Policy aims - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 177

Social and personal issues
As with environmental issues these are not necessarily devoid of economic significance,
but that is not their main source of concern. Rather they derive from concerns about
individual welfare, rights and the distribution of opportunities and other transport-
related conditions between different groups in society. For example improving the
mobility of disabled people may have economic benefits, but this is unlikely to be the
main reason it is proposed.
The distributional concern at the root of social objectives is different from the
preferences between groups on purely political grounds noted earlier. Although
governments will vary in the importance they attach to social issues, once policies
have been determined they are normally applied without political preference. For
example once national eligibility criteria have been set for people to receive free
school transport or concessionary travel, all members of the population who meet
these criteria are entitled to the associated benefits.
As we noted in Chapter 9 mobility in the sense of freedom from restriction on
personal movement is perceived as a fundamental right. Many decisions, particularly
at the local level, are concerned with balancing the 'freedom' available to different
modal groups where, because of the limitations of space and infrastructure, unimpeded
movement by all is impracticable. For example motorists may be restricted in their
ability to use certain shopping streets in order to give greater freedom to pedestrians, or
in 'home zones' in order to give children and others the freedom to move around safely.
Less noted tend to be restrictions which are not formally 'imposed' but which arise
because of the way streets and other transport facilities are designed and managed.
Otherwise mobile people can effectively be prevented from travel, for example by the
presence of steps, inadequate signing, or by fear of attack - especially after dark.
Mobility in the sense of freedom to travel amongst people who for one reason or
another do not already have this capability is a more contested policy area. Mobility is
something most people are able to 'purchase' and to exercise choice relative to other
claims on their time and income. However exactly what they are able to purchase,
and what kind of 'lifestyle' they are able to follow as a result, will depend on particular
circumstances. These include characteristics of the individual (e.g. physical mobility,
income, work or family responsibilities) and of their location (availability of jobs and
services, quality of transport networks etc.). Concern arises where the combination
of circumstances is such that people are effectively prevented from living what most
people would regard as a 'normal' life and may thus be classed as 'socially excluded'.
There are relatively few activities where the ability to travel has been given the
status of a right. Travel to school is the most important and is the corollary of school
attendance being compulsory. Other transport may be provided as ancillary to publicly-
funded welfare services, e.g. to hospitals (for patients) or to day-care centres. However
there is no 'entitlement' to transport for other purposes, irrespective of how severe
are personal circumstances. Public authorities are able to pay financial support for
transport services which fulfil 'social needs', but the definition of these and the extent
to which they are provided for is a matter of local discretion and voluntary resources.
Hence the opportunities available to similar sorts of people living in similar sorts of
places varies widely in different parts of the country.
Transport has significance for personal welfare other than through mobility and
accessibility. Car dependence can be a factor contributing to obesity and heart
disease; conversely walking and cycling may be encouraged as ways of combating