The framing of transport policy

Within the field of transport there exists a broad set of objectives which can be used to guide the development of transport policy. These include economic growth, environmental protection, health and well-being and social equity although each will have different importance dependent on the context under consideration. There is a strong tradition of work on objectives-led planning which presumes that these objectives flow through the decision-making process from problem identification to appraisal and evaluation. This paper looks at the experience of four major metropolitan areas in the UK and explores the motivations of urban planners, economic planners and transport planners in their approach to using transport as a contributor to improve the performance of their cities. The method involved semi-structured interviews with 21 practitioners in a two stage process. In the first stage participants discussed the role of transport in improving the city and in the second stage were asked to consider how they approach current and might implement potential future demand management policies. The interviews covered actors from the main city and from important surrounding towns. In the paper we use this data to construct a series of fundamental conceptualizations of the role of transport policies from the perspective of these decision-makers. We relate these back to both the core transport objectives described above and a series of potential theoretical explanations, many of which are not currently used as the basis for transport planning. The findings suggest that many of the underlying objectives are part of the framing of the transport problem but that they are interpreted in quite different ways which can be related to theory not currently deployed in transport planning. We identify a need to broaden the types of decision-making tools which are adopted within transport planning. If the relationships between policy fields is to be more integrated, as well as the relationships between policy makers in adjacent administrations, then decision-support tools which focus on understanding and mediating the position of these decision-makers will be important. It will not be effective to plea for a change in the frame of other sectors or to hope to impose policy tools and logics from transport to elsewhere. This is particularly so as transport is often seen as a means to an end. Our findings also reinforce the importance of educating transport professionals to be able to understand and relate to other policy areas and to know how and when best to use the tools of transport planning to support this.