Non motorised modes of transport
Reference Material
for
COMPETENCE
funded within the STEER Programme of the EU
The sole responsibility for the content of this [webpage, publication etc.] lies with the authors. It does not represent the opinion of the Community. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
Mobility Management and Travel Awareness
Reference Material from COMPETENCE / TREATISE / E-ATOMIUM
For the use of the following material:
The aim of this material is to strengthen the knowledge of local / regional managing agencies in the transport field and to accelerate the take up of EU research results in the field of local and regional transport. The beneficiaries of the project are managing (energy) agencies who want to play a bigger role in the transport field.
Due to the size and (in some cases) the number of individual projects, it is not possible to explain each single result in detail and include it into these written materials.
The following set of material should rather act as a portal and facilitate the access of single projects and detailed results.
Therefore the material in hand doesn't lay claim to completeness.
The following compendium contains results of EU research-projects and complementary results of national research-projects. The authors thank the partners and collaborators of the following projects. A complete list of the projects, consortia, and cited literature is given at the end of the material.
The material for the topic “Non motorised modes of transport” was compiled by Thomas KRAG in 2006
Thomas Krag Mobility Advice
Wilhelm Marstrands Gade 11, DK-2100 København Ø.
Company reg. no. DK 25 22 66 31.
Tel +45 35 42 86 24, mobile +45 27 11 86 24
Website www.thomaskrag.com
This material can be download from the project website:
www.transportlearning.net
Mobility Management and Travel Awareness
Reference Material from COMPETENCE / TREATISE / E-ATOMIUM
1. Table of Contents
1. Table of Contents 1
2. Non motorised modes of transport 2
3. Theory on behavioural change 9
4. Examples of specific campaigns 11
5. General considerations of campaigns 18
6. Web references of various campaigns 23
2. Non motorised modes of transport
Purpose / This document is made to serve as reference material for a training course in campaign activities in favour of non motorised modes as an energy saving alternative to motorised means of transport.The training course will be held in Almada, Portugal, on the 17th October 2006.
Contents / The document will give general information about the potential to obtain a shift towards non motorised modes, a short overview of the theory about behavioural changes, some examples of campaigns that have been carried out, general remarks on campaign creation and further web references for campaigns on walking and cycling.
Non motorised modes / In the history of mankind walking has been the most important means of land-based transport. Animals like horses and camels have also played a role.
Human beings have always strived for avoiding physically exhausting activities. This is also true when it comes to transport, where the rich and the powerful have achieved an access to (for themselves) non-physical demanding alternatives to walking, as for example riding, use of carriages or sedans, as shown below.
Today transport has become motorised to a high degree. This is also true for land based transport, whether collective (trains, trams, metros, buses) or individual (cars, motorcycles, mopeds, motorscooters). In the industrialised world animals only play a role in sport and recreation.
Human powered mobility, however, still has - or can have - importance. Two means are of interest and will be treated in the following: Walking and cycling.
Benefits of walking and cycling / There are several benefits of walking and cycling, as the modes:
· save energy
· improve environment (no pollution, no noise)
· save urban space
· save costs
· promote health and wellbeing
· makes your travel more enjoyable
· reduce time losses in transport, maybe even increase overall speed.
Energy savings from the use of walking and cycling is obvious, as the per-km use of energy of the two modes is small compared to motorised means and the direct use of fossil fuels is nil.
Environmental impacts are also foreseeable, as neither walking or cycling emits dangerous substances or make noticeable noise.
Space is an important issue in (historical) city centres. Walking is a very space efficient mode, as the person to be transported does only take up his or her own space and has no need for parking a vehicle in connection with the transport. Cycling is, compared to driving, also very space efficient. A road of a given cross section can transport several times as many people per hour on bicycles as if the same people were driving or sitting in cars. The bicycle also has several advantages compared to cars when it comes to parking. A parked bicycle takes op 1 square metre or less, while a parked car needs at least 10 times as much. Public transport, on the other hand, can offer some space advantages to cycling as far as parking is concerned.
Cost savings by walking and cycling are considerable. For the user the marginal cost by walking and cycling is very small, far below use of public transport or driving. From a society level the two modes are also cheap to provide, as the space requirements as well as the costs to provide, maintain and run pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are moderate compared to infrastructure for cars and infrastructure and rolling stock for public transport.
Health and wellbeing are influenced positively for the individual who is walking or cycling. Both means are physically active forms of transport, and increasing walking and cycling can curb the tendency to increased physical inactivity, which is considered a serious threat to public health. More about this later.
Travel quality can often be increased when walking or cycling as an alternative to driving. You will discover your surroundings better and when walking or cycling you can much easier make social contacts on your way. Cycling trips, for example, can in itself be a nice social activity for the family, and can also inspire to other social activities, as you will see much more along the route than if you use public transport or car. When cycling you, thus, can discover things in your neighbourhood, which can be the target for new trips. The same is true for walking trips.
Time savings from the use of walking and cycling are often possible when short trips are in question. Major reasons for the time savings are congestion, which delays cars and buses; parking restrictions, which makes car parking a time-costing affair; inflexibility (in time and space), which is a built-in characteristic of public transport; and the possibility to make shortcuts or on-the-way stops, which may not be possible when using other modes. If health and transport is seen in combination, much time can be saved from getting the physical exercise from ones transport instead of having to make special sports activities to be physically active.
Collective or personal benefits? / While the first mentioned benefits (energy, environment, space, to some extent costs, to some extent health) are of collective character (i.e. benefit to the society as a whole), the latter ones (cost, health and time savings) are of direct interest to the (potential) user.
It all depends... / It should be mentioned already here that the perceived as well as the actual benefits of a shift from motorised modes to walking or cycling depends on several factors. An obvious factor is what the shift to walking and cycling is from (e.g. public transport, car, motorcycle). But it all also depends a lot on the context, e.g. image, habits, traditions, history and facilities. If, for example, cycling has a bad image or cycling is (perceived to be) dangerous and uncomfortable due to lack of facilities and space in traffic, a switch to walking may be more appropriate.
On the other hand one should be careful not to disclose cycling for reasons of "culture". The culture, understood as the way the majority behaves, is not a fixed matter. Culture is subject to constant changes, not least in the last 100 years.
Moreover, cycling is - compared to walking - a fast means, that can cut travel time considerably, and over small as well as moderate distances can be highly competitive to public transport as well as driving.
Pollution and modes? / An often raised concern about cycling and walking is airpollution. If the urban air quality is poor, should one not try to avoid being physically active in such an environment?
The simple answer is yes. But if one has a reason to go into a city, he or she will have to inhale polluted air in any case. Cyclists and pedestrians are probably those, who will note poor air quality most. All users of road vehicles, whether buses, trams or cars, will however be exposed to significant levels of airpollution. They will just not note it to the same extent, as there from the start will be a certain background level of smell in the motorised vehicles.
Investigations show that the concentration of airpollution is considerably greater inside than outside the vehicles, and that the higher breathing rate by pedestrians and cyclists is compensated, if not more than compensated, by this fact.
The graphs below show the results of Dutch and Danish measurements of cyclists' exposure to airpollution.
The Dutch study (shown on top) finds concentration of dangerous fumes to be higher inside the car. The Danish study confirms this and calculates the total
exposure pr. km and shows the bicycle to be advantageous as far as the volatile compounds are concerned[1].
One can conclude that airpollution not from a rational point of view can be used as an argument against cycling in urban areas.
Safety and modes / Safety is often claimed as an important reason for not using the bicycle. Walking may also be suppressed for the same reason, though this is mentioned more seldom.
When calculating the per-kilometre risk for the user of various transport means, the risk of fatalities will usually be pedestrian > cyclist > car user > public transport user. Thus, walking is the least safe and using public transport most safe means from this perspective.
One can indeed question the relevance of a per-kilometre calculation, as walking and cycling trips usually are much shorter than car trips, reflecting that the surroundings becomes much more accessible when walking or cycling is possible. When making a calculation of fatalities per hour spent in various transport means or per trip, the differences tend to be much less, with pedestrian, cyclist and car user on the same level and only public transport users much less exposed to fatal accidents. The graphs show this phenomenon based on Danish figures[2].
Another matter is the traffic environment. Here there seems to be an inverse relationship between danger of cycling and the number of people who actually cycle[3]. It will, thus, be hardest to make more people cycle in areas, where only little cycling takes place.
In general regular cycle users in a given area tend to assess the risk of cycling smaller than the non-users. Interestingly, research shows that even those, who in various ways are converted from non cycle-users to users, tend to change their view on cycling risks. They, thus, view the bicycle as a safer vehicle than they thought before, once they have tried cycling over some time.
Health and physical exercise / Today the society has reached a level of richness where non physical demanding alternatives are available to almost everybody. Since physical activity always has been linked to poverty, these alternatives are now used to such a degree, that physical inactivity has become a major issue of concern. The human body is not tolerant to not being used, and several diseases (among them cardio-vascular diseases, heart attacks, diabetes 2, osteoporosis, back pain, colorectal and breast cancer) as well as obesity are linked to a modern lifestyle with physical inactivity.
This is an important - maybe the most important - reason to pay interest into non motorised modes of transport. Transport is an integral part of most peoples' lives, and if some of the (daily) transport was switched over to physically active modes, a huge improvement in public health would be brought about.
For the individual, health plays an increasing role. More and more people wish to get fit and spend time and money to exercise various sport activities.
For the society as such health is a huge challenge. Already in 1999 WHO (the World Health Organization) agreed on a charter about Transport, Environment and Health encouraging governments to promote the physically active modes of transport like walking and cycling[4].
Research shows that not only physical activity as such but also cycling in specific has a significant impact on health. The graph on the next page shows results from a Danish study[5].
What immediately may appear as a moderate difference in mortality actually reveals regular bicycle users to be much less overall liable to die than the average person. The study doesn't differ between various causes of death, and traffic accidents are included together with all other disease-related causes.
3. Theory on behavioural change
Change of behaviour / The scope of this training course is to obtain a change of transport behaviour in a given target group.A theory for such behavioural changes has been developed and named the Transtheoretical Model or the Stages of Change Model[6]. The individual is seen as going through a number of stages in his or her behaviour. The model has been used in connection with health behaviour changes (e.g. non-smoking, stop drinking, eat less and more healthy food etc.), and fits also well into the challenges connected with changing transport behaviour.