In recent years, there has been growing interest in a range of transport policy initiatives which are designed to influence people's travel behaviour away from single-occupancy car use and towards more benign and efficient options, through a combination of marketing, information, incentives and tailored new services. In transport policy discussions, these are now widely described as 'soft' factor interventions or 'smarter choice' measures or 'mobility management' tools. In 2004, the UK Department for Transport commissioned a major study to examine whether large scale programmes of these measures could potentially deliver substantial cuts in car use. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the approach taken in the study, the types of evidence reviewed and the overall conclusions reached. In summary, the results suggested that, within approximately 10 years, smarter choice measures have the potential to reduce national traffic levels by about 11%, with reductions of up to 21% in peak period urban traffic. Moreover, they represent relatively good value for money, with schemes potentially generating benefit: cost ratios which are in excess of 10:1. The central conclusion of the study was that such measures could play a very significant role in addressing traffic, given the right support and policy context. Acknowledgements: The support of the Rees Jeffreys Road Fund, which has enabled the preparation of this paper, is very gratefully acknowledged. In addition, the authors wish to gratefully thank the client team at the Department for Transport, all the different experts and practitioners working in this area who contributed to the study and the reviewers of this paper for their helpful comments.

This paper reports on a review of the European literature about the impacts of having an electrically-assisted bike available to use, together with results from a trial in the UK city of Brighton, where 80 employees were loaned an electrically-assisted bike for a 6–8 week period. In the Brighton trial, three-quarters of those who were loaned an e-bike used them at least once a week. Across the sample as a whole, average usage was in the order of 15– 20 miles per week, and was accompanied by an overall reduction in car mileage of 20%. At the end of the trial, 38% participants expected to cycle more in the future, and at least 70% said that they would like to have an e-bike available for use in the future, and would cycle more if this was the case. This is consistent with the results of the European literature which shows that when e-bikes are made available, they get used; that a proportion of e-bike trips typically substitutes for car use; and that many people who take part in trials become interested in future e-bike use, or cycling more generally

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives: To explore whether population-based fatality rates and measures of traffic exposure can be combined to provide a more comprehensive measure of safety. To illustrate how this could be achieved using surveys from a range of Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. To discuss why exposure is important. Design and setting: Fatality data were obtained from the International Road Traffic and Accident Database and travel data from surveys among government transport administrations in each country. Methods: Comparable exposure data were obtained for children aged 10-14 years from the UK, the USA, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and New Zealand. Fatality rates for children travelling as pedestrians, cyclists and car occupants were calculated based on (1) per head of population and (2) a combination of rate per head population and per kilometre travelled. Results: In this study, exposure-based fatality rates suggest a more polarized distribution rather than a graduated league. The USA and the UK were at the lower end of the table for child pedestrian safety; Germany for car-occupant safety, Sweden and New Zealand performed less well. For cycling, the inclusion of exposure data considerably changes positions within the table. Countries with higher cycling levels like The Netherlands perform better than those with low levels like the UK and New Zealand. Conclusions: Exposure-based fatality rates can help us to understand whether policies reduce exposure or whether they increase safety, given a similar level of exposure. Data need to be harmonized across OECD countries for a better understanding of the risks and links between health and sustainable travel.

No abstract

No abstract