The Future of London 2062: Transport Pathways and Strategic Choices

Dr Robin Hickman

Bartlett School of Planning, UCL

r.hickman@ucl.ac.uk

"If there is such a thing as

growing human knowledge,

then we cannot anticipate

today what we shall know only

tomorrow … no scientific

predictor - whether a human

scientist or a calculating

machine - can possibly

predict, by scientific methods,

its own future results."

Popper, K.R. (1961) The Poverty of

Historicism

The Central Problem

Two Looming Environmental Issues..

Our short term and (certainly) long term future travel behaviours

are likely to change dramatically in the next decades.

• Climate change: an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions by

2050 – how is this achieved?

• Oil scarcity: the International Energy Agency (2009)

projects that there are ‘just 46 years left’ of [conventional] oil

consumption, assuming proven reserves and current

consumption rates. There are also non-conventional oil

resources – Canadian, Venezuelan, Russian tar sands, etc.

BUT, despite 30 years of (often ad-hoc) effort in promoting

sustainable transport, the vast majority of contemporary travel is

still by the private motor car. Largely powered by a common

technology and power source: the four stroke cycle engine,

fuelled by petrol or diesel.

LONDON: Outer London and non radial trips are still very car

(and oil) dependent; many short trips carried out by the car

(school run, shopping, leisure trips)

• Baseline and

projection

• Alternative

scenario(s) of

the future

• Policy measures

and packages

available

• Appraisal,

costing,

optimum

pathways

Backcasting

A normative approach: where should we be?

and how do we achieve this?

VIBAT-London

London: The Baseline (Transport Only)

TC-SIM London

Local Version 03

Web Version 03

tcsim.html

www.vibat.org/vibat_ldn/tcsim3/tcsim.html

tcsim

topgear

Discuss and ‘Optimise’ the Strategy

Discuss and ‘Optimise’ the Strategy

2A. Scenario Matrix

* Use two major trends/uncertainties to

develop scenario dimensions

S1. S2.

S3. S4.

2062 Scenarios

2A. Scenario Matrix

* Use two major trends/uncertainties to

develop scenario dimensions

S1. S2.

S3. S4.

Sustainable city

stewardship: high

- Government

- Public

Sustainable city

stewardship: low,

remains conjecture

Technological change: high

Technological change: low,

or mis-directed

2062 Scenarios

Beyond to 2062: Orwellian Perpetual Motion (S1)?

DTI Foresight, Foster and Partners (2006)

High technological change, but little environmental stewardship

Increased mobility, largely individual-based, but clean vehicles –

the increased distances travelled offset much of the CO2 reduction

gain from cleaner cars – and the city is unattractive for living

Beyond to 2062: Hobbesian Urban Sustainability (S2)?

DTI Foresight, Foster and Partners (2006)

High technological change, and high environmental stewardship

High density, green built environment design, high investment in

public transport, walking and cycling and the public realm

New International Air Capacity in London: Does this Fit?

Three potential policy approaches:

1. Do we stumble on with failing to provide

increased capacity around London? (the

dominant policy position)

2. Cater for projected demand? (current

political considerations ..)

3. Or - think of other ways to accommodate

long distance travel that might have less

impact on the environment (CO2

emissions)? - HSR

New International Air Capacity in London: Does this Fit?

Bows, A. and Anderson, K. (2006) Policy clash: can

projected aviation growth be reconciled with the UK

Government’s 60% carbon reduction target? Transport

Policy, 14, 2007, pp. 103-110.

THE PROBLEM: aviation will account for 50-112% of the UK carbon budget by

2050 (Bows and Anderson, 2006), under varying assumptions, best to worst case if

unconstained demand is catered for. Use of kerosene likely to remain the major fuel

for flying over next 20-40 years.

• Since 1960, global air passenger traffic (revenue

passenger-km) has increased by nearly 9% per annum

– and expected to continue by 5% per annum from

2000-2015.

• In 2003, ~200 million passengers passed through UK

airports; projected to rise to 400-600 million

passengers by 2030 (DfT, 2004) – if sufficient capacity

is provided (2 or 3 additional runways in the South

East and unconstrained capacity in the regions).

THE SOLUTION: continue with current approach – ’fail’ to provide additional capacity?

Conclusions?

• Developing our understanding of the social and cultural aspects

behind travel:

“Cars will not easily be given up just (!) because they are dangerous

to health and life, environmentally destructive, based on

unsustainable energy consumption, and damaging to public life and

civic space. Too many people find them too comfortable, enjoyable,

exciting, even enthralling. They are deeply embedded in ways of

life, networks of friends and sociality, and moral commitments to

family and car for others.” Sheller (2004)

• Ambitious strategic policy ambitions (CO2 reduction) not likely to be

delivered (on current progress) – lots of conjecture, not enough

focus and consistency in spending profiles (e.g. vehicle emission

profiles, public transport, cycling, urban structure, international air).

• Transport investment required that helps achieve societal goals:

environmental and wider city design, social and economic

objectives.

• Participatory elements critical – people need to be able to choose

their future travel lifestyles, ideally consistent with policy goals.