Dealing with climate change in the UK’s surface transport sector requires a decisive mix of incentives (‘carrots’) and regulations (‘sticks’), implemented without delay and at scale. Without swift action, surface transport emissions, combined with persistently high emissions from aviation and shipping, will contribute to failed national climate targets. This will also add to global temperature rises of 2 or even 3°C.
What, then, must be done to ensure rapid decline in surface transport emissions across the UK?
Governments around the world are already experimenting with policies in order to reduce transport emissions, generating new and growing research. A substantive study has been published recently, summarising effective and sustainable measures (page numbers given below refer to this study).
A multi-country summary of policy initiatives designed to cut transport emissions
Policies that increase the cost of driving or reducing vehicle access can be difficult to implement in terms of public acceptance, while recognising substantial differences between rural and urban areas. Although congestion pricing has been introduced in places such as London and parts of Oxford, evidence from this type of measure suggests that it does not reduce overall national traffic levels (p.2). As a result, both tailpipe and non-exhaust emissions are unlikely to be reduced, especially in countries like the UK, where the numbers of vehicles continue to grow.
Efforts to make cities more liveable by promoting walking, wheeling, cycling, and public transport have limited applicability in many rural areas. Policies which increase urban population density, however, may well reduce the distance travelled by car (p.3). Given that OECD countries average around 82% of vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) by car (p.3), reducing car dependency is essential for cutting carbon emissions.
Importantly, commuting accounts for only a small share of total car use. A 13-country EU study found that commuting represents only 15% of annual car VKT, illustrating the importance of price and convenience of public transport and better walking and cycling networks to reduce non-commuting car journeys. These include leisure travel, shopping trips, and school runs in the UK, areas where these measures could have significant impact.
Professor John Whitelegg says there is a “need for best practice documentation and case studies and overall public policy synergy, e.g. high-quality public transport linked to policies to reduce car use and boost modal shift in a variety of geographies. This can be seen in all geographies from big cities like Berlin to rural areas in Sweden and small towns in Germany.”
Urbanisation, technology, and car use
The level of urbanisation within a country is a key determinant of travel behaviour – more so than a country’s average population density (p.7). This places particular importance on the quality of urban environments, including ongoing regeneration and sustainable retrofitting. Improving quality of life in urban areas may also reduce the incentive to relocate to rural areas with longer commutes and generally fewer facilities.
Despite expectations, research finds little evidence of travel patterns changing due to the arrival of the internet, smartphones, or means of micro-mobility such as e-scooters (p.8). Rail travel has generally increased, but without reducing car use (p.9).
Soft measures and mobility behaviour
The most rigorous, methodological studies show the little overall effect of so-called ‘soft measures’ on travel behaviour. These measures include travel planning initiatives, travel awareness campaigns, public transport marketing, and information about alternatives to private car use, as well as information about negative effects of driving – including climate change and air pollution impacts from both tailpipe and non-exhaust emissions (pp9-12).
Public transport and substitution effects
Increased public transport used has not been shown in research to necessarily translate into reduced car use. A trial of congestion charging in Stockholm increased public transport demand, but with little measurable reduction in car traffic (pp13-16). Similarly, improvements in rail services seem to have increased demand on the railways rather than replace car journeys (p.17).
Moreover, the emissions benefit of public transport is not guaranteed. Buses in use are mainly not electric and do not offer emissions reductions in consequence (p.42).
Cycling infrastructure
Cycling infrastructure in many cities has improved since the 1990s. Despite this, research suggests that cyclists would otherwise choose public transport for their journeys rather than their cycling reducing car use (p.18). Consequently, as cycling has increased due to better infrastructure, car journeys have not reduced alongside this improvement (p.43).
Rising trip distances
Average trip distances have been increasing, driven by factors such as increased incomes, consumption patterns, and lifestyle changes (p.34). However, the research does not mention the well-established concept of induced traffic demand. A considerable body of evidence indicates the creation of new transport infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, promotes longer and more frequent journeys, therefore failing to reduce emissions.
The impact of low impact measures
The research emphasises that measures with comparatively limited impact on emissions should not be dismissed (p.55). If, for example, improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure increase public health where available, then this is clearly of value, even if their effect on reducing car use is modest.
Despite these limitations, the evidence identifies a range of practical policy measures capable of reducing transport emissions while delivering wider public benefits.
Electronic road pricing
Electronic road pricing offers a potential solution to both manage demand and create revenue for transport improvements. Investment is needed in road and pavement maintenance, expanded pedestrianisation, improved walking and cycling networks, and better fully electric bus services. The public want this action. At the same time, the transition to electric vehicles will reduce revenues from fuel duties.
For these reasons, electronic road pricing should be introduced, starting in the most congested areas. If people can see transformed and improved areas in their own communities through raising money in this way, this change can be made acceptable with judicious charges and appropriate exemptions.
Problem drivers
Driving offences in the UK are increasing, including speeding and distracted driving, both of which can be hazardous to pedestrians, cyclists, and all other road users. Therefore, it would make sense for those who are repeat offenders to lose their licenses temporarily, or permanently. For example, where negligence causes loss of life, there should be a permanent consequence. This would make roads safer for everyone. The UK Government is currently running a consultation until 11 May, targeting a list of increasing offences and potential policy responses.
Pedestrianisation
There is longstanding evidence that pedestrianised areas increase footfall and economic activity. The continued expansion of pedestrian zones since 1945, alongside covered car-free shopping centres, reflects public support for these measures. Therefore, the public is already supporting pedestrianisation wherever implemented. Opposition, however, remains predictable from groups like taxi drivers and bus companies.
Improving affordability: buses and rail
Reducing the cost of bus fares is essential. Free bus fares across the UK could help ease cost-of-living pressures, whilst encouraging a shift away from car use. People must have a choice of free public transport as a climate measure, and also a better climate policy as buses transition to a fully electric operation.
Rail also has significant potential. The UK currently has some of the highest rail fares in Europe, which may prevent rail use from reaching its maximum potential. The UK Government must bring railways fully into public ownership and reduce rail fares by at least 50%. If these fares are frozen, demand could increase. As a result, improving rail infrastructure can be justified: more carriages; extensions of platforms; selective station rebuilding; full rail electrification; and expanded services. Rail users may well be delighted with fares reductions.
The school run
The school run is a major contributor to peak time congestion, particularly in areas where there are concentrations of schools in larger settlements. With consultation, introducing selective school bus services would have major benefits. However, adaptations should also be made to existing routes.
Ending fossil fuel subsidies
The £17.5bn currently spent subsidising fossil fuels in the UK should cease with no further delays. Redirecting these funds towards sustainable transport would support many measures outlined above.
Pavement parking ban
A nationwide pavement parking ban should be supported by UK Government funding throughout England, particularly to ensure its effective enforcement. Pavement damage and obstruction by large vehicles are widespread issues, and around two-thirds of the public support a UK-wide pavement parking ban.
Road traffic reduction
The UK has high levels of vehicle use, with a potential risk of a 54% increase by 2060. Existing settlements and infrastructure simply will not cope. Consequently, measures should be adopted to achieve scrappage or confiscation of the worst polluting vehicles, with incentive for replacement by electric vehicles or e-bikes where appropriate.
Stronger penalties for traffic offences, including loss of licenses and access to vehicles for specified periods, should form part of this approach. Combined with improved alternatives to car use, the above measures could help reduce UK emissions and car dependency. There is already evidence of less car ownership in larger urban areas, but more action is needed. We should particularly target those driving heavily polluting vehicles and high-emitting sectors such as construction.
Conclusion
Yes, there are good policies clear majorities of the public will support. No, this won’t win over committed ‘car fundamentalists’, but policy changes will rarely appeal to everyone.
Author’s note: This article draws on a recent study published in Transport Policy: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856425003684
Comments? We want to hear them. Please write to editor@westenglandbylines.co.uk
