TAPAS.network | 16 May 2022 | Editorial Opinion | Peter Stonham

Not quite what we planned for - but still an asset

Peter Stonham

IF THE PAST is not always a good guide to what will be happening in the future, the present is not an awful lot better.

We live in unstable times, and the current state of the world is not one of comfortable equilibrium, or certainty on which to build our plans.

Not that it ever really was so in modern times, apart from a few relatively brief and tranquil epochs. One thing that looking backwards can reveal, of course, is how we were once anticipating things might pan out – and the closeness of that to actuality.

From such a ‘forecast future’, frozen in time, we can make a reality check to learn how right – and how wrong – we can be. And what we missed. And maybe why.

quotations 5

Those responsible for transport investment are burdened with particularly critical and sticky decision-making about the future.

In the event, the pattern of demand has much changed since the plan was agreed by all concerned – including, critically, the funders – nearly two decades ago. And even since the construction work began in earnest 12 years ago, when the effective point was passed of not going back, or even much modifying what was to be provided.

The substantial sunk costs – and years of disruption too – mean cancellation is hardly an option, financially or politically, for schemes of this kind.

Now we are at the sharp end of the project, and about to see what the user reaction will be. It is pretty certain the nature of travel behaviour, and the economic and social impacts, will be significantly different to those that were set out in the plan.

It was not that the forecasts were wrong – they might well have been right at the time – but that the world, inevitably, moves on in ways that arguably no-one could truly foresee.

So, as well as back-calibrating what it was that we all missed, and how a more ‘agile’ approach might have made it easier to adjust on the way, the challenge now is to make the most of the asset that now exists rather than still striving to achieve the original outcome.

Here again, transport is not very flexible in that regard. Neither the tunnels, track nor trains can be practically re-deployed.

Planning and building them is challenging and rewarding for thousands of people. But now things move to making the most of them, and to come up with innovative ways of presenting new options to potential users and leveraging the opportunity that the asset presents in the current environment.

Perhaps surprisingly, then, there is not much of a tradition in transport of pulling together talented teams to squeeze the best performance from what now exists when such major public projects go live.

For an analogy, we might take the mobile phone; designed to enable us to make phone calls on the move, the use of the devices is now not primarily for people talking to one another at all. But no one bemoans the awful mistake of the original inventors – they opened the door to undreamt of innovation in communications!

The Writer and Philosopher George Santayana, popularly known for his aphorism “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”, also usefully suggested “We must respect the past, remembering that it was once all that was humanly possible.” Wise words indeed. 

Peter Stonham is the Editorial Director of TAPAS Network

This article was first published in LTT magazine, LTT845, 16 May 2022.

d2-20220516-1
taster
Read more articles by Peter Stonham
All change for the trains and buses - but will it deliver?
PUBLIC UTILITY OR PRIVATE ENTERPRISE' is an issue of both very philosophical and practical dimensions After the Second World War, the 1945 Labour government took the view that the railways should be state owned and run, and nationalised them- and that was how they stayed for Fifty years, under governments of both colours, albeit with not-inconsiderable pruning under the Beeching plan of the early 1960s. That ownership model meant a considerable public body- the British Railways board- was required, not to mention a matching division of people in the controlling government Ministry.
Transport – not just carbon hungry
IT IS GENERALLY ACCEPTED that transport-related activity accounts for between 25-30 percent of global CO2 emissions, and the sector is not yet significantly reducing that very material effect on global warming. There is considerable data and research knowledge about the sector’s carbon footprint and contribution to climate change. This is normally related directly to its fossil fuel consumption. Alongside this, transport is also indisputably a very significant consumer of other finite material resources on the planet, yet very few figures are available for this part of its impacts.
Should growth really ‘trump everything’?
AS TAPAS has already noted in earlier Editorial Opinions, the Government’s driving ambition to achieve economic growth is sweeping all else before it, or rather, in many respects, arguably sweeping other important things out of the way. This applies across its activities, including of course transport.
Read more articles on TAPAS
NTS 2022 records continuing impacts of the Pandemic – but dominance of car still shows through
Travel patterns were dramatically changed by the COVID 19 Pandemic, and the restrictions it brought. The new National Travel Survey results for 2020 show a further revival against the very low trip levels of 2020 and 2021, but still below 2019. John Siraut examines the data, and considers whether it indicates a permanent new position, in which travel activity is lower, and car users and non users have very contrasting types of trip making.
Making the right case, Using the right tools?
THERE’S QUITE A HEAD of steam building up for a long hard look at how transport investment fits into the UK’s wider economic, social and sustainability strategy. Plenty of examples are cropping up that illustrate the issues - and they are complex and cross cutting. In the present landscape there is, moreover, a big danger of different agencies and authorities ‘doing their own thing’ and claiming they are ‘meeting important objectives’ that might well be true - but could equally well be inhibiting or making impossible the delivery of others.
Plenty of judgement, but not enough evidence
THE PAST FEW WEEKS have seen a high-profile debate about the effectiveness and benefits of a number of important transport policy measures, most specifically the London Ultra Low Emission Zone, and other Clean Air Zones; 20mph urban speed limits; and Low Traffic Neighbourhoods. Alongside this we have had the benefit of detaled analysis of the the Elizabeth Line which provides a best practice case study of monitoring and evaluation with important potential consequences for forecasting the responses to future schemes.