Scenarios for a Sustainable Society: Car Transport Systems and the Sociology of Embedded Technologies Project ‘Scenesustech’
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
EMPLOYMENT RESEARCH CENTRE Department of Sociology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland http://www.tcd.ie/erc/ Scenarios for a sustainable society: Car transport systems and the sociology of embedded technologies Project ‘SceneSusTech’ January 1998- December 2000 Final report of project SOE1-CT97-1071 (Deliverable number: 5.3) Funded under the Targeted Socio-Economic Research Programme (TSER) Directorate General for Science, Research and Development EUROPEAN COMMISSION Project co-ordinator: James Wickham Employment Research Centre (ERC) Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Partners: Institute of Urban and Rural Sociology, National Centre for Social Research (IURS) Athens, Greece Istituto Ricerche Economiche e Sociali (IRES) Rome, Italy Unit of Social Policy (USP) University of Jyväsklylä, Finland Subcontractor: Centre for the Study of Environmental Change (CSEC), University of Lancaster, UK. Project duration: 2 years Date of issue of this report 20 September, 2002 The research team Athens (National Centre for Social Research, Athens): D. Balourdos, A. Mouriki, K. Sakellaropoulos*, E. Theodoropolos, K. Tsakiris Bologna (IRES, Rome): E. Battalgini*, F. Farina Dublin (ERC, Trinity College Dublin): M. Lohan, J. Wickham* Helsinki (USP, University of Jyväskylä): M. Javela*, T. Rajanti * Team manager SceneSusTech: Final report Abstract It is clear that the continued expansion of car usage in European cities is environmentally unsustainable. If this is so, it is important to discover to what extent and in what way the car has become essential to life in European cities, and to develop policies for reducing such ‘car dependency’. The project took four European cities as case studies. Two are car dominated and ‘bad practice’ cities: Athens and Dublin. Two have restrained car travel and are ‘best practice’ cities: Bologna and Helsinki. Within each of these four cities three local areas were selected for detailed study: an inner city ‘yuppified’ area, a low income or working class suburban area, a middle class suburban area. The research began by using aggregate statistics to compare the case study cities with other cities in Europe and the world. This showed a substantial variation in car usage between cities. Within Europe rich cities have lower levels of car usage. The first fieldwork stage of the research explained how Athens and Dublin have become car dependent, and conversely how Bologna and Helsinki have become cities that constrain car dependency. This involved a historical analysis of the ‘technological trajectory’ of the car system in each city, and a political sociology of contemporary decision-making. This showed that a necessary (but hardly sufficient) condition for tackling car dependency is an effective city level government. Fieldwork in each locality involved three separate methods: ethnographic research, a questionnaire based sample survey, and focus groups. This research showed that car usage is doubly contextualised by the immediate locality and by the city itself. Thus the study of working class peripheral housing areas showed that in car dependent cities those without access to car transport are often socially isolated and lack access to employment and facilities. This is not the case in cities which have controlled car dependency. The study of affluent inner city areas showed that only in cities where car dependency is controlled can re-urbanisation substantially reduce car ownership and car usage. Finally in middle class suburbs higher density building does not of itself reduce car dependency, while a good city wide public transport system reduces car usage even in ‘car based’ suburbs. The research ended with a scenario-building exercise with transport experts and policy makers in each city. Experts were clear as to the measures needed to reduce car dependency, but in most cities were sceptical whether they would be introduced. Car usage in cities can be reduced, but this requires an integrated public transport system which only city governments with real power seem able to develop. Such a system can contribute to social inclusion and indeed to urban citizenship. Developing alternatives to the private car (public transport, walking, cycling) involves enhancing people’s trust in and knowledge of these alternatives. i SceneSusTech: Final report Preface The research which is reported here was completed in early 2000. This final report was delayed partly because of an over-ambitious delivery schedule (a problem discussed in more detail in Chapter 2), but largely because of a long illness on my part. The delay has also meant that the writing of this report has been more of an individual process than originally planned. However, the research project itself was very much a team effort, with the concepts and methodologies continually refined in ongoing discussions, formal and informal, face-to-face and by e-mail. Hopefully this final report does some justice to the enthusiasm, commitment and professionalism with which the team as a whole carried out its work. James Wickham 20 September, 2002 ii SceneSusTech: Final report Contents LIST OF CHARTS ....................................................................................................VI LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................... VII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................VIII INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................VIII RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................VIII RESEARCH RESULTS ....................................................................................................X CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................................XVI POLICY IMPLICATIONS............................................................................................XVIII INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT 1 CHAPTER 1 SOCIAL RESEARCH ON CARS......................................................3 1.1. SUSTAINABILITY AND CAR TRANSPORT...............................................................3 1.2. THE CAR IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT ........................................................................5 1.3. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF AUTOMOBILITY: COHESION AND INCLUSION...............9 1.4. POLITICAL CHOICES AND CAR SYSTEMS ............................................................14 CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH STRATEGY AND METHODOLOGY....................24 2.1. LEVELS OF ANALYSIS ........................................................................................24 2.2. RESEARCH METHODS: PLANS AND REALITIES ....................................................28 2.3. CONCLUSION: LIMITATIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS.............................................39 CHAPTER 3 A TALE OF FOUR CITIES.............................................................41 3.1. FOUR CITIES ......................................................................................................41 3.2. THE CITIES IN CONTEXT.....................................................................................42 3.3. TRAJECTORIES OF CAR DEPENDENCY ................................................................46 3.4. CONCLUSION: TECHNOLOGICAL TRAJECTORIES AND SWITCHING POINTS .........53 CHAPTER 4 MAKING CAR DECISIONS ...........................................................55 4.1. THE CASE STUDY DECISIONS .............................................................................56 4.2. THE ACTORS AND THEIR ORIENTATIONS............................................................59 4.3. THE FORMS OF DECISION-MAKING.....................................................................66 4.4. CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................68 CHAPTER 5 TWELVE AREAS IN FOUR CITIES..............................................70 5.1. THE AREAS IN BRIEF ..........................................................................................71 5.2. CAR USAGE AND CAR DEPENDENCY IN THE MIDDLE CLASS SUBURBS ................73 5.3. CAR DEPENDENCY AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN WORKING CLASS AREAS ............78 5.4. REURBANISATION WITHOUT THE CAR? TRANSPORT RICH INNER CITY AREAS...81 5.5. CONCLUSION: THE CITY EFFECT ON THE AREAS ................................................86 iii SceneSusTech: Final report CHAPTER 6 INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY: SURVEY RESULTS.........................88 6.1. MODES OF MOBILITY IN THE LOCALITIES...........................................................88 6.2. JOURNEYS .........................................................................................................95 6.3. CHOICE AND CAR DEPENDENCY ........................................................................99 6.4. LOCAL MOBILITY AND SOCIAL COHESION........................................................104 6.5. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................106 CHAPTER 7 LOCAL MOBILITY EXPERIENCE IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT: FOCUS GROUPS RESULTS ...........................................................109 7.1. STRUCTURES OF EVERYDAY MOBILITY............................................................110 7.2. THE MEANING OF MOBILITY ............................................................................119 CHAPTER 8 SCENARIOS OF MOBILITY .......................................................125