitual carbon-intensive travel practices has become crucially important. Building primarily on the philosophies of Félix Ravaisson and John Dewey, we outline an approach to travel habits that is more affirmative than prevailing psychological perspectives. Rather than as the automatically cued, repetitive behaviour of individuals, habit is understood here as a generative and propulsive capacity brought about through repetition and belonging to body–mind–world assemblages that exceed the human individual as conventionally understood. The implications of the proposed conceptualisation of habits for behaviour change are also explored. We argue that widespread, durable behaviour change is unlikely to result from the displacement of automaticity by reasoned action alone but instead demands changes in collective customs. Additionally, a narrow focus on breaking carbon-intensive travel habits should be avoided. Not only should the formation of low-carbon habits and associated forms of embodied intelligence be stimulated; it is also important to capitalise on the potential for subtle change inherent to carbon-intensive travel habits in situations where individualised vehicular travel is the only realistic transport option.

Transport is a major user of carbon-based fuels, and achievement of the targets set at the Kyoto Protocol and elsewhere mean that the EU and national governments must reduce CO2 emissions in all sectors, including transport. This will be a difficult task and will require action on many fronts. This paper reports on two recently completed studies considering these issues – for the UK Department for Transport and the Scottish Executive. The core analysis considers the options available to meet a 60% CO2 reduction target by 2030 in the transport sector at the UK level and, using an innovative backcasting study approach, develops a business as usual (BAU) baseline for transport emissions, and alternative scenarios to 2030. Different policy measures are assessed and assembled into mutually supporting combinations. These are grouped into policy packages to establish whether the challenging 60% CO2 reduction target can be reached and when the key actions need to be taken. The distinct role that can be played in Scotland is also reviewed, considering the likely policy options available, using "new" policy measures or a "more intensive" application of existing policy measures. Although 2030 seems a long way ahead, action must be taken now in Scotland if the targets for CO2 reduction are to be met. The opportunity is there to develop a niche as a market leader in carbon efficient transport. Combining this with behavioural change, aimed at holding car-based travel at or near to present levels, will help Scotland move towards even the more stringent carbon reduction targets. A major transformation in the way transport and urban planning is carried out is however required. As transport, urban planners and the public we need to think very differently in tackling the new environmental imperative.

Over the past decades, transport researchers and policymakers have devoted increasing attention to questions about justice and equity. Nonetheless, there is still little engagement with theories in political philosophy to frame what justice means in the context of transport policies. This paper reviews key theories of justice (utilitarianism, libertarianism, intuitionism, Rawls' egalitarianism, and Capability Approaches), and critically evaluates the insights they generate when applied to transport. Based on a dialogue between Rawlsian and Capability Approaches, we propose that distributive justice concerns over transport disadvantage and social exclusion should focus primarily on accessibility as a human capability. This means that, in policy evaluation, a detailed analysis of distributional effects of transport policies should consider minimum standards of accessibility to key destinations and the extent of which these policies respect individuals' rights and prioritize disadvantaged groups, reduce inequalities of opportunities and mitigate transport externalities. A full account of justice in transportation requires a more complete understanding of accessibility than traditional approaches have been able to deliver to date.

We argue that there is no clear definition of the concept sustainable passenger transport to help guide politicians in solving challenges at the global or regional level. Rather, the use of the concept has to an increasing extent reflected socially desirable attributes of local- and project-level problems, but these ignore the global challenges the concept was meant to solve. Going back to the Brundtland Report, we redefine the concept of 'sustainable passenger transport' and suggest an assessment method based on four equally important, main dimensions: safeguarding long-term ecological sustainability, satisfying basic transport needs and promoting intra- and intergenerational equity. We also define indicators and threshold values that have to be met for each of these dimensions and then illustrate how to achieve sustainable passenger transport.

China's air transportation has experienced rapid growth and major reforms in the past three decades, some of which have been partially successful and are still ongoing today. The paper aims to analyze China's air deregulation experience over the last two decades and its impact on airline competition from a geographical perspective. After the establishment of the "Big Three" in 2002, the paper reveals that there has been a trade-off between the extent of deregulation and airline competition in China because the central government has tended to strengthen the "Big Three" rather than totally open the market to private and locally owned airlines. The paper uses each airline group as the basic unit of analysis and reveals that (1) the air market has been more concentrated in the "Big Three" as a result of the process of air deregulation; (2) airline competition in over two thirds of the airports and one half of the routes has increased in the last 18 years, but the core airports and trunk routes are chiefly dominated by the "Big Three". The peripheral airports and thin routes have been operated by private and locally owned airlines; and (3) regionally, airline competition has occurred in most airports of the eastern region, and it is more intense than in the central and western regions. But even here, competition in the eastern region has however decreased in 1994–2012. The three main contributions of the paper are: (1) the use of two measures of competition in the airline market; (2) the analysis of the historical evolution of competition; and (3) an understanding the role of the geography of competition in the Chinese airline market.

This paper seeks to develop a deeper understanding of the research on climate change mitigation in transport. We suggest that work to date has focused on the effects of improvements in transport technologies, changes in the price of transport, physical infrastructure provision, behavioural change and alternative institutional arrangements for governing transport systems. In terms of research methodologies, positivist and quantitative analysis prevails, although there are signs of experimentation with non-positivist epistemologies and participatory methods. These particular engagements with climate change mitigation reflect mutually reinforcing tendencies within and beyond the academic transport community. We first draw on a revised version of Thomas Kuhn's philosophy of science to explore the path dependencies within transport studies, which are at least partly responsible for the predisposition towards quantitative modelling and technology, pricing and infrastructure oriented interventions in transport systems. We then employ the governmentality perspective to examine how transport academics' engagements with climate change mitigation depend on and align with more general understandings of climate change in UK society and beyond. The analysis makes clear that ecological modernisation and neo-liberal governmentality more generally provide the context for the current focus on and belief in technological, behaviour change, and especially market-based mitigation strategies. While current research trajectories are important and insightful, we believe that a deeper engagement with theoretical insights from the social sciences will produce richer understandings of transport mitigation in transport and briefly outline some of the contributions thinking on socio-technical transitions and practice theories can make.