|
|
|
You are here: Home > Current Topics > At your Leisure > 24 October 2005 |
|
|
|
|
| Country | Year | Cars per 1000 people |
| USA | 2002 | 765 |
| Luxembourg | 2002 | 629 |
| Italy | 2002 | 581 |
| Canada | 2002 | 559 |
| Portugal | 2002 | 558 |
| Germany | 2002 | 541 |
| Austria | 2002 | 495 |
| France | 2002 | 476 |
| Belgium | 2002 | 463 |
| Spain | 2002 | 462 |
| Sweden | 2002 | 453 |
| UK | 2001 | 437 |
| Finland | 2002 | 423 |
| Netherlands | 2001 | 418 |
| Ireland | 2001 | 359 |
| Czech Republic | 2002 | 358 |
| Denmark | 2002 | 351 |
| Greece | 2002 | 313 |
Source: Statistical Yearbook of the UNECE 2005 [PDF, 107 KB] (http://www.unece.org/stats/trends2005/Sources/145_Number%20of%20passenger%20cars%20(per%201000%20pop).pdf)
But the UK of course occupies a relatively small land area and even comparatively low rates of car ownership produce congested roads, higher concentrations of pollutants and greater stress levels. The net effect is felt by UK drivers having one of the highest journey times to commute to work. The average British worker spends 46 minutes each day commuting, ten minutes more each day than in France and twice that of workers in Italy. The British also use their cars more intensively than people in other countries, meaning that we have a higher reliance on the car than elsewhere.
You might expect Britain's dependence on the car to have produced some of the worst accident rates in the world; but the opposite is the case. There has been great emphasis placed on road safety by successive governments. The introduction of seatbelts and modern social intolerance of drink-driving are just two examples of successful UK road safety campaigns.
In combination with other safety initiatives, these campaigns have produced the lowest road death rate in the EU. But even here, there is plenty to be concerned about. Whilst Britons have the lowest chance of dying in a road traffic accident as car passengers, British cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians are far more at risk. Pedestrians and cyclists are over twice as likely to die on UK roads than in the Netherlands or Sweden.
By the 1990s concerns over the UK's reliance on the car and the resultant demand for land for new road building reached its zenith. International awareness of the environmental damage caused by greenhouse gases saw the mood swing against traditional transport policy in the UK. Events such as the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the publication of a report in 1994 by the Royal Commission on Environmental Protection, and the enactment of traffic-cutting legislation in the form of the Road Traffic Reduction Act in 1997 marked this change in approach.
Now the key question was how the UK and other countries should manage car use, as part of an overall emphasis on finding a balance between different modes of transport. It seemed that we were on the verge of a properly integrated transport policy in this country.
The UN conference on climate change, held in Kyoto in 1997 produced a set of protocols designed to cut levels of climate change pollution to below 1990 levels by 2010. The UK government supported this stance and saw transport policy as the way to turn it into a reality. Transport was estimated to account for a quarter of the UK's carbon emissions; road vehicles were responsible for 80% of total UK transport pollution. So the most effective way of meeting Kyoto targets would be to change road traffic policy and develop better public transport alternatives.
The new focus of government transport policy was aimed at achieving a balance between different modes of transport, gradually weaning the UK off its dependence on the car. New policies were anticipated, including:
Image: Empty petrol pumps during the 2000 fuel crisis.
But the introduction of such measures has stalled as the government became worried about public reaction to rising fuel costs, which resulted in the fuel protests of September 2000, when oil refineries were blockaded and petrol stations ran dry. See Biz/ed's Wanna Argument? on the 2000 Fuel Crisis(http://www.bized.co.uk/current/argument/arg1.htm) for more.
Concerned about being seen as 'anti-car', the government retreated from pushing through such radical transport policies as road pricing and congestion charging. Although central London has its own congestion charge, central government has delegated to local authorities the power to introduce similar schemes. The difficulties of countering opposition to such policies in the UK's cities was demonstrated in February 2005, when residents of Edinburgh voted by a margin of three to one against its introduction in the Scottish capital.
In the face of such evidence, the UK, as the most car-dependent European country, will retain its position as a mid to high-level polluter. Up to date road transport emission data is hard to source, but the most recent figures suggest that Britain has to work hard on reducing its car dependency if it is to meet its Kyoto commitments.
With government having steered clear of the widespread application of 'hard' policies such as road pricing for the time being at least, the emphasis has fallen on 'soft' measures to cut UK dependence on private road transport. Many of these are organised and managed at the local level. One such example is the CIVITAS initiative. This programme uses EU funds to support and evaluate ambitious urban transport strategies, often involving public-private partnerships. In total over 300 million euro will be spent on a range of projects throughout the EU on measures designed to produce sustainable urban transport systems and, as a result, improve the welfare of EU citizens.
Bristol is one of four UK cities involved in the CIVITAS programme, the others being Norwich, Preston and Winchester. So what are the 'ambitious' transport schemes promoted by the programme in Bristol? The following list provides some examples of CIVITAS-supported projects:
One of the more interesting measures adopted by Bristol City Council is the idea of car clubs. These aim to cut the number of private cars used on the city's streets (Bristol's rate of car ownership outstrips the national average). It aims to encourage use of the club by stressing the following benefits:
Car clubs operate in several towns and cities in the UK, including Edinburgh, London, Brighton, Huddersfield and Portsmouth.
Images: The three steps of using a car with CityCarClub. Step 1: Cars can be booked online or over the phone. Step 2: Cars are unlocked using a smart card held against a sensor on the windscreen. Step 3: The driver enters their pin and can drive away. Copyright: Reproduced by kind permission of CityCarClub
Another initiative by a local authority in the south west of England illustrates how these 'soft' measures can use a mix of public and private sector skills to promote sustainable transport. Somerset County Council is overseeing the supply of 40 new Ford Focus cars powered by flexi-fuel systems to partner organisations including the Avon and Somerset Constabulary and Wessex Water.
The cars are capable of running on a renewable fuel called bioethanol, which is obtained from agricultural crops. This offers a 70% cut in CO2 emissions, after allowing for the energy used to grow the crops and process the fuel. Cars will be able to refuel at any of five fuel stations located around Somerset, but can run on any combination of petrol and bioethanol.
Plans for the future include setting up a bioethanol plant in the county so that the flexi-fuel cars can be used by more people in the region, as they become available to private individuals and fleet operators.
Clearly the softer measures outlined above will not produce the shock to people's travelling habits envisaged by some concerned about the UK's dependency on private cars. But in a complex world, operating within the reality of political systems, perhaps actions such as car sharing, greater access to low emission vehicles, better bus services and a more integrated transport system may be the best we can achieve.
