Thinking back to a question I raised at the end of one of my last posts, how do you reduce the dependence of people on their car? Well as the car not only allows easy movement nowadays, and instead acts as a symbol of power, status and superiority as well, it’s not going to be easy. Overall it seems there are 2 options available; one provide alternatives, and two reduce the attractiveness of car use (Beirao and Cabral, 2007).
The obvious alternatives to driving include public transport, cycling or walking, and if people are to start changing their habits the image of these alternatives, especially public transport, will have to improve to alter public perceptions. For the likes of busses and trains, this could involve increasing the number of services run, the reliability, and even the appearance of the vehicles. Serious thought would have to go into cost to, with low income families the ones who are now most rapidly buying cars (see my last post for the figures).
At present, I would argue this is one of the main reasons why people do not look past their cars for many journeys, with across the country many people perceive the price of public transport to be extortionate. Beirao and Cabral (2007) disagree with this, and suggest that many car users in fact believe public transport to be cheaper. Where I live, however, Reading, a return journey on the bus costs £3.60 and a return train into town £2.60. With free parking across the town centre, it is no wonder so many people prefer to drive, even if they do think that public transport is cheaper.
To promote walking and cycling, it is often necessary to highlight the pysiological and psychological benefits. In a poster aimed at getting people to leave their cars at home, Portsmouth County Council (PCC) recognise that the extra time taken through these transport methods, but point out how you may “begin to lose weight or generally feel fitter and more at one with the world!” How could anyone refuse?
The second, and perhaps more challenging way to coax people from their cars, is to make their use less attractive. Garling and Schuitema (2007) suggest that non-coercive schemes that involve giving information and feedback to drivers are ineffective and do not reduce car use. Santos and Rojey (2004) on the other hand, argue that demonstrating road pricing clearly to drivers, installing charging and prohibited zones across town and city centres, and increasing tax on fuel, can help to limit the number of car journeys made. PCC again highlight a similar idea in the aforementioned poster, by saying, “you are likely to save money on parking, fuel and maintenance by not using the car.”
Alongside these ideas PCC also highlight reasons relating to stress, socialising and community in putting forward their case for a reduction in the use of cars. Overall the poster is a fantastic advert for life without a car, and will hopefully persuade people to seek alternative transport, if not with their many reasons shown here, but with their question and answer section, that helps to reassure people who are undecided.
This is not too soon either, as to finish today I want to direct everyone to an article from the BBC website in 2002. While there seems to be limited evidence for its claims, the statistics produced by Dr. Steven Barrett are stagering and really highlight why wide spread behaviour changes are necessary.
No comments:
Post a Comment