Suchergebnisse

Cities looking to embark on more sustainable development pathways may need to evaluate the controversial but usually impactful measure of road pricing as a means of reducing their reliance on conventionally fuelled automobiles. Understanding the mechanisms determining the public acceptability of road pricing could be critical for its implementation. Studying the attitudes of older people is of particular significance because of their increasing demographic and political importance and vulnerability to transport-related social exclusion. Prior research identified that older people's social norms and pro-social values affect their attitudes to road pricing. The present paper extends this understanding based on the results of three focus groups conducted in Bristol, UK. According to these, there are three distinctive expressions of pro-sociality: pro-environmental values and generativity, which are mainly drivers of support for road pricing and pro-equity values, which are mainly drivers of opposition. Social norms have two particular expressions; subjective norms (i.e. norms reflecting participants' immediate social environment) and norms about others and society in general. Furthermore, a theory-driven thematic analysis indicates that trust on the integrity of the concept and older age as a life stage associated with ageing, retirement, lower income, mobility barriers and deteriorating health are important in how attitudes reflecting and affecting public acceptability to road pricing form. Finally, the paper highlights the need for packaging road pricing with measures looking to promote its pro-social potential and the importance of peer-to-peer communication and accepting citizens as "social influencers", tailored consultation, pro-social branding, pre-implementation trials, clear administrative roles, transparency, and "political patience".

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

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

Due to the motivations of climate change, the health impacts of poor air quality, and the importance of cities for economic growth, transport policy at all levels of governance places emphasis on reducing and managing urban traffic and congestion. Whilst the majority of urban traffic is created by personal travel, freight vehicles make a relatively large contribution per vehicle to congestion, pollution and severe accidents. The European Commission (EC 2011) estimates that 6% of all EU transport carbon emissions are from urban freight. For these reasons, a well-structured portfolio of measures and policies oriented towards more sustainable and efficient management of supply chain activities carried out in urban areas is needed, in order to reduce negative externalities related to urban mobility and improve economic performance. In recent years, there has been enthusiasm amongst commentators that shared-resource economic models can both create new commercial opportunities and address policy problems, including in the transport sector. Within the city logistics subsector, this new model is exemplified by the emergence of Urban freight Consolidation Centres (UCCs). UCCs replace multiple 'last-mile' delivery movements, many of which involving small consignments, by a common receiving point (the consolidation centre), normally on the periphery of a city, with the final part of the delivery being shared by the consignments in a small freight vehicle. Such arrangements can represent a good compromise between the needs of city centre businesses and their customers on the one hand (i.e. high availability of a range of goods) and local and global sustainability objectives on the other. At the same time, by sharing logistics facilities and delivery vehicles, UCCs offer added-value services to both urban economic actors, such as retailers, and network logistics providers. However, UCCs add to the complexity of logistics chains, requiring additional contracts, communications and movement stages. These arrangements also introduce additional actors within the supply of delivery services, notably local authorities present as promoters and funders, rather than simply as regulators, companies specialised in the UCC operation, and companies, which provide specialist technologies, such as electric delivery vehicles. UCCs therefore also represent an example of multi-stakeholder collaboration. Drawing on the results of a 2013 survey in Bristol (United Kingdom) and a further survey carried out in 2015 in Cagliari (Italy), the present paper will provide an in-depth comparison of the differences in the perceptions of urban freight users and stakeholders towards UCCs. Retailers involved in the survey carried out in Bristol showed high satisfaction with the delivery service provided by the UCC. Different topic areas (e.g. timeliness, reliability, safety) are examined through analyses of both qualitative and quantitative data. The survey carried out in Cagliari investigated the inclination of potential users to join a UCC scheme. The comparison between the two cities considers factors such as the nature of business holding (e.g. SME versus multiple retailers), operational practices (e.g. pattern of deliveries) and operating subsector (e.g. food versus no food). An analysis on the barriers to the implementation of UCCs in Bristol and in Cagliari is provided at the end of the paper.