Sha sustrans presentation final

81

Transcript of Sha sustrans presentation final

Page 1: Sha sustrans presentation final
Page 2: Sha sustrans presentation final

Healthy and sustainable: why walking and cycling are central to public health policy

Philip InsallDirector, Active Travel, Sustrans

Page 3: Sha sustrans presentation final

Transport policy has damaged public health

• climate change emissions

• local air pollution• obesity epidemic• road danger• difficulties of access• quality of life

Page 4: Sha sustrans presentation final

Global climate change

Climate change is also a public health issue

Climate change killed 150,000 people in 2006,

according to the World Health Organisation*

*www.who.int/globalchange/climate

Page 5: Sha sustrans presentation final

Source: European Environment Agency

ozone nitrogen oxides PM10 particulates

EU urban population exposed to air pollution above EC limits, %, 1999

Polluted urban air

Page 6: Sha sustrans presentation final

Europe, 2005:

41,000 dead

1.9 million injured

The roads ARE dangerous

Road casualties

Page 7: Sha sustrans presentation final

Inactive lifestyles• obesity• cardio-vascular

disease• type II diabetes• many cancers• mental ill-health….• cost over €15 billion

in UK alone

Page 8: Sha sustrans presentation final

“Besides the human costs of inactivity in terms of mortality, morbidity and quality of life, the report highlighted an estimate for the cost of inactivity in England to be £8.2 billion annually. This excludes the contribution of physical inactivity to overweight and obesity, whose overall cost might run to £6.6 - £7.4 billion per year according to recent estimates.”

Choosing Activity: a physical activity action plan (DH, 2005)

Physical inactivity is a big problem

Page 9: Sha sustrans presentation final

We eat too much, and choose unhealthy foods

We are not active enough, including in our travel choices

A worldwide epidemic of obesity

Page 10: Sha sustrans presentation final

Who do you think?

Who leads the world in obesity?

….. the following slides are courtesy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA…..

Page 11: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1985

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 12: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1986

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 13: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1987

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 14: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1988

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 15: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1989

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 16: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1990

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14%

Page 17: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1991

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 18: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1992

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 19: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1993

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 20: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1994

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 21: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1995

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 22: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1996

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

Page 23: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1997

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24%

Page 24: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1998

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24%

Page 25: Sha sustrans presentation final

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults1999

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24%

Page 26: Sha sustrans presentation final

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24%

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults2000

Page 27: Sha sustrans presentation final

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24% 25%

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults2001

Page 28: Sha sustrans presentation final

(*BMI 30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5’4” person)

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24% 25%

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults2002

Page 29: Sha sustrans presentation final

Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC

No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%-24% 25%

Obesity Trends Among U.S. Adults2003

Page 30: Sha sustrans presentation final

Predicted UK growth in obesity-related disease by 2030From “Our health, our care, our say” white paper

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Stroke Angina Heart Attack Hypertension Type 2 diabetes

+5%

+12%

+18%

+28%

+54%

Source: Living in Britain 2004: Results from the 2002 General Household Survey; National Food Survey 2000 Table B1

Page 31: Sha sustrans presentation final

Source: Fox / Hillsdon presentation to UK government Foresight policy development programme on obesity

The UK obesity epidemic…..….. is explained by <1.5 kg per annum weight gain

Page 32: Sha sustrans presentation final

Distance walked per person per annum…..

Source: Fox / Hillsdon presentation to UK government Foresight policy development programme on obesity

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1975/6 1989/91 1995/7

Walk miles

Car miles x 10

The UK obesity epidemic…..….. is explained by <1.5 kg per annum weight gain

….. equivalent to 1kg of fat gain, per annum….. fell 110km over 20 years…..

Page 33: Sha sustrans presentation final

We have made our environments “obesogenic”

Page 34: Sha sustrans presentation final

Levels of cycling (DfT 1996)

UK

Sw

eden

Ger

man

y

Sw

itzer

land

2%

10% 11%

15%

Prevalence of overweight children (IOTF 2002)

22%

18%15% 16%

Page 35: Sha sustrans presentation final

Environments condition behaviour

Modification of social, economic, and environmental

factors may yield greater health dividends than individual lifestyle approaches. Indeed such interventions may be necessary before individual lifestyle approaches can be effective.

Lawlor et al, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Page 36: Sha sustrans presentation final

A cross-sector issue

With cross-sector solutions

Page 37: Sha sustrans presentation final

Transport policy can now contribute to healthy, low-carbon lifestyles

Page 38: Sha sustrans presentation final

Restrain private motor traffic

“we recommend that the government develops and strengthens requirements for Local Transport Plans, such that by the end of 2008 they can include statutory targets for reduction in urban traffic”

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Report on the Urban Environment, 2007

Page 39: Sha sustrans presentation final

Changes people can really make

“For most people, the easiest and most acceptable forms of physical activity are those that can be incorporated into everyday life. Examples include walking or cycling instead of travelling by car…..

At least five a week; the Chief Medical Officer’s report on physical activity, 2004

Page 40: Sha sustrans presentation final

“Urban planners .…. need to integrate health and active living considerations fully into their work… … transport officials can provide a balanced transport system that enables residents to walk or cycle to shops, school and work.”

Promoting physical activity and active living in urban environments, World Health Organisation, 2006

Urban transport and healthy living

Page 41: Sha sustrans presentation final

Mobility….. or accessibility?

Page 42: Sha sustrans presentation final

Mobility….. or accessibility?

• Transport policy has prioritised mobility : the ability to travel – sometimes long distances

Page 43: Sha sustrans presentation final

Mobility….. or accessibility?

• Accessibility : access to the goods and services people need

• the ideal is maximum accessibility with minimum mobility

Page 44: Sha sustrans presentation final

Potential for change

Analysis of travel behaviour shows very significant potential for change to more active modes

Page 45: Sha sustrans presentation final

Constants in travel behaviour

Five out of six trips begin or end at homeSpatial orientation

Only one in five trips is work-relatedActivities

10% are not further than 1km, 30% are not further than 3km and 50% are not further than 5km

Car trips

On average, people make three trips per day, spending one hour travelling

Daily mobility

Page 46: Sha sustrans presentation final

Potential for change

What scale of travel behaviour change is possible?

Page 47: Sha sustrans presentation final

Potential for sustainable travel modes% trips per person: Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns

35

9

Circumstances enforce car use

Actual usage (walking, bicycle, public transport)

Page 48: Sha sustrans presentation final

9

2735

No adequate alternative

Actual usage (walking, bicycle, public transport)

Potential for sustainable travel modes% trips per person: Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns

Circumstances enforce car use

Page 49: Sha sustrans presentation final

35

29

27

9No adequate alternative

Actual usage (walking, bicycle, public transport)

Only subjective reasons against STM

Potential for sustainable travel modes% trips per person: Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns

Circumstances enforce car use

Page 50: Sha sustrans presentation final

Immediate potential for walking, cycling & public transport

Environmental factors “enforce” private motorised

modes

Potential for sustainable travel modeswithout significant environmental modification

64

36

Page 51: Sha sustrans presentation final

Potential for sustainable travel modeswith environmental intervention

75

25

Walking, cycling & public transport

Motorised private modes

“Idealistic, unrealistic

, radical…..”

Page 52: Sha sustrans presentation final

Idealistic, unrealistic, radical?

Page 53: Sha sustrans presentation final

Mode choice in Basel, Switzerland% trips per person

75

25

Walking, cycling & public transport

Motorised private modes

Page 54: Sha sustrans presentation final

Examples of intervention

What should we do to make urban transport systems better?

Page 55: Sha sustrans presentation final

Re-allocate road space

Take space from motor traffic and return it to walking and cycling

Bristol, UK

Page 56: Sha sustrans presentation final

Wien, Austria

Keep motor traffic out

Page 57: Sha sustrans presentation final

Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany

Design for healthy, sustainable travel

• Target: cycling up from 12 to 25% of urban trips• Investment: €1.4 billion, 1978 - 2006• Some cities now achieve 35% of trips by bike

Page 58: Sha sustrans presentation final

London Congestion Charge

Significant, incremental, long-term

Page 59: Sha sustrans presentation final

Show leadership

Page 60: Sha sustrans presentation final

Case study: Odense

Page 61: Sha sustrans presentation final

Odense – Denmark’s “cycling city”• 185,000 citizens (typical Scandinavian city)

• multi-year programme – main intervention 1999 – 2002

• central government funding at €11 per capita per annum

• main focus on cycling

• very wide range of measures

• physical measures – bus and cycle priority

• promotion and marketing – many initiatives

• monitoring

Page 62: Sha sustrans presentation final

Odense – results (1999 – 2002)• cycling up 20%, still growing

• car traffic down 15%

• shift to shorter local journeys

• increase in walking

• public transport travel fell too

• improved road safety

• raised physical activity levels

• significant reduction in cost of ill-health

• Odense continues to innovate…..

Page 63: Sha sustrans presentation final

Case study: National Cycle Network

Page 64: Sha sustrans presentation final

Composition of the Network

Traffic-calmed urban roads

Page 65: Sha sustrans presentation final

Quiet rural roads and lanes

Composition of the Network

Page 66: Sha sustrans presentation final

Traffic-free greenways (30% of total)

Composition of the Network

Page 67: Sha sustrans presentation final

Designed for multiple trip purposes

leisure and recreation…

Page 68: Sha sustrans presentation final

…shopping and personal business...

Page 69: Sha sustrans presentation final

…commuting to work...

Page 70: Sha sustrans presentation final

…school travel

Page 71: Sha sustrans presentation final

… attractive traffic-free routes...

Page 72: Sha sustrans presentation final

…without gaps or obstacles...

Page 73: Sha sustrans presentation final

…with iconic, memorable structures...

Page 74: Sha sustrans presentation final

Art and the travelling landscape

Page 75: Sha sustrans presentation final

Development of the Network

Page 76: Sha sustrans presentation final

National Cycle Network 1995: plans for 2,500 miles (4,000km)

Page 77: Sha sustrans presentation final

National Cycle Network5,000 miles (8,000km) open in 2000

Page 78: Sha sustrans presentation final

National Cycle Network10,000 miles (16,000km) in 2005

Page 79: Sha sustrans presentation final

….. and construction continues…..

Page 80: Sha sustrans presentation final

The National Cycle Network: changing people’s travel behaviour

• 338 million active trips in 2006• 50:50 walking and cycling• 91 million replaced a car trip• 78% “more active thanks to the

Network”• focused on deprived

neighbourhoods• used for all trip purposes

Page 81: Sha sustrans presentation final

Walking and cycling investment is excellent value for money

cost : benefit analysis of three UK construction projects

• average benefit : cost ratio 20:1

• motor transport projects, ratio 3:1

• many road transport projects have negative value