Institute for Transport Studies FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENT Wellbeing, Quality of Life and Transport Policy Louise Reardon ITS Research Seminar, 24 February 2015

Overview Wellbeing and Quality of Life have become more explicit goals of government activity Presentation divided into three sections Discussion of the rise of the ‘wellbeing agenda’ (Bache and Reardon 2013) Wellbeing and transport: current knowledge and potential (Reardon and Abdallah 2013) Lessons from ‘Quality of Life’ in transport policy (Reardon 2014)

The Wellbeing Agenda Focus on GDP leads to unacceptable and sub-optimal outcomes Increased confidence in subjective wellbeing measures – self report surveys International initiatives European Commission: ‘GDP and Beyond’ (2007) OECD: Better Life Index (2011) Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission (2009)

The Wellbeing Agenda Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission Shifting emphasis from measurement of economic output to wellbeing Measuring both objective and subjective dimensions of wellbeing Develop a dashboard of sustainability indicators Promote national level focus on wellbeing

David Cameron: “From April next year we will start measuring our progress as a country not just by how our economy is growing, but by how our lives are improving, not just by our standard of living, but by our quality of life.” Speech announcing the Measuring National Wellbeing Programme 25 November 2010 The Wellbeing Agenda

Goal of creating an ‘accepted and trusted’ set of national statistics Three stated uses of wellbeing data Overall monitoring of wellbeing International comparison Policy making process UK application of wellbeing tentative

Wellbeing and Transport Nef (2008) Dynamic Model of Wellbeing

Wellbeing and Transport Transport’s affect on four ‘systems’ Economic – improvements to transport infrastructure Environmental – air pollution, noise pollution, road accidents Social – social inclusion, fostering social capital, social exclusion Individual – physical activity, psychological response to travel

Wellbeing and Transport Research is rather disparate, not only across ‘system’ area, but also space, time, cohort, and research method used Subjective wellbeing indicators are not used that readily to understand impacts Stanley et al (2011) the ‘value’ of extra trip Stutzer and Frey (2010) challenges assumptions about commuter trade-offs

QoL and Transport Delivering a Sustainable Transport System Support economic competitiveness and growth Reduce carbon dioxide emissions Contribute to better safety, security and health Promote greater equality of opportunity To improve quality of life for transport and non- transport users – the ‘quality of life goal’

QoL and Transport Sheffield City Region (SCR) Area lagging behind national average on several economic indicators LTP had four goals Support economic growth Enhance social inclusion and health Reduce emissions from vehicles Maximise safety of the transport network

QoL and Transport Sheffield City Region No operational definition of quality of life Referred to in numerous ways Quality of life implementation group Largely a rhetorical shift

QoL and Transport “I think it [quality of life] was a catch all phrase at the end of the day, to cover a lot of things that didn’t necessarily fit in with everything else.” “It [quality of life] sort of grows, there’s never one specific definition.”

QoL and Transport City of York Out performs national average on several economic indicators LTP3 had five goals Provide quality alternatives (to the car) Provide strategic links Implement and support behaviour change Tackle transport emissions Improve public streets and spaces

QoL and Transport City of York Quality of life identified closely with quality of place Improving public streets and spaces Enhancing character of spaces and streets Reducing vehicle intrusion in the city Improve the environment for walking and cycling in residential areas

QoL and Transport Why the variation? National level very hands-off Local level recognised need to keep national government on side – follow signals Local context key Governance structure had no real effect QoL prevalent if tied to economic growth – a higher priority

Conclusion …Tying these three areas together Wellbeing is a potentially important agenda Wellbeing evidence challenges assumptions Need to be clear what we mean by wellbeing Increase the evidence base Does wellbeing have the potential to resonate within the transport sector?