Search

There has been a succession of policy documents related to active travel published by the British government since the implementation of a National Cycle Network (NCN) in 1995. However, as the latest National Travel Survey (NTS) reveals, the number of journeys made by bike in the UK has remained steadfastly around only 2% (Department for Transport [DfT], 2018a). By using documentary analysis of the available official policy documents and statements, the aim of this paper is to make sense of the policies that have been published concerning active travel (AT) in England. This is done from a figurational sociological perspective. Three key themes emerge from the analysis: (1) the rhetorical, advisory level of the vast majority of the policies; (2) the reliance on a wide network of local authorities to implement AT policy; and (3) the focus placed on individuals to change their behaviour. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that despite a large number of policy publications from a range of government departments claiming to promote AT, little has actually changed in this time period in terms of a national agenda. Despite the successive policies, it seems there is little appetite on behalf of recent governments to make widespread infrastructural changes, where instead the focus has largely been on persuading the individual to seek more active modes of travel, increasingly for their own, individual 'health' gains. Highlights •The paper is based on documentary analysis of available official policy documents from UK government on active travel since 1996 • The findings reveal the largely rhetorical, advisory level of the vast majority of the policies, which contributes to a lack of overall success in promoting active travel • The lack of success is compounded further by a reliance on a wide network of local authorities to implement active travel policy, when most local authorities appear more concerned with transport issues related to motorised vehicles • The findings reveal that active travel policy has becoming increasingly focussed on health gains that might be made from increasing the number of trips made by bicycle • The overwhelming focus of the policy documents analysed, however, is on encouraging individuals to change their behaviour, a process regarded as 'healthism', and one most sociologists of health suggest is likely to fail as a result • We conclude by suggesting that if the government is serious about wanting to see a 'step change' in the way in which people travel, particularly over shorter distances, then there is a need to have a more forceful approach to implementing policy within local authorities at the same time as making more substantial infrastructure changes to encourage cycling [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper analyses UK cycling policy in relation to the shift towards a hollowed-out neoliberal state. In the UK, cycling became embedded in public policy only after policy-making had been variously outsourced to private, quasi-private, and voluntary organisations. The paper argues that this broader context has contributed to the ongoing failure to treat cycling as a strategically important mode meriting substantial national transport funding. Secondly, the paper makes links between a growing policy focus on ‘active’ and ‘responsible’ citizenship, and the dispersal of cycling policy away from transport into other areas including public health and the environment. It is argued that while there are benefits to this construct, it has again helped to maintain cycling as perceived as being peripheral to the main business of ‘transport’. Cycling policy has been doubly devolved, away from the state, and away from transport. The implications of this for policy and advocacy are discussed and future directions for both are finally outlined. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: There is a demonstrable link between parking availability, price and mode choice, and parking policy has been shown to be a powerful demand management tool. Parking however is clearly an area of policy conflict since using it to manage demand may reduce revenue generation, or (be perceived to) damage the local economy. In terms of on-street and off-street parking there are a wide range of users who often have conflicting opinions, which have to be taken into account in its management, invariably leading to parking policies and measures that do not maximise the demand management potential of parking. This paper presents a range of public and business opinion data, from the case study of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, collected as part of the consultation for its parking strategy in 2005–2006. The strategy covers a wider geographical area than simply the city centre, and whilst this paper makes reference to this wider area it primarily deals with the city centre since that is where the majority of the parking strategy issues are to be found. After setting the policy and political context, the paper goes on to present these data. It then shows how the city''s parking policies were changed in response to the consultation. These policy changes are compared with parking policies that would solely manage travel demand, to demonstrate how the political process leads to compromise in the formulation of parking policies and measures. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]