Category: Transportation

Making walking and wheeling more inclusive is the aim of the Walking for Everyone Guide. At 122 pages the online guide sets an ambitious and inclusive agenda for the future of walking across diverse communities. Community-led engagement is important to ensure changes meet the needs of residents. This is how you get local place-based needs met – there is no one-size-fits all.

Walking is often ignored in transport policy. Even when it is, the budget allocation takes it from the top of the hierarchy to the bottom. Consequently, basic elements like footpaths are not delivered. Despite almost every journey beginning and ending with walking and wheeling, streets are not inclusive.

Valuing and promoting lived experience enables transport planners to understand different experiences especially where they conflict. The Guide reminds us that solutions will sometimes require compromise, but marginalised groups should come first. After all, their needs will improve experiences for other walkers.

The Guide presents a framework of recommendations targeted national and local governments. There are three key themes:

1. Improving governance, planning and decision making
2. Creating better places for everyone to walk and wheel
3. Supporting everyone to walk and wheel

Each of the themes is dealt with in detail. In Theme 2, Creating better places, they tackle road safety, air quality and physical severance by roads. In the UK, cars are allowed to partially park on the footpath in narrow streets, but Living Streets recommend this practice end. This is because it often limits the movement of people using assistive mobility devices.

Close the mobility gap

A key point in Theme 3 is to close the mobility gap by making walking and wheeling inclusive. This includes ensuring everyone who needs a mobility device can get one. These devices include assistance dogs, personal assistants and support workers as well as equipment.

The Guide is well presented with attractive photographs depicting a diverse population of pedestrians. It includes a socio-economic context and next steps which is a call to action for government, business and community sectors to work together. There is a useful list of reference documents at the end.

The title of the guide is Walking for everyone: Making walking wheeling more inclusive and was developed by Living Streets. Images are from the Guide.

Tools for Inclusion

Living Streets Scotland also has a useful Tools for Inclusion publication. This one is a guide on devising an Equality Impact Assessment at local government level. The report looks at the use of Equality Impact Assessment in delivering the obligations of the public sector to address the inclusion of people with disability. The findings of their study show there is still a long way to go. The report has several useful recommendations.

Infrastructure for everyone

Queensland’s Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) commissioned a project to map walking infrastructure for people with disability. The aim was to collect information to help planners create footpaths and crossings for everyone. “Walking” includes people using a mobility device such as a cane, frame or wheelchair.

“People with disability can be left stranded by a missing section of footpath or kerb ramps. Providing infrastructure suitable for people with disability means everyone benefits: people with prams, children, people with an injury, older people and anyone who wants to walk beside someone else comfortably.”

There is more on planning walkable communities and places on the TMR website.

Images from TMR website

Access and inclusion for transport in Queensland

Different government departments are responsible for different aspects of transport services and infrastructure. Consequently, not only do we “mind the gap” at the platform, we have to mind the gaps elsewhere in the system. And these gaps are sometimes just too wide for some people with disability. Queensland’s department of Transport and Main Roads seeks to overcome these gaps with their Access and Inclusion Strategy.

Queensland is a popular tourist destination and accessible tourism needs accessible travel to support this sector. Queensland is also hosting the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games and this has provided an extra reason to get things right.

The Access and Inclusion Strategy aims to create a single integrated network accessible to everyone. The Strategy was developed in consultation with customers, employees and partners, and it covers services, products, information and infrastructure.

The Accessibility and Inclusion Plan 2023-2024 supports the Accessibility and Inclusion Strategy. The Plan has 27 actions across three key pillars: strategy, culture and process.

The web pages for the Strategy and the Plan have a summary and links to alternative formats of the documents including Auslan and a narrated version. There are alternative language summaries and video transcripts as well.

Lucinda Miller asks the same questions any follower of universal design and inclusive practice asks. “Who are our built environments planned for?” Disability access standards are framed around people with physical and sensory disabilities. But what about people with invisible disabilities? Miller puts a neurodivergent lens on public transport and challenges the way policies are ‘decorated’ with the language of access and inclusion.

“What does ‘public’ mean if it does not serve the needs of all people in the community?”

Creating inclusive environments is not only bricks and mortar, but also the belief systems held by society.

Cover image by Miller and Leddie

Miller highlights the gap between the words and deeds in policy documents. There is a chasm in the translation of access and inclusion in addressing invisible disabilities.

The thesis reviews both disability literature and policies and looks at ethical considerations. New South Wales state and local government policy is the basis of the policy review.

The diversity of lived experience must be baked into the design recipe – the planning instruments – rather than bolted on as an afterthought.

Discussion and recommendations

The Disability Discrimination Act and the Disability Transport Standards define disability as both mind and body, but are skewed towards physical disabilities. These documents guide planning instruments and so the diversity of invisible disabilities goes unrecognised in action plans. Consequently, environments are accessible to some, but not inclusive of everyone.

Recommendations include mandating hidden disability training and taking a whole-of-government approach to universal design. A universal design approach should be at everyone stage of projects and include people with lived experience.

The title of the honours thesis is, The Invisible City: Public Transport through Neurodivergent Lenses. Miller’s concluding remarks begin:

“This thesis explored how terminology such as accessibility and inclusive in policy and urban design translate to public transport from neurodivergent perspectives. It revealed that accessibility currently equates to a compliance-based mindset favouring minimum design standards. In contrast, inclusive is less concrete and highly decorated in strategic documents, yet its translation is absent from public space.”

From the abstract

Designing public transport to accommodate people with physical disabilities has gained momentum. The consideration of invisible disabilities, the experiences of neurodivergent individuals, navigating public space is yet to catch up.

This thesis interrogates the terms ‘accessibility’ and ‘inclusive’ in transport planning, and examines how these terms translate to the built environment.

This thesis emphasises the social value of public services in its fundamental role in serving communities. Despite the importance of compliance-based thinking there is a need for a cultural shift that moves beyond minimum standards..

The diversity of lived experiences should be embedded in planning instruments – “baked in, not bolted on”. It accentuates the Transport ‘Customer’ as more than a transactional member of the community.

The design of public transport must reflect the spectrum of disability, where transport journeys are about dignity. All users and their intersecting needs should feel a sense of autonomy over their right to participate in everyday life.

The design of driveways and their impact on footways is often forgotten in street design. That’s because not many people realise that crossing over driveways and roadways at side streets to continue a journey is part of a footway. Consequently, the design of continuous footways has a role to play in creating walkable neighbourhoods.

Living Streets is a UK based charity focused on safe and accessible walking and wheeling. As part of a major project to encourage walking they have produced a report on inclusive design and continuous footways.

The research project included a literature review, GIS mapping, working with professionals, working with people with disability, which led to detailed site work. The issues raised in this project are likely to be similar in other jurisdictions.

Key conclusions are:

• There’s confusion over what constitutes a continuous footway, their design, and what their use aims to achieve
• Many designs being called continuous footways in Britain do not convincingly continue the footway
• Most of the designs called continuous footways in Britain do not provide high levels of pedestrian priority

• The use of these designs can create problems not just for some disabled people, but for a wider group
• Where there are fewer vehicles travelling at lower speeds, it’s easier to establish pedestrian priority
• What we call “real” continuous footways might be more effective in prioritising pedestrians

Many pedestrians find crossing over delivery driveways and car parking driveways unsafe. This is largely due to drivers and pedestrians not knowing who has the right of way.

Design issues

Researchers found that some designers wanted to design for maximum pedestrian safety, but were forced to compromise by “highway engineers”. People who are blind or have low vision are particularly impacted where the footway is not clearly delineated by kerbs or clear transitions. This results in that journeys not made when pedestrians feel unsafe.

Design factors having potential significance for pedestrians are:

• Continuity of main carriageway kerb
• Lack of visible (kerb) radii at the main carriageway
• Continuity of markings (white line)
• Height different and ramp design
• Visual continuity of materials and colour of footway
• Contrast between footway and carriageway colour

Findings from the study

Overall there was a broad failure to prioritise pedestrians at all study sites even where designers were aiming to prioritise pedestrians. Failure to reduce vehicle speeds and use visual cues so that drivers know when they are crossing a footway were two findings.

The title of the Living Streets report is, Inclusive design at continuous footways. There is a separate document of appendices that has many illustrations. The Living Streets website has more about the project and links to further documents.

Living Streets: Literature Review

Living Streets has an additional literature review on continuous footways which is part of the Inclusive Design at Bus Stops and Continuous Footways project. The overall project is to investigate issues for both continuous footways and cycle tracks at bus stops.

One of the findings is that guidance documents suggest benefits for either pedestrians or cyclists but not both. The broader Living Streets project is investigating whether continuous footways can improve the inclusivity of streets. Continuous footways can include raised crossings which gives a physical signal to drivers and cyclists that pedestrians have priority. However, people who are blind or have low vision require consistent application of tactile ground indicators to make this work for everyone.

This is a thorough review of the literature with more to come. You might need to sign up to Living Streets to access their free material.

Most of the research and about accessible transport focuses on people with physical and sensory disabilities. But people with anxiety conditions experience mobility challenges as well. Consequently, they adapt or restrict their movements to minimise anxiety triggers. Sometimes the trigger can begin before leaving home when information about the trip is lacking or inadequate.

Not much is known about the travel behaviours of people with anxiety conditions, but they are complex and varied. However, active travel in familiar surroundings lessens the impact on their anxiety.

People with anxiety disorders can be restricted in their mobility because of their concern about having an anxiety attack away from home. This can be as a driver or passenger in a car, travelling by public transport and even going on foot.

Anxiety disorders take many forms: panic attacks, fear of open spaces, fear of social embarrassment, and specific phobias such as fear of dogs. The researchers look at these and related cognitive conditions as well as different modes of transport triggering anxiety.

It’s complicated

While some reduced their anxiety triggers by driving a car, others experienced higher levels of anxiety as a driver. That also means that for some, catching a bus is preferable, while for others this raises anxiety levels. One of the key factors is the sense of being in control of their situation. Anxiety levels for most interviewees are increased when more than one travel mode is needed

Staying in familiar environments was an important coping strategy for most interviewees. Travelling with a family member of friend also helped. Taking a universal design approach to make transport systems, information and infrastructure can help mitigate anxiety levels. Knowing what to expect and when provides a the necessary sense of control.

Co-design processes should include people with anxiety disorders as well as people with physical and sensory disabilities.

From the abstract

People with anxiety disorders may encounter anxiety triggers when (planning to) travel(ing) to a destination. This affects their ability to actively participate in society.

In-depth interviews were held with 40 Dutch adults which revealed that most interviewees experience a mix of problems in using various transport modes. Interviewees often experience the feeling of being locked up and not being able to escape as anxiety triggers. They perceive the mobility system as complex and overwhelming, while mobility-related information can trigger panic attacks or lower respondents’ stress level.

Coping mechanisms include: avoidance of transport modes; avoidance of highways, bridges, tunnels; remaining in a familiar, predictable environment; asking for social support when travel is necessary; and searching for adequate travel information to use before and during travel. 

Coping with anxiety disorders and mobility-related problems impacts on professional life, including job switching and job relocation. It is almost impossible to develop a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to alleviate this population’s problems. We end with transport interventions that could benefit people with anxiety disorders.

The title of the paper is Moving around with an anxiety disorder.

This study brings to light some of the hidden barriers to mobility that are experienced by people with anxiety disorders. It adds to the literature on barriers experienced by people with physical and sensory impairments.

There is an expectation that everyone will be self-reliant and keep up with the latest technology. But what happens to people who don’t keep up or can’t? Digital technologies have quickly found their way into pubic transport systems. But the digitisation of public transport can lead to unequal access.

We need to broaden the conversation from accessibility to inclusion. It has to go beyond people with mobility and sensory impairment captured by access standards. The digital divide is too complicated to be addressed by a single solution.

According to recent research, there are multiple groups of individuals who are likely to be impacted by the digitisation of public transport. If individuals experience difficulty or can’t get support, they may stop using public transport altogether. But it is these groups that often rely on public transport the most. So, what can be done to mitigate this?

A team of researchers in the Netherland set about finding some answers. Their study found more than one answer was needed, and that they needed to complement each other. They uncovered fourteen measures, categorised into five perspectives. Briefly they are:

• Design – strive for universal design
• Educational- provide courses
• Persuasive – raise awareness
• Social – provide non-digital alternatives
• Governance – adopt a long term approach

The research paper explains these five perspectives in more detail using the fourteen different measures. Not all measures need to be enacted by all stakeholders in the transport system. Clearly, it depends on what part of the system people are working in. However, universal design is the underpinning perspective.

The title of the article is, Fostering an inclusive public transport system in the digital era: An interdisciplinary approach.

From the conclusion

A focus on an inclusive design from the start showing the added value of digital products and services is needed. In addition, providing courses, specialist products and non-digital alternatives contribute to fostering a more inclusive public transport system. The role of public transport staff ought not to be underestimated by public transport authorities. Workers at the interface between the system and users play a key role in the digital transition.

Last but not least is the governance of digitalisation in the sector to mitigate unequal access. Nevertheless, there is only so much that the transport sector can do. Tackling systemic issues that underlie digital barriers like poverty and low literacy is crucially relevant.

From the abstract

Digitalisation is making its way into public transport (PT) services. Policy approaches to ensure that such services remain inclusive are at best fragmented, at worst non-existent. This study looks existing initiatives and lessons learnt in the transport sector, and takes inspiration from other fields with a more mature understanding of digitalisation.

Twenty-two experts working either in the PT sector or in other sectors such as healthcare and public administration were interviewed. We conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all, but a series of complementary strategies to address digital inequality.

A focus on an inclusive design, specialist products and non-digital alternatives are the basis of a more inclusive PT system in the era of digitisation.

The role of the public transport staff is essential in digital transformations. Acknowledging the issue of unequal access to PT due to digitalisation at a decision-making level is essential.

While the present study was conducted in the Netherlands, the presented measures can be applied in other countries by stakeholders working on inclusive digital transformations in (public) transport services.

Asking the right questions is the key to getting the right answers. But new questions require a new way of looking at problems. Bridget Doran does that in a white paper on transport equity. She argues that investment in equity will have payoffs for the climate as well as people.

“It is remarkable that in 2023 we do not measure the return on investment in transport by asking who is, and who is not, accessing what they need. However, we are beginning to understand that different people have different needs of transport. An equitable approach is about continuing to learn about who has what needs, and working to meet them.”

New ways to measure progress

Councils spend a lot of money on maintaining streets. Asset management priorities rarely consider who benefits from quality infrastructure. For example, more people who use wheelchairs and mobility devices live in poorer communities. So fixing footpaths in these areas is a good investment in equity. A focused accessibility audit can identify where people can and cannot go depending on their abilities.

Asking people where they are and are not going at a local level is essential. In this way councils can identify priorities for upgraded road crossings and other street improvements. Transport planners use crash data to justify infrastructure investment. Now they should use access data to prioritise investment in equity.

“Strong policy matters. If investment in equity is not made for good reason, it can be delayed, removed or watered-down for political reasons or when other objectives are introduced with stronger rationale.”

Image from the A Just Now white paper.

Summary of recommendations

A strong policy vision with equitable participation made an explicit goal of investment is a key recommendation. This is required nationally, regionally and at a local level.

Promoting the needs of people with most to gain from investment, and working to promote low-carbon means of access, will result in the most tangible change. “We have to challenge ourselves to want it.” Image from A Just Now white paper.

The title of the white paper is A Just Now: Equity and transport in a changing climate.

Transport innovation: more of the same?

There’s a long gap between new ideas in transportation and when passengers get to experience them. And there are lots of stakeholders within transport systems. Regulators, designers, manufacturers, policy-makers, local and state governments and let’s not forget the travelling public. With so many stakeholders and things to think about, accessibility and inclusion could get missed. So will transport innovation be more of the same?

Apart from interstate trains and buses, public transportation systems are the responsibility of each state and territory. This poses issues of inconsistency, particularly in relation to accessibility. The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) recommends greater coordination and national goals for future transport systems. It’s good to see accessibility and inclusion in the mix. 

Different stakeholders want different things

• Regulators want to see reduced emissions and congestion, increased efficiency, and greater accessibility and social equity.
• Transport providers want greater efficiency, capacity and market share. 
• Passengers was increased usefulness, accessibility, inclusivity, comfort, convenience and safety. Then they want reduced price.

Innovation is in the eye of the beholder. The drivers for innovation were identified as, social and environmental, what passengers want, resource constraints, regulatory gaps and political imperatives.

The AHURI research reviews international practice in the context of Australian conditions. Policy discussion in Australia has not moved on from practices set in the late 1990s. Innovation is about emerging modes of transport. These include trying to lessen car dependency by improving public transport, and integrating transport nodes with activity centres. 

The research paper goes on to discuss policy development options, issues for institutions, policy gaps and opportunities, and the role of the state in transport innovation. 

The title of the report is, “Innovative responses to urban transportation: current practice in Australian cities” There are two documents – the 12 page executive summary and the 130 page full report. 

The research questions

Four research questions guided the approach:

1. How are large-scale processes of technological, economic, social and environmental change affecting travel patterns and transport systems in Australian cities?

2. What strategic approaches to configuring infrastructure, technology, regulation and design are Australian metropolitan transport programs and policies adopting?

3. How do Australian metropolitan transport programs and policies compare to relevant international examples in terms of strategic approaches to technological, economic, social and environmental changes?

4. What forward positions should Australian metropolitan transport programs and policies consider in response to drivers of major transport system change and what further research is needed to inform this positioning?

What factors should be considered when designing accessible autonomous vehicles? A collaborative effort by academics and policy makers found some answers. They looked at the data on people with disability to come up with some practical information.

Cumulative disadvantage faced by people with disability affects their physical, financial, health and wellbeing. One particular challenge is easy access to transportation.

Academics from the Queensland University of Technology and staff at the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads have embarked on a long term project. The first phase is a data review and surveys with disability user groups. The second stage will involve detailed benchmarking of vehicle designs. A vehicle prototype will be developed in the third stage.

Numerical data

Articles relating to human participants gave specific recommendations for the physical measures of a person’s size and functional capabilities (anthropometrics). This information is essential for informing the design of vehicles. The information includes:

• wheeled mobility percentiles
• clear floor space requirements
• recommended ramp angles
• interior layout configurations
• door dimensions and placement
• ceiling heights

The authors note that this particular study focused on mobility users and explored user preferences for interior layout and configurations. Updating Australian standards and design guidelines is another task to undertake.

A conference paper reports on the first stages of the research project. It’s titled, On the Road to Enhancing Transportation Access for People with Disabilities: A Data Review of Accessible Autonomous Vehicles Research.

From the abstract

The overall study focuses on improving transportation and mobility access for people with disabilities. AAVs can potentially provide accessible transport options, leading to improved access to medical care, employment, social inclusion, and safety.

The data review identifies key design information for accessible AVs. However, there is a need for more co-design prototyping, analysis of standards, and current design best practices. This review provides a comprehensive set of design principles for a AVs that caters to the diverse needs of PwDs.

Technology, transportation and inclusion

One fifth of all car journeys in the UK are taken by people with disability, and one third of those are taken as a passenger. So, connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) provide a great opportunity to create independent travel.

While CAVs are good in theory, there are many pitfalls in making them fully accessible. This is where policy and regulations have a strong role to play.

A 2020 article on the Open Inclusion website has a podcast and a video of two transportation specialists. They discuss the amount of change going on in the transportation industry. This is good in terms of being able to provide real time data on services, and other information such as station platform lifts being out of order. Electrification and automation are the other major changes, and opportunities for the private sector to provide services.

There is more useful information on this website on practical aspects of inclusion for people with disability: smart cities, inclusive travel, and universal design. It includes a link to the autonomous shuttle bus in an aged care village in Canberra. 

Accessible vehicles for all

A paper from the 11th International Congress on Transportation Research addresses the research gaps for accessible autonomous vehicles. The conclusions list the gaps, but in the end a universal design approach (co-design) will solve them all. Indeed, the researchers recommend including people with disability and older people in design processes.

The title of the paper is Accessibility of Persons with Reduced Mobility: the Age of Autonomous Vehicles and Accessible EU.

Lifelong mobility with automation

The arrival of the self-driving car could be life-changing for people who have been unable to own and/or drive a car. In their article, Towards Life-Long Mobility: Accessible Transportation with Automation, the authors explore some of the challenges and opportunities for automated vehicles for people usually excluded from driving. They conclude that the future of automated vehicles for currently excluded people seems to be promising.

From the abstract

Little research has been conducted on inclusiveness of traditionally excluded populations from driving. Even though we may envision a future where everyone can drive with perfect automation, the problem will not be that simple. we need to scrutinize all the design considerations – not only each population’s characteristics (capabilities and limitations), but also the entire system, technological limitations, and task environments. This paper explores challenges and opportunities of automated vehicles for multiple populations, including people with various difficulties/disabilities, older adults, and children.

Electric vehicles and wheelchair users

Good to see designers thinking about customising for the independent travel of wheelchair users. The designers claim that you can wheel yourself into the vehicle and drive yourself without the need for assistance from others.

This vehicle is available in the UK. We might have to wait for more electric vehicles to appear in Australia before this option is available here. See the website for dimensions and other information and more pictures. 

Transport, Mobility and Society

The Centre for Transport and Society has a mission to understand the interactions between mobility, lifestyles and society. This includes equity in transport and mobility.

Use the search facility to find projects and papers.

Making public transport attractive is an important aspect of encouraging people not to take the car. But it’s not all about making public transport better. A person’s life situation, family make-up, and age can also influence car use. So it’s not just about the infrastructure or service quality as a Nordic study found out.

The car is the preferred mode of transport by many older people. Unsuitable routes and times, having to stand, crowding and long walking distances are some of their reasons.

Younger people are more likely to use different modes for the one journey. They use a mix of cycling, driving and public transport. However, if they have a drivers licence they will use the car more than those without.

Families with young children also prefer the car especially if the transpsort mode is not physically accessible. Older children are subject to parent preferences for driving them to school. This is particularly the case if the distance to school is significant. However, as children grow older, they are more encouraged to walk to school if they feel safe and the area is “walkable”.

Distance

Distance between home and workplace or the city centre impacts travel choice. The probability of using public transport increases when living five minutes or less from a public transport stop. But this was when the frequency was no more than 20 minutes between departures.

Travellers dislike walking, waiting, and transferring more than spending time in their car. This is especially the case if the wait takes place in an unpleasant environment. Having to transfer more than once was also unattractive.

Station facilities were more important than on-board comfort for shorter trips. Unexpected and unpredictable delays were not viewed well, which means reliability is a key factor. Overall, travellers should be seen in their sub groups because their preferences are decided by different factors. This should be reflected in any marketing campaigns for active travel.

In essence, reliability and frequency are important attributes for making public transport attractive. After all, the car gives both. Car users need to be persuaded that there are benefits for them.

For people unable to afford a car, or physically unable to drive a car, public transport is essential. Norway has made considerable efforts to make their public transport system accessible.

The title of the article is, Factors that make public transport systems attractive: a review of travel preferences and travel mode choices.

From the abstract

Background: Many regions worldwide are struggling to shift from private cars to more sustainable transport modes. There is a lack of a comprehensive overview of the factors that make public transport systems attractive.

Aim: This review aims to offer insights into factors influencing travel behaviour and demand for public transport. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review with a Nordic focus regarding public transport preferences and travel mode choices. The focus on these countries is because they have ambitious policies for reducing emissions in the transport sector.

Methods: The literature review encompassed international literature reviews and included an examination of results from the Nordic countries.

Findings: Reliability and frequency are important factors for creating an attractive public transport supply. However, there is only limited evidence about the impact of improvements in these attributes on public transport demand. This needs more research. This review highlights the importance of understanding the underlying motivations for choosing travel modes. Recommendations include further investigation to understand the attractiveness of public transport supply.