Fancy that – transport planning day coinciding with a slew of long-term decisions for a brighter future (well, the UK Government’s cabinet was ‘refreshed’ anyway). I had the privilege of speaking at the Transport Planning Society‘s event in London, addressing the exam question “Fair shares – how equitable is the current transport system and would a decarbonised system be more or less equitable?” I’d been given pause for thought about equity in advance of the event, having learnt that people sleeping in tents on the streets was a lifestyle choice. However, the cabinet reshuffle let me clear my head and get back on track.

Short answer to the exam question for me was ‘not very’ and ‘it couldn’t be any worse (or maybe it could)’. Longer answers:

How equitable is the current transport system? Sadly, I look back at work 20 years ago into social exclusion and transport and feel a lot of resonance with today (including the recent and excellent TfN report) which suggests we haven’t made much headway. Perhaps we’ve become more aware of diversity and inclusion but the TfN work points to significant numbers of people at risk of social exclusion. Add to that the need to also take on board intergenerational fairness and international inequities where global north lifestyles (including mobility behaviours) are higher carbon and leading to adverse effects more greatly felt in the global south.

Would a decarbonised system be more or less equitable? It *could* be either. Since the current UK Government’s mantra (stemming from its Transport Decarbonisation Plan (TDP)) is ‘doing the same things differently’, I’m not encouraged we are heading in a more equitable direction. The TDP, in one of only three references to inclusion, pointed (in 2021) to “promoting the principles of 20-minute neighbourhoods” being part of “good design and proper consideration of the needs of our communities”. But such statements are easily made and then superseded – cue The Plan for Drivers: “We will explore options to stop local councils using so-called “15-minute cities””. A case of preferring to see more forced car ownership in the name of ‘freedom’ than promoting the benefits of having access to what one needs in everyday life closer to hand? It could be more equitable if we rethought the balance of access provision in society, giving greater weight to reducing the need to travel and shifting modes instead of fixating overwhelmingly on ‘doing the same things differently’ like electrifying cars.

Can’t we get better at the messaging? It’s not a case of “Eco-zealots want to reduce our car use by 20%” but “We can still have 80% of our pre-pandemic car use, the access we need, AND help avert a nightmare future. Great!”

With back pedalling on decarbonisation efforts I am left wondering whether the cost of living crisis is going to turn into the cost of living with climate change crisis.