Search results

This chapter focuses on strategies to initiate a shift in mobility behaviour away from private cars towards a combination of more environmentally friendly transport modes including public transport, ride- and car sharing or even completely carbon-free modes like walking and cycling. The requirement for such a shift is that people must be able to actually choose between different travelling options and combine them within an intermodal mobility network. Here, shared mobility has a considerable potential to fill the gap between public and individual transport options.

This chapter summarises results from different studies on shared mobility from the providers’, the users’ and the political perspective. The user’s perspective is based on an empirical study comparing car sharers’, car drivers’ and public transport users’ attitudes and mobility patterns.

The empirical findings from the case study have shown that shuttle trips by car in general, and to the train station in particular, are an important field of action for improving the environmental impact of intermodal trips. The study has also shown that car sharing enables people to live without a private car by using different transport modes for different purposes. As the majority of car sharers report needing a car only one to three times a month, they have a very small carbon footprint compared to the average car owner.

Mobility patterns are determined by local transport options as well as by personal routines. Hence, current changes due to new shared mobility options seem to have a considerable direct impact on how people organise their daily lives on the one hand and an indirect impact on their living costs on the other hand, since private cars have an important share of private household costs.

From an environmental perspective, any incentives to encourage people to choose alternative forms of transport over their private cars would seem to be particularly effective. Thus, understanding the behaviour and needs of multi- and intermodal travellers is an important step towards sustainable mobility. Acknowledging that most travellers still need a car every now and then, car sharing is an essential addition to public transport systems, supporting both public transport use and carbon-free mobility like walking and cycling.

Purpose — This chapter considers how transport policy and planning has been developing in Victoria in tandem with the research program described elsewhere in this book. Developments in policy and planning are discussed with particular regard to transport disadvantage and social inclusion.

Methodology — The chapter commences by providing a policy and planning context in terms of the geography and demography of travel needs, the relevant jurisdictional responsibilities in Australia and the policy history. It then describes the evolution of transport policy in the past decade and outlines the way in which the findings of this research are being incorporated into the development of programs and projects to support social inclusion. Additionally, some key policy challenges are outlined, at least some of which may provide fruitful areas for undertaking further research to support the development of future policies and programs.

Findings — The results show that applied research can be a highly successful endeavour, particularly when policy and planning perspectives are integrated into the development of the research design and strong collaboration is an ongoing feature of the research program.

There are different narratives surrounding smart mobility, which can sometimes even appear as opposing (Lyons, 2018). Its fiercest proponents are promising versions of a revolutionised future, where users have on-demand access to multiple mobility options and are freed from car ownership, while transport systems become carbon neutral and congestion is a problem of a bygone age (Sherman, 2019). At the same time, the plausibility of such visions of the future has been questioned, with critics warning against the potentially negative impacts of the widespread adoption of privately provided services and stressing the need for state intervention to avoid exacerbating ‘classic’ transport issues such as congestion and unequal access to services, as well as creating new challenges such as uncontrolled market monopolies (Docherty, Marsden, & Anable, 2018). Drawing from these narratives, this chapter explores how officials from English transport authorities see state intervention evolve in the future, and what accountability arrangements are necessary to achieve the level of steering they envisage. Based on interviews with local authority officials, this chapter shows that the officials’ views generally align more closely with the narrative of providers than with that of critics. Although different local authorities envisage varying levels of control and steering of smart mobility, they all expect new services to improve the local transport provision. This chapter also discusses the barriers local authorities face in shaping local accountability arrangements.

The chapter provides a general review of the policy debate around the provision of formal Park-and-Ride (P&R) facilities and the empirical research evidence about travellers’ responses to the opportunities they present, drawing on evidence from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The effects of the schemes on road traffic and car dependence are considered.

The different ways in which private vehicles and public transport are combined during journeys are reviewed. The position of P&R is considered as a modal variant within a ‘socio-technical system’ competing with the more established journey options of fully private and fully public transport. Scenarios which can maximise the traffic reduction and sustainable development potential of P&R are examined.

The review of the policy context establishes that a range of policy objectives are conceived for P&R depending on different professional and citizen perspectives. There is partial understanding amongst local authorities about the effectiveness with which P&R addresses the range of objectives in practice. The key travel behavioural findings are that only a portion of P&R users’ car trips are shortened. Hence, overall increases in car use occur, combined with overall reductions in public transport use, and in some cases less active travel. Where dedicated public transport services are operated, these are also a further source of additional traffic.

P&R implementations are generally successful where they are explicitly for providing more parking for economic growth or traffic management reasons, rather than to enhance sustainable mobility. The essential conditions for traffic reduction to occur in future are a strategic subregional integrated parking and public transport strategy which achieves interception of car trips early and ensures public transport services remain attractive for a range of access modes.

The chapter provides a synthesis of work by a number of leading authors on the topic and includes elements of originality in the combination of the established knowledge, the addition of novel insights, and in overall interpretation.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides: