Effects of pedestrianisation on the commercial and ... - Eco-Logica

(Interview No.21: One car, single parent
household)
Several interviewees remarked on their
decreased usage <strong>of</strong> public transport since
becoming a two car household:
Q. "Do your children normally
travel with you when you go on the bus?
A. Yeah. It would be a bit <strong>of</strong> an
adventure now, going on a bus, wouldn't it?
(looks at child). Because we used to go
everywhere on buses"
(Interview No.3: 'two car' household for
three years)
The 22 parents were asked if they liked
walking and about acceptable distances. For
some this depended on the context,
separating walking for transport (to local
shops or school) with recreational walking,
for pleasure or exercise. The desire to walk
or the distance did not depend on car
ownership levels. Two <strong>of</strong> the four 'no car'
interviewees walked only when necessary:
Q. "Do you like Walking?
A. I don't like it – I do it, but I
wouldn't say I like it"
(Interview No.12: 'no car' household,
interviewee's emphasis)
Discussion: Number <strong>of</strong> Cars in Household,
Travel Mode and Habit Forming Behaviour
A pervasive finding is the strong link
between the amount <strong>of</strong> car usage and the
'number <strong>of</strong> cars in households' (it is also
associated with attitudes towards cars,
public buses and childrens’ future
aspirations learning to drive own car
(Baslington 2006)). It is the independent
variable on regular journeys as well as
childrens' short car journeys. Although the
PTEQ sample was self-selected, the findings
mirrored a national sample <strong>of</strong> school
escorters as well as a sample <strong>of</strong> employees
from the general population. The
pervasiveness <strong>of</strong> car usage by mothers in
households with two/more cars suggests a
habit forming relationship signified by the
gradient which cuts across car ownership
categories in cross tabulations. Those <strong>of</strong>
more recent second car ownership were
conscious <strong>of</strong> behavioural change in relation
to amount <strong>of</strong> walking and diminished use <strong>of</strong>
public transport. Goodwin (1995) concludes
that car dependence is a process not a
state. Justifications for escorting children by
car are based on social, psychological and
economic variables: safety: 'stranger
danger' or busy roads, time pressure, peer
pressure, convenience, the weather, cost,
all <strong>of</strong> which are tangible reasons. These
explain peoples' needs, but not the greater
usage <strong>of</strong> cars in multi-car households. Do
these parents feel more threatened by
'stranger danger’? Do they have less time
than others? Fear <strong>of</strong> strangers or busy
roads is reason for parental accompaniment
<strong>of</strong> children but does not explain car use for
this purpose, except if the parent
themselves feels threatened. Time pressure
because <strong>of</strong> employment is an important
factor, but nationally, the numbers involved
are surprising. A picture <strong>of</strong> 'trip chaining'
and school escort is provided by the DfT:
57% <strong>of</strong> women and 53% <strong>of</strong> men return
straight home in the morning (DfT, 2005).
Of the 43% who 'trip chain' only 18% <strong>of</strong>
female escorters, (17% <strong>of</strong> male) continue
on to employment. Shift work or part-time
employment may be explanatory, but
interestingly, the unemployed in two/more
car households use the same mode as the
employed. Housewives have time
pressures; they may be full-time carers
with toddlers or elderly relatives. However,
this also applies to housewives from 'no car'
or 'one car' households' but unemployment
appears to provide the incentive for these
to walk. Distance travelled did not have a
bearing, 90% lived approximately 1.13
World Transport Policy & Practice________________________________________________________
Volume 13.1 September 2006
14