Sustainability Of Land Use and Transport in Outer NeighbourhoodS
The Solutions project, conducted in five universities and funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, found virtually no relationship between urban form and travel. Raising urban densities doesn't push people out of their unsustainable cars and into sustainable public transport, it revealed, because land use options matter far less than long-term socio-economic trends, which increase the likelihood of people wanting more spacious homes and more travel
The overall conclusion of the study is that the relatively small differences between the 3 alternative policy options studied (Compact City, Market-led Dispersal, Planned Expansion) are overwhelmed by the impacts of socio-economic trends.
A little light reading for those extolling the virtues of planned settlements in our area I think.
"Virtually no relationship between urban form and travel" What? This all sounds highly unlikely to me. It's no good having a car if you live in central London / Edinburgh / Glasgow etc.
ReplyDeleteTo say that 'land use options matter far less than long-term socio-economic trends' is not a scientific finding, it's just an opinion, which I do not share.
It is a thought provoking report. Of the three forms looked at; the dense Urban City model would cut energy use, the Garden City and 'sprawl' would raise energy use.
ReplyDeleteWhat we are looking at is a picture of our society and what people want and are used to getting. It is the overiding impact of socio economic trends that is fascinating. Zero waste, climate change, homelessness, food provision these are all major issues on which land use policy has an impact. Land use policy is in turn driven by a hierarchy of desires (Land owners / developers / politicians / users) which is cultivated within the market economy.
In terms of the local situation it is likely to be a question of scale; self sustaining rural growth supported, but large out of town settlements based on a 'mixed use' and the garden city model not supported - likely not big enough to create a low carbon urban scenario, but large enough for the socio-economic needs to keep people in their cars and commuting to work.
Then you have the conflict between basing growth on a 'transport' model and genuine sustainability, whether or not the economic situation predicates against it being achievable.