城市交通规划的可接受性:书面咨询回应的专题分析

IF 3.2 3区 工程技术 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Transport & Health Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jth.2024.101956
Kate Garrott , Benjamin Hawkins , Jenna Panter
{"title":"城市交通规划的可接受性:书面咨询回应的专题分析","authors":"Kate Garrott ,&nbsp;Benjamin Hawkins ,&nbsp;Jenna Panter","doi":"10.1016/j.jth.2024.101956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Policy intervention to reduce car use is required for environmental and health benefits. Multi-component interventions with both positive (i.e. ‘carrot’) and negative (i.e. ‘stick’) strategies are effective in promoting modal shift, but ‘stick’ strategies are less acceptable and often abandoned before implementation. This study aims to understand the arguments surrounding policy acceptability for a multi-component transport plan including both carrot and stick strategies in Cambridge, UK.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A series of public consultations between 2017 and 2022 informed transport priorities and provided feedback on a range of proposals. The final public consultation sought views on detailed proposals to expand the bus network and invest in sustainable travel infrastructure funded by the implementation of a road user charge. Following the consultation, concessions were made to the plans and they were later abandoned due to a lack of political consensus. We downloaded and analysed written responses generated during the consultation to identify arguments influencing policy acceptance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 115 included responses, we identified five themes: (1) support for the overall vision of the transport strategy; (2) mixed support on proposals (favouring carrots but not sticks); (3) concerns about consultation process; (4) concerns about deliverability of proposals; and (5) the effects of the scheme on transport, inequalities and economic growth.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our findings suggest that policy design and communication should focus on perceived effectiveness and equity and building trust among agencies ahead of policy proposals to support the effective implementation of travel policy solutions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47838,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transport & Health","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 101956"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of a city-wide transport plan: A thematic analysis of written consultation responses\",\"authors\":\"Kate Garrott ,&nbsp;Benjamin Hawkins ,&nbsp;Jenna Panter\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jth.2024.101956\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Policy intervention to reduce car use is required for environmental and health benefits. Multi-component interventions with both positive (i.e. ‘carrot’) and negative (i.e. ‘stick’) strategies are effective in promoting modal shift, but ‘stick’ strategies are less acceptable and often abandoned before implementation. This study aims to understand the arguments surrounding policy acceptability for a multi-component transport plan including both carrot and stick strategies in Cambridge, UK.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A series of public consultations between 2017 and 2022 informed transport priorities and provided feedback on a range of proposals. The final public consultation sought views on detailed proposals to expand the bus network and invest in sustainable travel infrastructure funded by the implementation of a road user charge. Following the consultation, concessions were made to the plans and they were later abandoned due to a lack of political consensus. We downloaded and analysed written responses generated during the consultation to identify arguments influencing policy acceptance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 115 included responses, we identified five themes: (1) support for the overall vision of the transport strategy; (2) mixed support on proposals (favouring carrots but not sticks); (3) concerns about consultation process; (4) concerns about deliverability of proposals; and (5) the effects of the scheme on transport, inequalities and economic growth.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our findings suggest that policy design and communication should focus on perceived effectiveness and equity and building trust among agencies ahead of policy proposals to support the effective implementation of travel policy solutions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47838,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Transport & Health\",\"volume\":\"40 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101956\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Transport & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140524002020\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transport & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140524002020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了环境和健康利益,需要进行政策干预以减少汽车使用。积极(即“胡萝卜”)和消极(即“大棒”)策略的多成分干预措施在促进模式转变方面是有效的,但“大棒”策略不太可接受,往往在实施之前就放弃了。本研究旨在了解围绕英国剑桥多组分运输计划的政策可接受性的争论,包括胡萝卜和大棒策略。方法在2017年至2022年期间进行了一系列公众咨询,了解了交通运输的优先事项,并就一系列建议提供了反馈。在最后的公众谘询中,政府就扩大巴士网络和投资可持续交通基础设施的详细建议征询公众意见,这些建议由道路使用者收费提供资金。在磋商之后,各方对这些计划作出了让步,但由于缺乏政治共识,这些计划后来被放弃。我们下载并分析了咨询期间产生的书面答复,以确定影响政策接受的论据。结果从115份回复中,我们确定了五个主题:(1)支持运输策略的整体愿景;(2)对提案的支持不一(喜欢胡萝卜而不是大棒);(三)对咨询过程的关注;(4)对方案可交付性的担忧;(5)该方案对交通、不平等和经济增长的影响。结论研究结果表明,政策设计和沟通应侧重于感知有效性和公平性,并在政策建议之前建立机构之间的信任,以支持旅行政策解决方案的有效实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Acceptability of a city-wide transport plan: A thematic analysis of written consultation responses

Introduction

Policy intervention to reduce car use is required for environmental and health benefits. Multi-component interventions with both positive (i.e. ‘carrot’) and negative (i.e. ‘stick’) strategies are effective in promoting modal shift, but ‘stick’ strategies are less acceptable and often abandoned before implementation. This study aims to understand the arguments surrounding policy acceptability for a multi-component transport plan including both carrot and stick strategies in Cambridge, UK.

Methods

A series of public consultations between 2017 and 2022 informed transport priorities and provided feedback on a range of proposals. The final public consultation sought views on detailed proposals to expand the bus network and invest in sustainable travel infrastructure funded by the implementation of a road user charge. Following the consultation, concessions were made to the plans and they were later abandoned due to a lack of political consensus. We downloaded and analysed written responses generated during the consultation to identify arguments influencing policy acceptance.

Results

From 115 included responses, we identified five themes: (1) support for the overall vision of the transport strategy; (2) mixed support on proposals (favouring carrots but not sticks); (3) concerns about consultation process; (4) concerns about deliverability of proposals; and (5) the effects of the scheme on transport, inequalities and economic growth.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that policy design and communication should focus on perceived effectiveness and equity and building trust among agencies ahead of policy proposals to support the effective implementation of travel policy solutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
196
审稿时长
69 days
期刊最新文献
Acceptability of a city-wide transport plan: A thematic analysis of written consultation responses Does mental health influence commuters’ mode choice? A cross-sectional assessment from the Netherlands Understanding COVID-19 pandemic-related shifts in active commute patterns: Insights from employees of a Canadian university Neighborhood facilities and physical self-efficacy of older adults: The mediating role of daily activity opportunities An exploratory study of the transportation modes associated with community participation among adults with serious mental illnesses
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1