Planning for and Learning from Disruptions

1. Greg Marsden – Leeds Jillian Anable - Aberdeen Iain Docherty - Glasgow Planning for and Learning from Disruptions

2. Presentation • What do we mean by disruptions? • What do they reveal? • Researching disruption • National survey • Action research • Implications

3. Disruptions come in various forms Source: Getty Images Australia: source- telegraph.co.uk

4. Disruptions reveal insights • “Studying moments when infrastructures cease to work as they normally do is perhaps the most powerful way of really penetrating and problematising those very normalities of flow and circulation to an extent where they can be subjected to critical scrutiny” (Graham, 2010)

5. What do we mean by disruptions? Moments where systems cease to work as they normally do and which have a significant impact on mobility

6. “Although the stimulus for change varied, in each case drivers needed to decide what to do when their normal travel patterns were disrupted, and there were useful insights from all the examples as to how they reacted.” Cairns, S., Atkins, S. and Goodwin, P.G. (2002) Disappearing Traffic? The story so far, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Municipal Engineer 151 (1), 13-22

7. What do we mean by disruptions?

8. National Survey Q1. How is disruption conceptualised (i.e. what is it?) Q2. What role does it play in everyday life (i.e. how often does it occur?) Q3. What events cause disruption? Q4. How does this vary by mode, socio-demographics and place?

9. The data • On-line panel survey (YouGov) • Early September 2013 • n=2700 • Pre cognitive testing (n=27) + pilot (n=100) • 20 minutes average completion time • Weighting: ONS stats on composition of each local authority area to weight the data by age, gender and social grade.

10. Sampling Regions 6 Travel to Work Areas (TTWA) Geographically and socio-demographically diverse, and provide a better representation of a regions sphere of influence. • Aberdeen (n=436) • Liverpool (n=410) • London (n=632) • Reading & Bracknell (n=410) • Yeovil & Chard (n=405) • York (n=407) Total n=2700

11. How did we define disruption to participants? Introductory rubric: • “The topic of this survey is ‘disruption.’ By ‘disruption’ we mean events that cause us to change our travel arrangements and/or the activities we were planning to do. This can include disruption which happens on the roads, railways and other modes of transport, but can also include many other types of events which cause us to have to change our plans.” Example question: • “ How frequently would you say your plans to get to/from the following activities are disrupted for some reason? This may be due to something happening with the transport mode you intend to use (i.e. your car breaks down or the train is cancelled), but it could also be due to something non-transport related like your child falls ill and you have to change your plans of how/when/whether to travel.”

12. Q1: How is disruption conceptualised? • 17 attitude statements to 5 ‘factors’ representing key conceptual dimensions of disruption:

13. Construct development

14. Flexibility: How easy would it be to change? • Respondents in employment (excluding home workers) regarding the journey to work (51% / n=1,387) • 58.6% of journeys made by car/van/motorcycle • 22.4% by public transport • 18.5% walk/cycle • 39.7% of journeys ≤5 miles • 10% drop-off/pick-up children as part of journey • 45% have to travel outside of the workplace sometimes • 14% care for an adult outside of their normal working activities • 33% work at home at least one day a week

15. Perceived (in)flexibility Least flexibility =16.4% Highest flexibility =6.4%

16. Q2. What role does it play in everyday life?(i.e. how often does it occur)? • Respondents were asked how often their travel plans were disrupted (1=Always, 5=Never) while undertaking 5 common everyday journeys… -work (paid) -work (voluntary) -shopping -caring for an adult - taking children to school/nursery • …as well as up to 3 self-named additional journeys that they undertook regularly as part of their everyday life (e.g. going to the gym or seeing friends). • We were interested here not so much in which trips were the most disrupted per se (although this was of interest elsewhere) but what role disruption plays in everyday life.

18. Q3. What sort of events cause disruption? Respondents were asked to state the last time that their plans had been disrupted by adverse weather conditions, strike action on the transport system, road works, an accident or mechanical failure on public transport, and having to care for a friend or relative (including children). • Over half of respondents (50.6%, n= 1365) experienced at least one type of disruption in the preceding month. Of these, 14.6% experienced 2 or more disruptions. • Generally speaking, and as expected, those who claimed they were ‘often’ or ‘always’ disrupted were more likely to have experienced disruption in the preceding month. But who are these people…?

19. What type of events lead to the most disruption? (open ended question) Transport system-related events responsible for 70% of disruption on the journey to work (open ended q – coded into 7 categories; n=103 of respondents who said their journey to work was ‘always’ or ‘often’ disrupted)

20. Q4. How does this vary by mode, place, and socio-demographics? • Who experiences the most disruption?

21. Does disruption vary by location?(percentage of respondents Rarely or Never, Sometimes, and Often or Always disrupted.

22. Thoughts… • Having access to a car does not reduce perceived experience of disruption , although – • - the more public transport is used, the more disruption is experienced • Having additional travel responsibilities increases perceived exposure to disruption • It is not clear whether having a disability cuts across other factors in terms of ones experience of disruption, or amplifies existing vulnerabilities. • London residents do seem to experience greater levels of disruption • It is an extremely complex picture. The way people perceive and experience disruption is not just a matter of who they are or where they live (although this still can be important), it also relates to their past experiences, their attitudes, their perceived flexibility and their ability to cope with the event.

23. Researching Disruption Unplanned Events

24. Disruption Project Case Study Winter Weather

25. Disruption Context • The UK experienced a bout of disruptive wintery weather that started 18 January and lasted for just over a fortnight. • Disruption for several days • School closures – more than 5,000 on 21st January • Cancellation of public transport – including major airports • Road closures • Difficulty travelling on roads that were open.

26. Online Panel Survey • Decision to deploy an online panel survey made on 21 January. • N = 2418 • 6 of the worst affected regions chosen: • Hampshire, Kent and Surrey • Norfolk • South Wales • West Yorkshire

27. Mode Use by Journey Purpose

28. Main activity affected

29. Role of Distance

30. Does mode make a difference?

31. Does previous experience matter?

32. Statistically Significant Outcomes • Those aged 30+ years have a higher probability of not making their journey, particularly the case for those aged 30 to 49 years which probably reflects the fact that they have children to care for. • Walk and train journeys have a higher probability of taking place compared to car. The main difference is that walk journeys have a much higher probability of taking place. Note that the other modes are not significant. • Compared with frequent journeys less frequent journeys have a higher probability of not taking place, particularly low journey frequencies. • If the respondent is not physically expected to be in work then there is high probability that they will not make the journey, suggesting they will work from home. • If the employer is not accommodating then there is a stronger possibility that the employee will make the journey into work.

33. Disruption Project Case StudyYork Floods

34. Some Key Findings • For an event lasting a week or less, many activities can be rescheduled • More significant to many • Funeral, visiting elderly relative • Caring, single parent families • Public transport services to some communities were cut – a problem to rely on public transport? • Access by bike was much easier than by car for many • Impacts of school closures was greater than transport system • E-working can be undertaken for some

35. CAR responses

36. CYCLE responses

37. Drawing Together Unplanned • Greater flexibility in retiming activities • Earlier vs Later • Today, Tomorrow or Next Week • Learnt strategies are used • Resource to cultivate • Novelty led to some in York being ‘caught out’ • Without good guidance and/or communication bad choices are made • ‘Call it’ early • Only travel if necessary??? • Mode specific response to events • Not just a transport issue – schools, healthcare...

38. Researching DisruptionPlanned Events • A major sporting event – London 2012 • Largely temporary change to normal • A major office consolidation • Creating a ‘new normal’ • Characteristics • Long warning period • Time horizon known • Control is higher • Scope is defined

39. Disruption Project Case StudyLocal Council Reorganisation • 18 sites consolidated into two • Open plan integrated working space • Not enough desks for people • Shared meeting space • No formal parking • Increase in flexible working and move to paperless • Distances most people ‘moved’ small – 14% mode shift • N = 271 questionnaire • 32 Interviews

40. Days in Office – Before and After

41. Departure time variability Increases

42. Has your spouse/partner had to make changes as a result?

43. Drawing Together Planned • Major changes are more acceptable than normally considered • ‘Non-transport’ interventions have important transport opportunities • Greater flexibility in retiming activities • Earlier vs Later • Need to think also of household structure • Scope for greater home working but limits • Good communication led to good choices • But even those not planning to, do change • Longevity depends on wider conditions

44. So What? • Taking practical lessons to stakeholders • Series of interviews with key stakeholders from transport *and other* sectors • ‘Framing’ disruption: are ‘elite’ conceptions of disruptions and their importance consistent with empirical data? • Testing ideas about coping with/proactively using disruption to innovate • Deliberative policy-design workshops to follow • Resource for survey still there

45. Thank You www.disruptionproject.net g.r.marsden@its.leeds.ac.uk j.anable@abdn.ac.uk Iain.docherty@glasgow.ac.uk