Larbert/Stenhousemuir

1. Kirkintilloch/Lenzie Kirkwall Larbert/Stenhousemuir Barrhead Dundee Dumfries Glasgow East End

2. Lessons from smarter choices (1) • Community level package approach is effective: • STTs: 5% - 7% reduction in car driver distance per person • Most effective where infrastructure improvement is combined with information, education and nudging - this evidence is not in dispute….

3. STT household surveys – changes in trips by mode All trips Car driver Car passenger Bus Cycle Walk -15 +15 Sloman et al 2010 Change in trip numbers per 100 people per day 2004 to 2008; weighted dataset; trips<50km

4. Lessons from smarter choices (2) • Workplace travel plans – most effective when combined with parking charges • Strong social advocacy in the business and political spheres + citizen engagement = cultural shift • Monitoring and evaluation – key to political advocacy • Partnership working across local agendas

5. Does nudging work? • Where the challenge is to achieve greater compliance to legislation – maybe • But, only if further legislation is not a realistic option “No examples of significant change in the behaviour of the population by non-regulatory measures alone.” HoL, Science and Technology Committee (2011) Inquiry on Behaviour Change

6. Nudging uphill …. Are choices really free or subject to powerful manipulation?

7. Judging nudging • Emphasis on the importance of understanding behaviour is welcome • But – ironically – the focus on ‘Nudge’ could lead to less evidence based, effective and cost-effective policies • Coercive and restrictive options (eg tax increases on tobacco) are often most effective and widely accepted as can be seen as helpful in overcoming temptations

8. Effective regulation • Unambiguous • Easy to be monitored • Policed and enforced • Be within the competence of the individual to comply • Have a clear rationale understood by the public = combined with education, training, nudging and community engagement • Have a severe and multi faceted penalty for non compliance • Have an associated high probability that non-compliance will be detected

9. (b) Understanding the role of attitudes • With more emphasis being placed on non-regulatory measures – need to have a greater understanding of the role of attitudes

10. Improve service Improve knowledge Improve attitudes Change Behaviour If only it were this simple …

11. The ‘deficit model’ still prevails

12. Awareness raising – how not to do it … “If everyone in the UK washed their laundry just 10 degrees cooler we would need one less 250 Megawatt power station!!” Mistakes with this statement: • What is a 250 MW power station? • Who cares? • Where is the benefit at the individual level? • What if ‘everyone’ else doesn’t do it? • What if I want to wash my clothes with hot water to get the washing cleaner? (based on Hounsham (2006))

13. TDM (bad) examples: “If everyone who lives within five miles of their workplace left their car at home just one day a week and cycled to work, nearly five million tons of global warming pollution would be saved every year.”

14. Improve service Improve knowledge Improve attitudes Change Behaviour Why its not so simple … TRUST in the information provider Perceived CONTROL Sense of responsibility Objective knowledge or PERCEPTION? Identity Social norms Efficacy Habit Generalised cost Cognitive dissonance Behaviour informs attitudes

15. So … • Information is necessary but insufficient on its own– there are multiple objective and subjective barriers to behaviour change • Different barriers are experienced by different people – there is no one size fits all message or solution

16. But attitudes are important... • Legislation is most effective where there is persuasive communication – neither are effective on their own • Acceptability is based on: • Perceived fairness • Transparency • Consistent messages • Clear evidence of effectiveness • But – evidence is based on subjective judgement – so also need public engagement – easier to achieve at local/ community level • Public opinion is the outcome; public influencing is the process

17. Energy and equity • Perceived fairness an important ingredient in acceptability • Smoking ban – framed the issue around social inequality • 80mph: • Net of any value assumed for time savings, savings, extra fuel consumption at 80mph = overall loss to drivers (MRTU 2011 • Who can afford to drive safely at 80 or 90mph? • + distributional impacts of pollution, climate change and accidents

18. Public opinion about speed on motorways • Speeding on motorways is seen as more acceptable than on other roads • BUT only around 1/3 drivers think 70mph limit is too slow • And around 1/5 would prefer speed limits to be lessthan 70mph • High acknowledgement of the role of speed in accidents (although less of a link made with own speeding behaviour) • + 25% of people do not own cars ….

19. 25% of the population drive over the motorway speed limit and think it is safe to do so Holder, S. (2006) Public Opinions towards Road Safety: A Desk Research Project. Prepared for the Department for Transport/AMV/BBDO

20. Car Complacents Die Hard Drivers Aspiring Environmentalists Malcontented Motorists Reluctant Riders Car Sceptics Car Aspirers Attitudinal Segmentation

21. Cause and effect • Attitudes tend to change after behaviour, not before: • Congestion charge • Pedestrianisation • Smoking

22. Examples of reductions in car use:

23. (c) Ignoring human nature “ The refusal to acknowledge human nature is like the Victorian’s embarrassment about sex, only worse: it distorts our science and scholarship, our public discourse, our day to day lives.” S.Pinker (2003) The Blank State: the modern denial of human nature. Penguin. Cited in M.Earls (2009) Herd. How to change mass behaviour by harnessing our true nature. Wiley.

24. I will if you will • The consensus on ‘what works’ may be falling apart ... • Communications are everywhere

25. Lessons for sustainable travel behaviour interventions • Change our assumptions • e.g. pressure to ‘drive with the traffic’ is likely to raise average speeds at 80 mph • Think about mass behaviour change – not individual behaviour • ‘Influence’ (peer-peer, consumer to consumer) is much more important than ‘persuasion’ • Importance of business & political advocacy

26. (d) Evidence-based policy • Importance of a clear, established and well-understood evidence base • - for policy makers • - for public influencing • Problems with • quality and quantity of evaluation • presentation of the evidence

27. E.g. Smarter Choices • Some evidence is lost in translation/ ignored • The need for synergy between ‘hard and soft’ • The need for regional-wide consistent application • The need for increased skill capability • Insistence on knowing role of single instruments • Some evidence has not yet been collected • The scale / social distribution of behaviour change • Longevity of behaviour change • Diffusion / peer to peer impacts = public and political scepticism

28. Creative accountancy DfT Figures: motorists gain more in travel time saved than they pay in extra fuel above 70mph ‘Steady state’ figures: losses are greater than gains MRTU (2011) Briefing on the relative impact on fuel duty and time savings with speed limits of 70mph and 80mph

29. 3. Joining agendas

30. Joining agendas • Obesity, environment, oil price rises, congestion, accessibility, urban design • However, multiple aims are not always compatible some are more equal than others (e.g. economic growth)… “Links between a behaviour and multiple departments signal the importance of the behaviour for concerted action. Yet, there is a lack of integrative cross-department units designed to tackle particular problem behaviours.” Hol Science and Technology Committee (2011) Behaviour Change Inquiry

31. Failure of ‘sustainable’ travel policy? • ‘Sustainable travel teams’ - claim a cross-sectoral agenda • But, often promote walking and cycling without embedding road safety plans • To encourage walking and cycling – road safety strategies must be part of travel planning • Accessibility planning may be a better unifying framework

32. New opportunities • Travel cannot be sustainable if it is not safe • How much of the reduction in walking KSIs are due to lower levels of walking and higher car use? • Opportunities to work with new partners and stakeholders • Increased legitimacy and advocacy for road safety • The best way to improve car user safety is to reduce car use!

33. More Haste Less Speed Conclusions

34. Speed enforcement: the perfect policy? • Guaranteed carbon reduction • Significant carbon reduction • Other significant benefits (e.g. safety) • Equitable • Can be implemented now • Cost effective • Maximises efficiency in the system • Locks in the benefits of other policies • Politically deliverable – particularly with: social and political advocacy, communication of the evidence and emphasis on social equity

35. Conclusions • Speed control lacks high level political advocacy • Travel cannot be sustainable if it is not safe • Work with new stakeholders to create broader coalitions • De-regulation and nudging is not based on evidence of ‘what works’ • Unequivocal evidence: regulation and infrastructure investment works but only with public engagement and acceptability • Ministers should slow down and reconsider