The ethics of transport planning Stephen Potter Professor of Transport Strategy The Open University Human Centred Design Institute May 2009

Warning This is a ‘think piece’ presentation NOT a fully worked out research results-type seminar Seeking to explore ideas and get some feedback

This is a ‘think piece’ presentation NOT a fully worked out research results-type seminar

Seeking to explore ideas and get some feedback

Ethics in design Ethics are often formulated as concerning individual decisions – personal morality But there are collective institutional and structural ethics – clear examples are legalised oppression and unjust systems (slavery, exploitative trade relations) This has for long been recognised (e.g. in the Bible, institutional oppression is condemned - Amos 2: 6-7) There is a tendency to see structural ethics as being resolved at a political level to leave the design practitioner free of worries. Such a view is untenable and the ethics of design is a key area

Ethics are often formulated as concerning individual decisions – personal morality

But there are collective institutional and structural ethics – clear examples are legalised oppression and unjust systems (slavery, exploitative trade relations)

This has for long been recognised (e.g. in the Bible, institutional oppression is condemned - Amos 2: 6-7)

There is a tendency to see structural ethics as being resolved at a political level to leave the design practitioner free of worries.

Such a view is untenable and the ethics of design is a key area

Designing transport systems Transport and urban design is often portrayed as a technical process that operates within a politically determined framework that sorts out the ethical side. But we seemingly technical design decisions can have a major ethical dimension This presentation explores this issue regarding transport and urban design

Transport and urban design is often portrayed as a technical process that operates within a politically determined framework that sorts out the ethical side.

But we seemingly technical design decisions can have a major ethical dimension

This presentation explores this issue regarding transport and urban design

Ethical rebound effects Our institutional systems can produce social or environmental injustice e.g. people campaign against environmentally-damaging structures, such as roadbuilding or investment assessment systems that undervalue environmental damage. But, individually ‘moral’ decisions can collectively produce structural injustice. For example driving our children to school to protect them from danger collectively produces danger to others Collectively, high car use can cause social isolation for those without cars Promoting low carbon cars can reinforce a carbon intensive transport system

Our institutional systems can produce social or environmental injustice e.g. people campaign against environmentally-damaging structures, such as roadbuilding or investment assessment systems that undervalue environmental damage.

But, individually ‘moral’ decisions can collectively produce structural injustice. For example

driving our children to school to protect them from danger collectively produces danger to others

Collectively, high car use can cause social isolation for those without cars

Promoting low carbon cars can reinforce a carbon intensive transport system

Symptoms of structural effects Leads to injustice and oppression of the vulnerable Denial or downplaying of unethical consequences – or claim that they can be addressed by other means (latter sometimes possible – but usually an excuse) Perpetrators portray themselves as victims (often seen in oppressive regimes; ‘persecuted motorists’) Traps people in unethical behaviour – makes it hard to be moral (sustainable). People lose hope. Causes people to tempt others into unethical behaviour So it involves how the designer-user system interacts - which may be more than current design ethics thinking covers

Leads to injustice and oppression of the vulnerable

Denial or downplaying of unethical consequences – or claim that they can be addressed by other means (latter sometimes possible – but usually an excuse)

Perpetrators portray themselves as victims (often seen in oppressive regimes; ‘persecuted motorists’)

Traps people in unethical behaviour – makes it hard to be moral (sustainable). People lose hope.

Causes people to tempt others into unethical behaviour

So it involves how the designer-user system interacts - which may be more than current design ethics thinking covers

Transport There is a growing awareness of the negative systems effects of transport trends and policies Social Exclusion/Inclusion is now a big issue for transport policy As our economic and social systems have adjusted to a high car-dependence lifestyle, increased mobility has led to isolating some people – particularly the poor, elderly and children They are restricted to a limited (and usually poorer) range of employment, shopping, health services, housing locations etc. The same structural processes produce environmental degradation

There is a growing awareness of the negative systems effects of transport trends and policies

Social Exclusion/Inclusion is now a big issue for transport policy

As our economic and social systems have adjusted to a high car-dependence lifestyle, increased mobility has led to isolating some people – particularly the poor, elderly and children

They are restricted to a limited (and usually poorer) range of employment, shopping, health services, housing locations etc.

The same structural processes produce environmental degradation

Transport Planning and social justice There are some flagrant examples of unjust transport planning (e.g. Robert Moses’ Wantagh Parkway design in Long Island to exclude buses used by blacks and poor) But Transport Planning always has an ethical dimension – even if it is not as obvious as this Low bridges to stop 12’ high buses using the Parkway

There are some flagrant examples of unjust transport planning (e.g. Robert Moses’ Wantagh Parkway design in Long Island to exclude buses used by blacks and poor)

But Transport Planning always has an ethical dimension – even if it is not as obvious as this

Transport/Land Use System The layout/design of towns and cities significantly affects our travel choices – and ability to travel more sustainably Big planning decisions bring the choices we make to the fore – but they are there all the time in everyday behaviour and decision making The social and environmental ethics involved are most obvious for big, new developments New towns in 1970s and Ecotowns today are prime example

The layout/design of towns and cities significantly affects our travel choices – and ability to travel more sustainably

Big planning decisions bring the choices we make to the fore – but they are there all the time in everyday behaviour and decision making

The social and environmental ethics involved are most obvious for big, new developments

New towns in 1970s and Ecotowns today are prime example

Transport/Land Use design of the New Towns The 1960s/70s debate over the design of New Towns actually was very much transport-related Largely forgotten now – but we are returning to the same issue (with Environment having a much increased emphasis) Worthwhile taking the long view The transport/land use design of Milton Keynes illustrates well the situation and ethical challenges

The 1960s/70s debate over the design of New Towns actually was very much transport-related

Largely forgotten now – but we are returning to the same issue (with Environment having a much increased emphasis)

Worthwhile taking the long view

The transport/land use design of Milton Keynes illustrates well the situation and ethical challenges

Milton Keynes urban design principles Urban structure to be flexible - providing ‘freedom and choice’ and allow for growth in consumption in 21 st century Key aspect was to facilitate ‘saturation’ car use Low density (27 ppha) and dispersed land uses, served by 1 km grid of dual 70mph roads (‘Modified Los Angeles system’)

Urban structure to be flexible - providing ‘freedom and choice’ and allow for growth in consumption in 21 st century

Key aspect was to facilitate ‘saturation’ car use

Low density (27 ppha) and dispersed land uses, served by 1 km grid of dual 70mph roads (‘Modified Los Angeles system’)

Urban designs for public and private transport are ‘diametrically opposed’ (Jamison and Mackay, 1967) One person’s freedom can be another’s chains… Less obvious than Robert Moses’ Wantagh Parkway design, but just as effective in excluding people Urban design conflict

Urban designs for public and private transport are ‘diametrically opposed’ (Jamison and Mackay, 1967)

One person’s freedom can be another’s chains…

Less obvious than Robert Moses’ Wantagh Parkway design, but just as effective in excluding people

Public transport-oriented urban design 1967 Runcorn design sought ‘social inclusion’ through a design to facilitate bus operations and pedestrian access Car user needs then fitted into this structure

1967 Runcorn design sought ‘social inclusion’ through a design to facilitate bus operations and pedestrian access

Car user needs then fitted into this structure

Rediscovering Runcorn(!) 21 st century environmental imperatives and need to manage road congestion has led to a rediscovery of the Runcorn idea Thames Gateway Fastrack Busway Cambridge guided busway-linked developments designed to similar principles

21 st century environmental imperatives and need to manage road congestion has led to a rediscovery of the Runcorn idea

Thames Gateway Fastrack Busway

Cambridge guided busway-linked developments designed to similar principles

An unethical deceit? In contrast, in 1971, MK opted for an entirely car-oriented design Probably because all other aspects of the design fitted needs for economic growth and ‘leisure’ society But MK Development Corporation claimed that the new town would have a public transport service so good that it would provide a real choice to car users. Hidden away in a technical supplement was the admission that the ‘selected land use plan’ meant that only a service of the ‘minimum level necessary’ could be achieved without very large subsidies. Was this an unethical deceit?

In contrast, in 1971, MK opted for an entirely car-oriented design

Probably because all other aspects of the design fitted needs for economic growth and ‘leisure’ society

But MK Development Corporation claimed that the new town would have a public transport service so good that it would provide a real choice to car users.

Hidden away in a technical supplement was the admission that the ‘selected land use plan’ meant that only a service of the ‘minimum level necessary’ could be achieved without very large subsidies.

Was this an unethical deceit?

Resolve design/ethical conflict by technical innovation and finance? With vast economic growth anticipated, ample public funding was expected in the future to subsidise buses Innovative demand responsive buses were thought to be able to operate well for dispersed demand in a low-density city Dial-a-Bus tried 1975-80 So tried to resolve the urban design dilemma through cash and technology.

With vast economic growth anticipated, ample public funding was expected in the future to subsidise buses

Innovative demand responsive buses were thought to be able to operate well for dispersed demand in a low-density city

Dial-a-Bus tried 1975-80

So tried to resolve the urban design dilemma through cash and technology.

Milton Keynes’ hidden Transport Crisis Hope of resolving ethical dilemma through cash and clever technology failed Dial-a-Ride needed high subsidy and was soon abandoned 1986 bus deregulation rendered subsidy policy illegal

Hope of resolving ethical dilemma through cash and clever technology failed

Dial-a-Ride needed high subsidy and was soon abandoned

1986 bus deregulation rendered subsidy policy illegal

A negative legacy amidst success Milton Keynes’ urban design has proved a very successful design that accommodated economic and social changes very well But transport is MK’s major failure a hostile operating environment for buses – the poorest service for any UK settlement of 250,000+ Under 5% of local work trips are by bus Walk and cycle use is exceptionally low, despite segregated routes, as low density produces long trip distances. Town is highly car dependent - over 80% local work trips and 50% of school trips by car There is no freedom not to use the car – and roads are starting to get congested

Milton Keynes’ urban design has proved a very successful design that accommodated economic and social changes very well

But transport is MK’s major failure

a hostile operating environment for buses – the poorest service for any UK settlement of 250,000+

Under 5% of local work trips are by bus

Walk and cycle use is exceptionally low, despite segregated routes, as low density produces long trip distances.

Town is highly car dependent - over 80% local work trips and 50% of school trips by car

There is no freedom not to use the car – and roads are starting to get congested

Reforming Car City Today the design for Milton Keynes would be viewed as environmentally irresponsible and socially divisive Current plans to expand Milton Keynes include densification, reworking some grid roads as bus corridors and medium density expansion areas served by 20-30mph bus-priority ‘city streets’ Still essentially suburban but with denser centres

Today the design for Milton Keynes would be viewed as environmentally irresponsible and socially divisive

Current plans to expand Milton Keynes include densification, reworking some grid roads as bus corridors and medium density expansion areas served by 20-30mph bus-priority ‘city streets’

Still essentially suburban but with denser centres

Sustainability opposed Move away from the design ethos of ‘the city built for the car’ is widely viewed with horror and derided Even introducing 50mph speed limits and traffic lights on Grid Roads are viewed as unacceptable The predominant view is that no alternatives to car use are possible and that the existing car-dependant design is so good it must be retained There is no awareness that there even is a problem Improving bus services etc. seen as separate from the overall transport system

Move away from the design ethos of ‘the city built for the car’ is widely viewed with horror and derided

Even introducing 50mph speed limits and traffic lights on Grid Roads are viewed as unacceptable

The predominant view is that no alternatives to car use are possible and that the existing car-dependant design is so good it must be retained

There is no awareness that there even is a problem

Improving bus services etc. seen as separate from the overall transport system

Petitioning for unsustainability 2008 Petition to retain car-oriented design ( http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/MK-Grid-Roads/ ) attracted thousands of signatures and big local support May 2009 residents petitioned to ban buses as they felt they lowered the tone of their exclusive estate Even blockaded buses with their 4x4s to make their point ….(oppressors portray themselves a victims)

2008 Petition to retain car-oriented design ( http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/MK-Grid-Roads/ ) attracted thousands of signatures and big local support

May 2009 residents petitioned to ban buses as they felt they lowered the tone of their exclusive estate

Even blockaded buses with their 4x4s to make their point ….(oppressors portray themselves a victims)

Too late to be ethical? Fudging the ethical issue in the past has led to situation tumbling out of control ‘Unsustainability’ is now so engrained it is portrayed as the sensible choice People widely feel there is no alternative (powerless) The case for unsustainability seems to be winning – trapping further thousands into an urban design that denies them the choice to travel sustainably This may look extremist – but the issues thrown into focus in Milton Keynes are going on everywhere and raise fundamental issues

Fudging the ethical issue in the past has led to situation tumbling out of control

‘Unsustainability’ is now so engrained it is portrayed as the sensible choice

People widely feel there is no alternative (powerless)

The case for unsustainability seems to be winning – trapping further thousands into an urban design that denies them the choice to travel sustainably

This may look extremist – but the issues thrown into focus in Milton Keynes are going on everywhere and raise fundamental issues

Barriers to sustainable suburbia Is there only one model for sustainable transport? – built around the operational needs of high-capacity public transport systems? MK throws this dilemma into focus… – MK’s liveable suburbia is what has made it so socially and economically successful. Is it impossible for suburbia to have sustainable transport?

Is there only one model for sustainable transport? – built around the operational needs of high-capacity public transport systems?

MK throws this dilemma into focus… – MK’s liveable suburbia is what has made it so socially and economically successful.

Is it impossible for suburbia to have sustainable transport?

A more flexible approach? Is a different model is needed for suburbia? e.g. emphasis on local access, non motorised trips, innovative public transport systems (PRT?) and packages of ‘smarter’ measures (travel plans, public cars etc). Not just sustainable urban design and investment, but institutional, financial structures and regulation. Our institutional structures make sustainable innovation hard.

Is a different model is needed for suburbia?

e.g. emphasis on local access, non motorised trips, innovative public transport systems (PRT?) and packages of ‘smarter’ measures (travel plans, public cars etc).

Not just sustainable urban design and investment, but institutional, financial structures and regulation. Our institutional structures make sustainable innovation hard.

Attitudes and perceptions MK – an anti-environmental aberration or a microcosm? The reaction to MK’s expansion plans throws into focus attitudes and perceptions that are just present elsewhere. This is no freak response The environmental and social ethics around transport and urban design have been fudged and hidden within a professional process There is no ‘buy-in’ to the transport and environmental professional’s analysis of our transport problem The concept of transport demand management is alien, threatening and viewed as a political con

MK – an anti-environmental aberration or a microcosm?

The reaction to MK’s expansion plans throws into focus attitudes and perceptions that are just present elsewhere. This is no freak response

The environmental and social ethics around transport and urban design have been fudged and hidden within a professional process

There is no ‘buy-in’ to the transport and environmental professional’s analysis of our transport problem

The concept of transport demand management is alien, threatening and viewed as a political con

The need for a new vision The Milton Keynes case brings into focus some key and disturbing issues How do we get understanding and buy-in to transport solutions from a deeply cynical public? Have people lost hope of a fairer future for transport? The big city institutional response of infrastructure build is less appropriate for suburbia – where innovative transport solutions require institutional reforms An equitable and sustainable transport vision is needed that can win acceptance and positive support

The Milton Keynes case brings into focus some key and disturbing issues

How do we get understanding and buy-in to transport solutions from a deeply cynical public?

Have people lost hope of a fairer future for transport?

The big city institutional response of infrastructure build is less appropriate for suburbia – where innovative transport solutions require institutional reforms

An equitable and sustainable transport vision is needed that can win acceptance and positive support

No neat conclusions!! We know design inevitably incorporates value judgements Transport and urban design can incorporate hidden ethical decisions New technologies and different institutional structures can play a role in resolving the ethical clashes But the problem needs to be accepted – which for transport is still not the case Transport planning seen as something imposed by remote professionals commanding little trust

We know design inevitably incorporates value judgements

Transport and urban design can incorporate hidden ethical decisions

New technologies and different institutional structures can play a role in resolving the ethical clashes

But the problem needs to be accepted – which for transport is still not the case

Transport planning seen as something imposed by remote professionals commanding little trust