Public Attitudes to Transport DfT's On-line Citizens' Panel

GfK NOP

Public Attitudes to Transport

DfT’s On-line Citizens’ Panel

A report for:

Department for

Transport

Provided by: GfK Consumer Services

Date: June 2008

Your contact: David Rodgers

Phone: +44 (0)20 7890 9779, Fax: +44 (0)20 7890 9744

e-Mail: [email protected]

http://www.dft.gov.uk/

GfK NOP

Table of Contents

1 Executive summary...................................................................................................... 1 2 Introduction................................................................................................................. 9

2.1 Background ............................................................................................................9

2.2 Research Aims and Objectives................................................................................ 10

2.3 Research Methodology .......................................................................................... 10 3 Panel Profile ............................................................................................................... 13 4 Transport Needs......................................................................................................... 14

4.1 The most important things required of a transport system........................................ 14

4.2 How DfT’s five strategic goals align with transport needs.......................................... 17 5 Challenges for transport policy makers ..................................................................... 21

5.1 Climate Change..................................................................................................... 22 5.1.1 Summary ............................................................................................................. 22

5.1.2 Key challenges to achieve this goal......................................................................... 24

5.2 Competitiveness and productivity ........................................................................... 34 5.2.1 Summary ............................................................................................................. 34


5.3 Equality................................................................................................................ 60 5.3.1 Summary ............................................................................................................. 60


5.4 Health, safety & security........................................................................................ 67 5.4.1 Summary ............................................................................................................. 67


5.5 Quality of life ........................................................................................................ 82 5.5.1 Summary ............................................................................................................. 82


6 Policies themes that transcend different goals ......................................................... 96 7 Travel Behaviour ...................................................................................................... 101

7.1 Travel method used in last 12 months .................................................................. 101

7.2 Frequency of travel ............................................................................................. 103

GfK NOP

7.3 Purpose of most frequent journey ........................................................................ 104

7.4 Main method of travel on most frequent journey ................................................... 105

7.5 Most important need when making most frequent journey...................................... 106 8 Appendices............................................................................................................... 109

8.1 Profile of the panellists who answered each questionnaire section........................... 109

8.2 Questionnaire ..................................................................................................... 110

8.3 Analytical methodology and sampling ................................................................... 124 8.3.1 Panel Recruitment............................................................................................... 124

8.4 Maximising Panel Participation At Future Waves..................................................... 127

GfK NOP

1 Executive summary

The Department for Transport (DfT) currently undertakes a range of research to understand public

attitudes to and perceptions of transport and transport policy. To complement the existing evidence

base, DfT commissioned GfK NOP to establish the “DfT On-line Citizens’ Panel” to seek feedback from

members of the public specifically on the Department’s five strategic goals, published in a policy

document “Towards a Sustainable Transport System”1:

To address climate change by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other green house

gasses

To maximise the competitiveness and productivity of the UK economy

To promote greater equality of transport opportunity for all citizens, with the desired outcome

of achieving a fairer society

To contribute to better health and life-expectancy through reducing the risk of death, injury or

illness arising from transport and promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health

To improve quality of life for transport users and non-users, including through a healthy natural

environment with the desired outcome of an improved well-being for all

Email invitations were sent out to a random selection of GfK NOP online panel members, from which a

total of 606 members were recruited to become part of the Citizens’ Panel. Recruitment quotas were

set on age, gender, region and urban/rural location to ensure that the panel reflected the population of

England and Wales as far as possible.

It is important to note that the panel is not representative of the population (of England and Wales) in

a statistical sense and it is acknowledged that the research is restricted by its methodology and as a

result is biased towards on-line panel members. However, in order to create a sample that best reflects

the population of England and Wales, the sample was designed around key quotas set on the following

demographics: Region, Age, Gender and Urban vs. Rural.

1 Towards a Sustainable Transport System: Supporting Economic Growth in a Low Carbon World, available on DfT

website at http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/strategy/transportstrategy/pdfsustaintranssystem.pdf

DfT Citizens’ Panel Wave 1 Report 1

GfK NOP

One of the key roles of the panel will be to act as an important balance to the views expressed by

“experts” as part of the wider stakeholder engagement. Furthermore, as most of the survey questions

were asked in an open-ended format, it has enabled panel members to write – in their own words – the

issues they consider most important without the confines of pre-coded responses.

The panel members were asked specifically to describe what they thought the most important things

were which they wanted the transport system to do for them. Reassuringly although panel members

were not asked explicitly to reflect on whether the 5 goals were the right ones, the feedback does not

suggest that the DfT’s Towards a Sustainable Transport System strategy has missed anything that is

uppermost in peoples’ minds. The things panellists most wanted from transport are set out in the

figure below.

Figure 1: Hierarchy of transport needs

Fast

Safe

Affordable / cheaper

Convenient & easily accessible

Reliable, regular & timely

Fast

Safe




Comfort & cleanliness

This illustrates a hierarchy of transport needs represented as a pyramid consisting of six different levels

(a design based on Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs proposed in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human

Motivation). The most basic need is shown at the bottom of the pyramid - a reliable, regular and timely

transport system. The higher needs in the pyramid only come into focus when the lower needs are

satisfied, so that once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower level will

no longer be prioritised. However, if a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual will re-

prioritise these needs by focusing attention again on the unfulfilled level.


GfK NOP

So, the most basic need expressed was that transport must be reliable, regular and timely.

Panellists want public transport services to arrive punctually and predictably and to deliver them to their

destinations with fewer delays. Private vehicle users also wanted minimised delays. Convenient and

accessible public transport was next most frequently mentioned, meaning having bus stops and

train stations within easy walking distance from people’s homes and from work places and shopping

and leisure facilities, as well as the assurance that transport modes would be easily accessible for

groups such as elderly travellers, people with a disability and parents travelling with babies and

children. Many panel members said they thought public transport was too expensive at present, and

needed to be cheaper and more affordable. They compared public transport provision to car travel

and expressed the view that public transport definitely should be cheaper than making the same

journey by car. Safe travel was the next issue, and this theme covered safety from other travellers

who might be violent, criminals or terrorists; assured safety from accidents when on public transport,

and ensuring that road travel is as safe as possible through more appropriate, usually tighter,

regulations on speeding and dangerous driving. Fast, efficient and well integrated transport, with

more direct bus and train routes was the next level of desire. Finally, at the highest level panel

members wanted transport that was comfortable and clean. Comfort was predominantly seen in

terms of having a seat but also in terms of not standing in very packed carriages and buses. Ideally,

panellists wanted to enjoy a pleasant stress-free journey in a clean and comfortable environment,

without over-crowding. This would help satisfy and retain current public transport travellers and some

car driving panellists also said this would help attract them out of their cars.

Broadly speaking the goals that the Department has identified are aligned with these needs. Perhaps

the most challenging link to make between the goals and consumer needs is in the area of Climate

Change. When we asked individuals about their ‘transport needs’, climate change came low on their list

of priorities (one in ten mentioning spontaneously). However, it should be borne in mind that the

question asked of panel members was about their ‘transport needs’, and therefore perhaps this finding

is not surprising. Indeed, it could be argued that it is encouraging that as many as one in ten

mentioned the issue of climate change when considering their needs of a transport system. It is

apparent, though, from these responses that many will only start to think about whether the transport

they use is environmentally friendly once their primary needs of a transport system (as described

above) are met.


GfK NOP

Improved public transport was a policy challenge that came up in relation to all five goals. Panel

members perceived that better provision of bus, rail and other public transport services would help

achieve each of the goals in turn and was clearly identified as a key requirement. It was the only

theme that transcended all the goals defined by the Department. However, other policy initiatives were

identified that addressed specific issues across more than one goal. For example, improved use of the

road system was suggested as a policy initiative, in one shape or another, across all goals except the

Equality goal. Policy initiatives to improve the safety of transport users applied to the Health, Safety

and Security goal (not unexpectedly), but also to the Competitiveness and Productivity goal.

Development of green technology and the encouragement of its use featured in responses to both the

Quality of Life and Climate Change goals, whilst improved facilities for cyclists and walkers were themes

common to both the Quality of Life and Health, Safety and Security goals. So, whilst this research has

identified policy challenges underlying each specific goal, it has also highlighted actions that could be

adopted to achieve all or some of the goals in combination.

Looking at the challenges panellists spontaneously mentioned in relation to each goal, some clear

themes emerged. With regards to Climate Change, our panellists most often felt that the answer lies

in encouraging the use of greener vehicles and fuels, and in particular increased investment in the

research and development of “greener technology”. Many felt that encouragement should be in the

form of rewards and tax incentives, such as tax breaks for companies to use greener vehicles, or a

reduced road tax charge for drivers of greener vehicles. Some felt that Government could go further

and enforce good practice in certain areas - such as the regulation of higher standards of fuel efficiency

and/or low emissions, and insisting that transport companies use hybrid vehicles - or at least bring

pressure to bear on key groups to develop this type of greener technology.

Making public transport a viable alternative to travelling by car came through as an important theme in

many panellist responses. By improving public transport provision, it was considered that people would

be encouraged to choose it over car travel, which in turn could have a significant impact on the

reduction of emissions.

Discouraging private and business motoring was another approach mentioned by some. Examples of

how this might be done included: the banning or penalising of big cars or old cars, increasing parking

charges, keeping cars out of towns and introducing more park and ride schemes, encouraging less use

of cars for the “school run”, and encouraging car sharing schemes. A minority of panellists thought that


GfK NOP

air travel should be discouraged, either by providing affordable alternatives, such as rail, for some

journeys, or by increasing taxes on air flights or air fuel.

Many view using the ‘carrot’ rather than the ‘stick’ approach to reduce emissions as a more effective

solution. However, there was a minority of people who would like to see individuals and/or businesses

penalised for wasteful or excessive private travel.

The provision of reliable information on emissions emerged as a theme specific to making it easier for

people to make environmentally-friendly choices. This might involve detailing the carbon emissions

associated with different transport modes, by way of example, or a more general educational campaign

to raise awareness of the climate change issue. Government pressure to enforce maximum carbon

emissions was the one other aspect mentioned by some panellists when responding to the issue of how

to reduce emissions that contribute to climate change.

Turning next to the Competitiveness and Productivity goal, panellists identified public transport

improvements ahead of road improvements as the way to advance this objective. Making rail cheaper

with fewer delays for passengers, and less overcrowded at peak times, were the main suggestions,

together with the idea of making rail more central to the movement of products around the country.

With regard to bus transport, the issue most frequently mentioned was the regularity and frequency of

services, especially at peak times and in rural districts.

However, road improvements were also important to panellists, and the recommendation which

recurred with insistence throughout responses was to reduce congestion and ease traffic flow. Some

thought the way to combat congestion was to reduce the number of cars on the road, whilst others

focussed on the need to increase the capacity of the road network, particularly motorways and primary

roads.

In relation to airport and seaport access, the main issue raised was for access by road to be reliable, as

public transport was thought impractical for many (e.g. those travelling with children, or with a lot of

luggage, or travellers with a disability). Specific suggestions included creating dedicated lanes for

airport traffic, allowing airport traffic to use motorway hard shoulders if necessary, and always

scheduling road works carefully, in particular to avoid school holidays. Continuing this theme of reliable

and speedy travel, faster movement through airports by better resourcing and streamlining of security

processes was identified as an area that most panellists wanted to see improved.


GfK NOP

Some panellists commented on the need to improve airport facilities outside of the London airports, and

transport links to these regional airports. On the other hand, a small minority wanted to see better use

of the airports which serve London, typically commenting that policymakers should look at alternatives

to Heathrow.

Safety was a top-of-mind concern for panellists when considering the needs of international travellers.

Reassurance was required that travelling would be safe, along with a sense that everything possible

was being done to effectively minimise the risk of terrorism.

Reducing road haulage was the main suggestion made with regard to freight transport, as well as

improving the reliability and affordability of distribution through more use of rail, delivery at night and

organising transport on the basis of rail hubs, using road transport only for short distances.

Equality of opportunity for our panellists meant removing specific barriers to use, by ensuring

everyone can afford to travel by public transport and everyone can easily use public transport,

recognising the specific needs of the disabled and the elderly. Cheaper public transport was mentioned

by many, for both bus and rail. Some went further and suggested that public transport needs to be

free or heavily discounted for certain groups, such as those with a disability and the elderly. Aside from

cost, it was recognised that the other main barrier to use for certain people - the elderly, mothers with

pushchairs and those with a disability - was the problem of accessing the public transport system. It

was felt necessary to make it easier to get onboard public transport vehicles and access stations, via

use of low-floor buses, more open-plan decks, and ramps or lifts at stations.

However, panellists felt that equality of opportunity also means having a public transport option that is

a realistic alternative to the car for all types of journey, and this was seen to require investment in

public transport services to ensure that there are better public transport options – that is better public

transport links and better integration of services, and better public transport connections between local

communities in rural areas.


GfK NOP

When thinking about how to reduce the numbers of those killed or injured in transport accidents in the

Health, Safety and Security goal, panellists focused very much on road safety. Panellist felt that DfT

should therefore aim to improve current road layouts, taking into account traffic volumes. Suggestions

in this area included: measures to slow traffic down, safer road design, clearer road signs, more

pedestrian crossings, more use of purpose built cycle lanes, better diagnosis of local causes of

accidents and the introduction of appropriate preventative measures, and the use of more speed

cameras. Many also felt that driving skills in general need to be improved through better education,

stricter driving tests and the introduction of repeat driving tests, particularly for those who offend on

the roads. Stricter speed controls, particularly in built-up areas was another theme that recurred with

some regularity. There was a small minority who advocated a ‘zero tolerance’ approach towards

offenders, with drink driving being seen as a particular area for tougher penalties.

Some felt the answer is to get people off the road and onto public transport. However, proponents of

public transport recognise that to encourage use, public transport needs to improve its services and

reduce its cost so that it is a realistic alternative to private car usage.

When thinking about how to ensure people can travel in safety and be protected from crime and

terrorists, some wanted to see policies put in place that increased levels of security by putting more

transport police on transport routes. Many felt that a high level of visible security and policing would

deter crime. A minority felt that increased level of surveillance would help and a few suggested a policy

that included enhanced and more targeted checks on potential suspects.

Finally when considering ‘improving health and life expectancy through healthier forms of transport

such as walking or cycling’, many spontaneously mentioned a need for more and safer cycle and foot

paths that were pleasant to use. By keeping cyclists away from busy sections of the road, people

would be encouraged to cycle more, and this would also enhance the safety of cyclists on the road.

Panellists also recommended better lighting and path maintenance, and policies that promote and

educate young people to use healthier forms of transport such as cycling.


GfK NOP

Finally, with regards to the Quality of Life goal, the consensus was again to strengthen the UK public

transport system infrastructure and assist it in becoming more environmentally friendly, since this

would achieve the double-objective of reducing the number of private journeys and their multiple

emissions, and introduce low-impact technology most quickly into England and Wales.

Through their emphasis on public transport, panellists are expecting Government to take a lead in

becoming environmentally friendly, but they do not just focus on public transport. The road network

was the subject of many recommendations which could improve citizens’ quality of life and minimise

negative effects on the environment - chief among these recommendations were: keeping roads well

repaired through efficient road works; reducing congestion through better planning and discouraging

private motoring; and introducing tighter emission checks on vehicles.

Panellists also wanted policy makers to tackle issues that related directly to individuals’ health and life

expectancy. These were: reduce air pollution, notably by encouraging the development of more

environmentally-friendly transport options; ensure that is was safe to travel; promote a better

pedestrian experience through well repaired pavements and safer, and well lit walkways; and reduce

stress, discomfort and exhaustion through clean and comfortable public transport.

Only a fairly modest minority of panellists (around one in ten) focussed on protection and promotion of

wildlife, wildlife habitats and green spaces when considering what transport policy makers should be

trying to achieve in terms of quality of life and reduced impact on the environment. However, they did

so compellingly and with perhaps a broader and more long-term view of human quality of life within the

context of the natural world. Planting more trees along transport routes, considering wildlife migration

routes and different species, checking waterways and simply preserving existing green areas were

specific suggestions. It is worth noting that the desire for a reduction in green-house gases and air

pollution and the associated recommendations for improved public transport and more ‘green’ transport

options imply awareness of and concern for the wider environment as well.


GfK NOP

2 Introduction

2.1 Background

In February 2008 The Department for Transport (DfT) commissioned GfK NOP to set up an online

“Citizens’ Panel” in order to better understand public attitudes and perceptions of transport and

transport policy, specifically in relation to the goals described below.

DfT has set out a strategy, “Towards a Sustainable Transport System”, published in October 2007,

which sets out five broad goals:

To address climate change by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other green house

gasses

To maximise the competitiveness and productivity of the UK economy

To promote greater equality of transport opportunity for all citizens, with the desired outcome

of achieving a fairer society

To contribute to better health and life-expectancy through reducing the risk of death, injury or

illness arising from transport and promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health

To improve quality of life for transport users and non-users, including through a healthy natural

environment with the desired outcome of an improved well-being for all

DfT had some immediate information needs to help identify the challenges to deliver this strategy. The

DfT was interested, therefore, in finding out what the public consider to be the key challenges for

transport strategy over the next 5 – 15 years to ensure that transport meets the needs of the public,

businesses, the wider economy and the environment.

The first wave of the Citizens' panel was used to provide public responses around these five strategic

goals. Thereafter the panel will be used to meet a variety of information needs by providing additional

depth and understanding to the existing evidence base around public attitudes that DfT already holds.

One of the key roles of the panel will be to act as an important balance to the views expressed by

'experts' as part of the wider stakeholder engagement. Furthermore, as the questions were all open-

ended, it has enabled panel members to write - in their own words - the issues they consider most

important, without the confines of pre-coded survey responses. Therefore the findings presented in this


GfK NOP

report are based on analysis of the spontaneous answers, provided by panel members, in response to

questions around DfT's five strategic goals.

2.2 Research Aims and Objectives

The primary objectives for the first wave of the panel research were:

to provide an initial ”trial wave” of “Citizens’ panel” to further enable DfT’s “understanding

public attitudes towards transport” agenda

to provide initial findings to questions around DfT’s five strategic goals set out in “Towards a

Sustainable Transport System” strategy document

to provide public perceptions of transport issues around the five strategic goals identified in

the Department's "Towards a Sustainable Transport System” strategy and to complement the

views of the experts with whom DfT already engages

the ability to support information collected from other research sources by providing more

insight and depth around people's attitudes and opinions

2.3 Research Methodology

Panel Recruitment

To recruit DfT’s On-line Citizens’ panel, 11,000 email invitations were sent out to a random selection of

GfK online panel members, 5,256 responded, approximately 3,000 indicated they were willing to

participate, from which a total of 606 were recruited to become part of the panel. The recruitment text

contained the following information:

Intended aim of the panel

To set up a Citizens’ Panel in order to better understand the public attitudes and perceptions of

transport and transport policy

The duration of the panel

The panel would be conducted over a period of 12 months or more, with the possibility of regular

(perhaps monthly) surveys

Incentive to join the panel


GfK NOP

GfK ipoints for every completed survey and an additional ipoint bonus for those completing a

minimum number of surveys from the DfT’s On-line Citizens’ Panel over the year

Those that were recruited to become a member of DfT’s On-line Citizens’ Panel then went on to

complete the main survey for this first wave.

Sample

Recruitment quotas were set to ensure that the panel reflected population in England and Wales i.e.

the sample was designed and recruited to achieve a sample that was as representative as possible

within the constraints of an "online panel" methodology.

The target sample number was 600, with 606 actually achieved.

As already noted the panel is not statistically representative of the population (of England and Wales)

and it is heavily biased towards on-line panel members. However, in order to create a sample that

best reflects the population of England and Wales, the sample was designed around key quotas set on

the following demographics:

• Region

• Age

• Gender

• Urban Vs Rural location

All targets were achieved as showed in Table 1, section 3.

Questionnaire

The survey length for this first wave averaged 15 minutes. The structure consisted of nine sections

(see below). All panel members answered sections 1, 2 and 3. Sections 4 to 8 concentrated

individually on the five goals, with each respondent asked to provide responses to questions about two

of the five goals. This section rotation approach to the questionnaire was designed to collect a range of

panellists opinions and attitudes across all five goals, without over-burdening respondents with an

overly long and complex survey. (Please see Appendix for full questionnaire).

Section 1 – Panel profiling and recruitment


GfK NOP

Section 2 – Travel profile

Section 3 – Overall needs of travel system

Section 4 – Climate change

Section 5 – Productivity and competitiveness

Section 6 – Equality of opportunity

Section 7 – Health, safety and security

Section 8 – Quality of life

Section 9 - Conclusion

Data analysis and reporting

A qualitative approach was used to analyse the results and report the findings from the on-line panel.

This was felt to be the most appropriate analysis to support the open-ended nature of the questions

and to reflect the fact that the results are not statistically representative of the population of England

and Wales.

The questions that focussed on the DfT's five strategic goals (the questions covered in

section 3 to 8) were all open-ended and asked panellists to respond spontaneously, using

their own words. Verbatim responses were analysed and categorised into key themes for each

individual question, and then re-visited and amended to remove duplications within each goal/section.

Having identified the key themes for each goal, these were then reviewed to identify any overarching

themes that transcended different goals. Finally we looked at how these policy themes related to

panellists needs of the transport system (identified in responses to section 3 in the questionnaire).

All themes are supported with profiled verbatim responses in this report.


GfK NOP

3 Panel Profile

Around 3000 GfK NOP online UK panel members were willing to participate in DfT’s “On-line Citizens

Panel”, with 606 panellists recruited to take part in this first wave of research.

In order to reflect the population of England and Wales, quotas were set on gender, age, region, and

Rural vs. Urban locations. The table below details each quota split by number achieved and target

percentage required. The panel membership correctly reflects the population of England and Wales.

Table 1: Panel Profile

Quota groups Number of panellists

Percentage of

panellists Target

percentage

Percentage difference

+/- Gender

Male 297 49.0 49.0 exact

Female 309 51.0 51.0 exact

Age

18-34 175 28.9 29.8 -0.9

35-54 215 35.5 35.2 0.3

55+ 216 35.6 35.0 0.6

Region

North 162 26.7 27.0 -0.3

Midlands 133 21.9 22.3 -0.4

South West and Wales 92 15.2 15.0 0.2

South East and London 219 36.1 35.6 0.5

Urban vs Rural

Urban 351 57.9 57.6 0.3

Rural 255 42.1 42.5 -0.4


GfK NOP

4 Transport Needs

4.1 The most important things required of a transport system

All panel members were asked to focus broadly on general issues, rather than the detailed specifics of

their current journeys. They were asked to think about the challenges which they thought the

Department for Transport needed to address over the next 5-15 years to ensure that transport is able

to meet the needs of the public, business, the wider economy and the environment.

The panel members were asked specifically to describe:

What are the most important things that you want the transport system to do for you?

In order of priority the things panellists most wanted from transport are set out in the figure below. The

responses were prioritised according to how many panellists spontaneously mentioned each theme.

Figure 2: Hierarchy of transport needs

Fast

Safe




Fast

Safe




Comfort & cleanliness

The figure above illustrates a hierarchy of transport needs represented as a pyramid consisting of six

different levels (based on Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs proposed in his 1943 paper A Theory of

Human Motivation). The most basic need is shown at the bottom of the pyramid - a reliable, regular


GfK NOP

and timely transport system. The higher needs in the pyramid only come into focus when the lower

needs are satisfied, so that once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower

level will no longer be prioritised. However, if a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual

will re-prioritise these needs by focusing attention again on the unfulfilled level.

So, at the most basic level, panel members thought that transport must be reliable, regular and timely.

They want public transport services to arrive punctually and predictably and to deliver them to their

destinations with fewer delays. Private vehicle users also wanted minimised delays. Many were

interested in better public transport provision at peak times and noted that improved reliability and

frequency (or timeliness) are key to encouraging people out of their cars and onto more

environmentally friendly public transport.

Convenient and accessible public transport was next most frequently mentioned. The term

“convenient” was used to group together panellists’ comments such as: having bus stops and train

stations within easy walking distance from people’s homes and from work places and shopping and

leisure facilities. Improved convenient access in outer city and rural areas was wanted as well as the

assurance that transport modes would be easily accessible for groups such as elderly travellers, people

with a disability and parents travelling with babies and children. Provision of ramps, lifts and

convenient parking were mentioned in connection with this issue.

Many panel members said they thought public transport was too expensive at present. They compared

public transport provision to car travel and expressed the view that public transport definitely should be

made to be cheaper than making the same journey by car.

Safe travel was the next issue, and this theme covered safety from other travellers who might be

violent, criminals or terrorists; assured safety from accidents when on public transport, and ensuring

that road travel is as safe as possible through more appropriate, usually tighter, regulations on

speeding and dangerous driving.

Fast, efficient and well integrated transport, with more direct bus and train routes and simple,

integrated ticketing was also desired by many panellists. Again several said that they would prefer to

use public transport if it was a more direct, speedy (and cost effective) option than presently available.

They thought many public transport links were too inconvenient and lengthy at the moment (as well as

expensive).


GfK NOP

The next most important quality that a lot of panel members wanted from ‘transport in general’ was

comfort and cleanliness. Comfort was predominantly seen in terms of having a seat but also in terms

of not standing in very packed carriages and buses. Ideally, panellists wanted to enjoy a pleasant

stress-free journey in a clean and comfortable environment, without over-crowding. This would help

satisfy and retain current public transport travellers and some car driving panellists also said this would

help attract them out of their cars.


GfK NOP

4.2 How DfT’s five strategic goals align with transport needs

Goal 1: Climate change

One in ten of all panellists mentioned climate change issues in relation to their transport needs.

Although this may seem rather low considering how big the topic of ‘climate change’ is in the world, it

should be borne in mind that the question asked of panel members was about their ‘transport needs’,

and therefore perhaps it is not surprising that only a minority mentioned this theme spontaneously in

response to this question. Indeed, it could be argued that it is encouraging that as many as one in ten

mentioned the issue of climate change when considering their needs of a transport system.

It is clear, though, that their immediate needs are a transport system that gets them from A to B as

quickly, efficiently and cost effectively as possible, with no delays, congestion or overcrowding. It

seems only when their primary needs are met will they start to think about whether the transport they

use is environmentally friendly. However, of those that mentioned ‘climate change issues’ the following

three broad issues were highlighted; promotion and investment in environmentally friendly transport /

vehicles, making public transport a real alternative to the car, and reducing pollution / carbon emissions

in general.

It was evident throughout the survey that there was a high level of awareness but a frustration,

particularly amongst car users, that there was no real transport alternative that would meet their

primary travel needs and be environmentally friendly. The main example of this was those who would

like to use public transport instead of their car but say it is not a viable alternative, with many stating

inconvenience, unreliability, inaccessibility and cost as reasons why they would not use public transport.

In summary we cannot strictly say that the climate change goal aligns with primary consumer transport

needs. However this is not to say that those using transport are not interested in environmentally

friendly transport, more that they simply have other priorities that need satisfying first. Panellists did

demonstrate at least some levels of awareness and concern about climate change and environmental

issues in some comments across most goals.


GfK NOP

Goal 2: Competitiveness and Productivity

When panellists were asked to name the most important things they wanted from a transport system

the majority brought up features aligned to the goal of national competitiveness and productivity

because transport is a first and foremost a functional activity, which either assists or detracts people

in/from pursuing their economic and personal objectives. Most panellists named cost and affordability

as crucial; secondly reliability and punctuality; and thirdly, efficiency and speed. These aspects enable

participation in the wider economy through transport, and the more or less efficient planning of

peoples’ time and energy.

The goal of maximising competitiveness and productivity of the UK economy aligned very closely with

panellists’ aspirations for the transport system, which from the top priorities they indicated by sheer

numbers of spontaneous mentions, appeared to be driven largely by a desire to maximise personal

productivity.

Goal 3: Equality of Opportunity

Half of all panellists spontaneously mentioned ‘equality’ issues. However, it should be noted that all

equality mentions focused on public transport rather than private. Panellists wanted a public transport

system that is cheap and affordable for all. People who live in remote / rural areas wanted public

transport to service their towns and villages so that they are not reliant on cars alone. Many people

mentioned they wanted transport that is easily accessible - this included accessibility of roads leading

up to stations, availability of car parks, lifts, ramps and transport that can be accessed (trains, tubes,

buses) by all.

It is not just the minority groups that want better access to public transport, but also mothers with

buggies or prams, cyclists with bikes and the elderly. People want transport to be designed in such a

way that these groups are considered, and appropriate space and design implemented.

The goal of greater equality of transport opportunities for all citizens closely aligns with panellist

aspirations for public transport.


GfK NOP

Goal 4: Health, Safety and Security

One third of those surveyed spontaneously mentioned ‘safety and security issues’. Whatever the

transport mode used, the majority of those who mentioned ‘safety’ did so as a general theme i.e. they

wanted to travel from A to B as safely as possible. They also wanted travel to be a pleasant,

comfortable and stress free activity. With reference to public transport they wanted to be able to travel

in a clean and litter free environment, and to have a seat instead of standing room only, with no

overcrowding.

Whilst the majority spoke of a general feeling of safety, some people mentioned more specifically that

they wanted public transport to be safe and well maintained with good back up procedures in the event

of equipment / transport failure. Others spoke of a need to feel safe from other travellers on public

transport.

Those who mentioned road safety talked specifically about safety from other motorists as well as road

safety including road surfaces, design and congestion. People wanted to travel on roads without fear

of speeding or dangerous drivers. They wanted to travel on well-maintained and designed roads that

would help to reduce congestion and ease traffic flow, and therefore make it safer to travel.

All of the areas discussed so far align with DfT’s goal to reduce risk of death or injury or illness from

transport. However, the link between transport and better health/longer life expectancy is not an

automatic one that panellists make spontaneously. The majority did not automatically think of walking

or cycling to improve their health through daily journeys.

Overall the results showed that DfT’s goal appropriately aligned with the needs of one third of those

interviewed, which in relation to all five goals can be considered a substantial proportion. Although it

must still be noted that people do not directly relate their transport needs to healthy forms of transport

such as walking or cycling. People accept there is a link between walking and cycling and health, but

this is not a top of mind issue when making travel choices.


GfK NOP

Goal 5: Quality of Life

Initially, when panellists were first asked to name the most important things they wanted from the

transport system just under half mentioned one quality of life issue or another. Responses mainly

concentrated on the cleanliness and comfortableness of public transport, on the provision of room to sit

down and pleasant, stress-free, easy transportation. These aspirations were seen very much by

panellists as direct benefits to individuals’ quality of life when travelling. Spontaneous mentions which

showed a consideration for the impact that transport has on the environment were very few in

comparison.

The spontaneous desire expressed by some panellists for a reduction in air pollution and transport

emissions did relate indirectly to the environment but we sensed that the focus was on improving air

quality for human health in the main, and even here only a few panellists cited this as initially

important. When the quality of life goal was deconstructed and presented to panellists as two separate

questions which helped to focus panellists minds on both ‘the quality of journeys, and ‘the impact of

transport on the environment’, mentions of cutting air emissions increased a great deal and other aims

emerged such as reducing noise pollution, developing more environmentally friendly transport options

and preserving and developing wildlife habitats and green spaces.

However, the main ways that the quality of life goal aligned with what panellists most wanted from the

transport system was principally through direct benefits to the quality of life of human beings when

travelling (by making our journeys more pleasant, comfortable and cleaner); and only secondly through

reducing the detrimental impacts of transport on the environment.


GfK NOP

5 Challenges for transport policy makers

The following sections cover each of the five key goals;

1. Climate change,

2. Competitiveness & productivity,

3. Equality of transport,

4. Health safety & security and

5. Quality of life.

The structure for each section follows the same format. Firstly there is a summary section that lists

the themes or challenges that policymakers face in tackling the issues identified within each of the

goals, and summarise these challenges. Then each of themes is described in more detail, and the

commentary is supported by verbatim responses.


GfK NOP

5.1 Climate Change

Goal 1: To address climate change by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other

greenhouse gasses

Specific issues that DfT identified within this goal are:

- making it easier for people and businesses to make more environmentally friendly choices about the

way they travel

- reducing emissions that contribute to climate change from journeys in the UK or internationally

5.1.1 Summary

Key themes that panellists identified as challenges that transport policy makers should focus on to

address the climate change goal were as follows (ordered according to the frequency with which each

theme was spontaneously mentioned, the most frequently being listed first):

Overarching key themes:

1 Encouraging the use of green technology, including the specific sub-theme – greater R&D/Investment in green technology

2 Make Public Transport a viable alternative to travelling by car

3 Discourage private & business motoring

4 Discourage use of air travel

5 Scepticism about Climate Change

There was one additional key theme for making it easier for people to make environmentally friendly choices:

6 Provide reliable information on emissions


GfK NOP

And there was one additional key theme for reducing emissions that contribute to climate

change:

7 More downward pressure on emissions/enforce maximum limits

Our panellists most often felt that the answer lies in encouraging the use of greener vehicles and fuels,

and in particular increased investment in research & development of “greener technology”. Many felt

that encouragement should be in the form of rewards and tax incentives, such as tax breaks for

companies to use greener vehicles, or a reduced road tax charge for drivers of greener vehicles. Some

felt that Government could go further and enforce good practice in certain areas - such as the

regulation of higher standards of fuel efficiency and/or low emissions, and insisting that transport

companies use hybrid vehicles - or at least bring pressure to bear on key groups to develop this

greener technology.

Making public transport a viable alternative to travelling by car came through as an important theme in

many panellist responses. By improving public transport provision, people would be encouraged to

choose it over car travel, which in turn would have a significant impact on the reduction of emissions.

Discouraging private and business motoring was another approach mentioned by some. Examples of

how this might be done included: the banning or penalising of big cars or old cars, increasing parking

charges, keeping cars out of towns and introducing more park and ride schemes, encouraging less use

of cars for the “school run”, and encouraging car sharing schemes. A minority of panellists thought that

air travel should be discouraged, either by providing affordable alternatives, such as rail, for some

journeys, or by increasing taxes on air flights or air fuel.

Many view using the ‘carrot’ rather than the ‘stick’ approach to reduce emissions as a more effective

solution. However, there was a minority of people who would like to see individuals/businesses

penalised for wasteful or excessive private travel.

The provision of reliable information on emissions emerged as a theme specific to making it easier for

people to make environmentally-friendly choices. This might involve detailing the carbon emissions

associated with different transport modes, by way of example, or a more general educational campaign

to raise awareness of the climate change issue. Government pressure to enforce maximum carbon

emissions was the one other aspect mentioned by some panellists when responding to the issue of how

to reduce emissions that contribute to climate change.


GfK NOP

5.1.2 Key challenges to achieve this goal

To identify key challenges for this goal, 200 panellists were asked to describe the most important things

policy makers should be trying to achieve in the following two topic areas:

Q1 making it easier for people and businesses to make more environmentally friendly choices

about the way they travel

Q2 Reducing emissions that contribute to climate change from journeys in the UK or

internationally

All the themes mentioned by panellists in response to the first question were repeated in response to

the second question. So, policies that our panellists thought should be implemented to reduce

emissions, such as improving public transport or discouraging/penalising use of private cars, were also

seen as policies that would make it easier for people to make more environmentally friendly choices. By

way of example, it would be easier to choose public transport if it were improved and greater use of

public transport would reduce emissions.

We start therefore by describing the policy themes that were common to both question areas, and then

describe the policy suggestions that were specific to the individual topic areas.

Overarching themes

Theme 1: Encouraging the use of green technology

The most frequently mentioned issue with regard to climate change was the need to encourage use of

green technology. In addition to funding research and development investment (see sub-theme 1b

below), it was felt appropriate for Government to encourage widespread use of green technology.

Some panellists spontaneously suggested doing this via rewards and incentives. It was felt that

Government could provide incentives for the use of greener vehicles and fuels, and the conversion of

vehicles to a greener specification. This could be via tax breaks for companies to use greener vehicles,

or a reduced road tax charge for individual drivers.

“Encourage businesses to make the right choices with financial disincentives in place for the wrong choice e.g. tax incentives for environmentally friendly company vehicles” (Female, C2DE, aged 55+, urban Midlands, disability, commute by car)


GfK NOP

“Give tax breaks to firms who use hybrid cars” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban North, commute by car)

“Phase out all cars over 10 years old, make only cars with low carbon emissions. Reward these car owners with reduced Road Tax charges” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, urban South East and London, shopping by bus or walking) “Government has to encourage people to use greener cars by lowering the tax on the purchase of new green cars and making a bigger difference in road tax for greener cars…make the gas guzzlers much more expensive” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, rural South East and London, commute by car)

The use of incentives and rewards was not the only mechanism suggested by our panel to encourage

the use of green technology. Some panellists felt that Government could go further and enforce good

practices by regulation in the following areas:

The enforcement of higher standards for the maintenance of vehicles to ensure either a certain

level of fuel efficiency (both private and public transport vehicles) or low emissions

Insisting on transport companies using hybrid vehicles

“Force transport companies to use bio-fuels or electricity!” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, urban South East and London, shopping by bus) “Low emissions enforced by law; ban high emission cars entirely” ( Female, ABC1, aged 55+, urban North, shopping by car)

For others, however, the Government’s role was not to regulate but to apply pressure on key groups to

develop greener technology and therefore options for the public. There was comment on the need for

Government to pressurise car manufacturers or airlines to offer affordable greener alternatives, and the

need for Government to have the courage to tackle powerful interest groups who might be resistant to

such change.

“Encourage vehicle manufacturers to reduce emissions” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban North, commute by car) “Pressure on manufacturers to develop green technologies and to make them available at economic prices” (Female, ABC1, aged 55+, rural South East and London, commute, main method of transport is walking) “Encourage plane makers to produce more efficient engines” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East and London, shop & social trips by car)


GfK NOP

Cycling was seen by some as an alternative green “technology”, and there were a number of comments

about Government doing more to promote cycling. This could either be through the promotion of

existing facilities for cyclists, or the development of new facilities, such as increased investment in cycle

lanes:

“Invest in cycle use/cycle friendly roads” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes by bus/bike) “Subsidise cycling and develop more cycle lanes” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, urban South East and London, disability, shopping by train)

Many panellists mentioned incentives and encouragement for greener transport options as a key

theme, but those particularly likely to do so were lower income earners, and those currently inclined to

travel by car.

Sub-Theme 1a : Greater R&D/Investment in green technology

This was seen as a specific issue to address, and suggestions covered a number of different research

and development areas:

Research into cleaner transport and fuels e.g. hybrids, electric and bio-fuels

Development of alternative sustainable energy and fuel sources

Building more electric power plants

Development of alternative energy sources & infrastructure e.g. carbon free energy

This kind of investment was often mentioned as something that Government could do in partnership

with the private sector, rather than being seen as exclusively a Government prerogative.

"Exploring fully alternative fuels - focusing on the environmental issues" (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban South East and London, commute by car) "Buses powered by electricity. Smaller buses used at off-peak times" (Male, ABC1, aged 18-34, rural Midlands, commute by car) "Bio-fuel research" (Female, ABC1, aged 55+, urban North, shopping by walking)

The idea of investing in research to develop green technology for transport was more likely to be made

by males, those aged 35 years and over and social grade ABC1s.


GfK NOP


GfK NOP

Theme 2: Make Public Transport a viable alternative to travelling by car

This came through as an important theme in many panellist responses. By improving public transport

provision, people would be encouraged to choose it over car travel, which would in turn have a

significant impact on the reduction of emissions. There were a number of suggestions about how

public transport could be made a viable option, but the main comments were as follows:

Make public transport more efficient and reliable

Integrate and improve public transport networks to cover the entire country

Lower the cost of public transport, and in particular make public transport cheaper than

travelling by car

"I think the pricing policy should ensure that it is always cheaper to get from A to B by public transport than it is to do the same journey by car" (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban South East and London, commute by train) "If there were more buses available in rural areas people wouldn’t use their cars as much" (Female, C2DE, aged 18-34, rural Midlands, school run, by walking) "The train is most environmentally friendly but is often not accessible, unreliable and too expensive" (Male, ABC1, aged 35-54, rural South East and London, commute by car)

This policy suggestion – the need to make public transport more viable alternative to the car - came

from across the whole spectrum of our panel, but panellists recommending this course of action were

more likely to be public transport users, and those aged over 35.

Theme 3: Discourage private and business motoring

This was another approach that was mentioned by many panellists. For some, discouragement meant

penalising inappropriate car usage, for example:

Banning or penalising use of 4x4s

Extending tax penalties on big cars or old cars

Increasing parking charges

Keeping car traffic out of town and introducing more free park & ride schemes


GfK NOP

“There should be a complete ban on large vehicles such as 4x4's for personal use” (Female, ABC1, aged 18-34, rural Midlands, disability, exercise therapy by bus) “Make it harder/more expensive for motorists to park their cars in cities” (Female, C2DE, aged 55+, urban South East and London, shopping by walking) “Encourage councils to build car parks outside of main town & offer decent park & ride” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes by bus or bike)

Others commented on the need to discourage certain types of behaviour, such as using the car on the

school run. It was suggested this could be put into action through some sort of communication

campaign to make this kind of car usage socially unacceptable, or alternatively via better provision of

school buses.

“Prohibiting the 'school run' when under 5 kms" (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, rural North, shopping by foot) “Put school kids on the bus” (Male, C2DE, aged 35-54, urban North, commute by car)

Government promotion of car sharing was another area that was seen to be helpful in discouraging

excessive car usage. It was thought this could be implemented either by penalising single person

journeys, or providing specific benefits to those who travel in “full” vehicles.

“Getting people out of their cars, especially single occupants and the school run” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban South West, commute by bus) "Car sharing in businesses where people travel together, perhaps tax relief for businesses who show a substantial reduction from their pollution and that of their employees" (Female, C2DE, aged 35-54, rural North, school run by car) “Promoting car sharing especially in the urban commuter areas” (Female, C2DE, aged 35-54, rural South West, commute by car)

There was also mention of providing incentives, both to individuals and to businesses, to encourage

reduced use of the car.

“Give incentives to get people out of cars” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban North, shopping by car) “Encourage employers to pay people for cycle or public transport usage instead of car mileage” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban South West, commute by bus)


GfK NOP

This policy theme of discouraging private and business motoring was most commonly associated with

older panellists aged 55+ years, and in the context of reducing carbon emissions, most often suggested

by Males, C2DEs, those who live in rural areas and those resident in the South East area.

Theme 4: Discourage use of air travel

This was only mentioned by a minority of panellists, but it did come through as a theme that would

both encourage more environmentally-friendly choices and reduce emissions. For some the focus

should be on provision of affordable alternatives such as rail for internal UK travel, which would reduce

the demand for domestic air flights. A few others commented upon the need to discourage

international air travel, principally via increased flight taxes. There was also mention of using the tax

regime to encourage airlines to fill up their flights rather than sending out flights with a lot of empty

seats.

“Journeys by air need urgent attention, perhaps by internationally-imposed taxes on journeys to discourage excessive travel” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West, personal business by car) “Stop low-cost short-haul flights so that these journeys are no longer so cheap that people don't think twice about flying” (Female, ABC1, aged 55+, rural South East and London, commutes, main method of transport is walking) “Tax aviation fuel!” (Male, C2DE, aged 35-54, urban South East and London, leisure by walking) “To move people in a more friendly way around this planet, air travel must be judged on how many people are on the plane. If the minimum numbers of people are not on the plane to make it friendly, then it should be cancelled.” (Male, aged 55+, urban South East and London, caring by car)

Those mentioning disincentives for air travel often tended to be older panellists, C2DEs and those living

in urban and metropolitan areas.

Theme 5: Scepticism about Climate Change

It is important to note that there were a few panellists (2%) who spontaneously mentioned that they

did not believe in global warning. Most of these disbelievers argued that the evidence for climate

change is insufficient or flawed.


GfK NOP

“There is no evidence for climate change. For each opinion that floods etc are caused by climate change, there is a later statement that climate change was not the cause” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South East, shopping & social travel by car)

There are also a few hard core dissenters who believe sun spots are the source of climate change

rather than human activity.

"…Human beings do NOT cause climate change despite what so called experts state. We must start to worry about external problems like the increase in the sun's size/heat output and impact from meteors - areas where scientists are truly worried. Politicians are playing at conservation to get votes/keep them on the gravy train…" (Female, C2DE, aged 55+, rural South East and London, shopping by car)

Panellists who thought that climate change is a myth were most likely to be male, over 55 years old,

and those who tended to travel by car.

Making it easier for people to make environmentally friendly choices (topic 1)

As discussed above, most of the policy initiatives that were suggested by our panellists were felt to be

as relevant to helping people make environmentally friendly choices as they were to reducing

emissions, but there was one policy suggestion which related mainly to this first topic, as follows:

Theme 6: Provide reliable information on emissions

A minority spontaneously mentioned that they wanted to see Government provide more information

about the environmental impact of different travel choices, in particular detailing the carbon emissions

associated with different transport modes. These panel members thought individuals and businesses

could make better decisions if provided with authoritative information on the issue. Others suggested

that the Government should be more involved in educating and raising awareness of this issue.

“We should be achieving reducing emissions whatever it takes. Clear guidance should be made available online to allow people to make decisions about how to travel to reduce emissions.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South East, commute by car) “There should be better, standardised information from authoritative sources, not manufacturers.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South East and London, commute, social, school run by walking) “Providing more information about how different methods of transport can affect the environment.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban North, commutes by tram)


GfK NOP

“Provide full information to the travellers so they can make informed decisions.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East and London, commutes, shop and leisure by car) “Ordinary people on the whole are open to helping the environment by making informed choices. Businesses tend to base their choices on economic factors. We need to make information readily available to the public and encourage businesses to make the right choices with financial disincentives in place for the wrong choice e,g. tax incentives for environmentally friendly company vehicles.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban Midlands, Disabled, commutes by car) “The easiest way to make a difference is to make information more readily available to the general public to enable them to make informed choices and to discourage unnecessary use of vehicles e.g. short journeys to school when a walk will do.” (Female, C2DE, aged 55+, urban Midlands, disability, commute by car) “Making travel providers disclose all environmental consequences of their routes.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural Midlands, leisure by car)

Those who thought Government should be more involved in ensuring the provision of authoritative

information on emissions, were much more likely to be female than male, and to be from the ABC1

social grades.

Reducing emissions that contribute to climate change (topic 2)

Theme 7: More downward pressure on emissions/enforce maximums

Government pressure to enforce limits on maximum carbon emissions was the one other aspect

mentioned by some panellists with regard to reducing emissions. This was seen particularly as a

mechanism for reducing the use of private cars, and thereby reducing emissions. Some panellists

described schemes which involved the introduction of personal carbon travel allowances and the

rationing of journeys according to a maximum points allowance.

“Introduce a personal carbon travel allowance.” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, urban South East and London, disability, shopping by train) “… There should be a points system where a family has a certain number of emissions points and vehicles have a point value. People should also have a personal petrol limit which allows for a reasonable amount of petrol per person. This would encourage people to make shorter journeys by foot and to use public transport more.” (Female, ABC1, aged 18-34, rural Midlands, disability, exercise therapy by bus) “Ensure and enforce maximum emission levels…”


GfK NOP

(Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban South West, commute by bus)

Panel members who wished to see more downward pressure on carbon emissions with enforced

maximums were much more likely to be ABC1s, middle aged, and from the South of England or Wales.


GfK NOP

5.2 Competitiveness and productivity

Goal 2: To maximise the competitiveness and productivity of the UK economy

Specific Issues that DfT identified within this goal are:

- Ensure that people are able to travel to work, or on business, within the UK at a reasonable cost and

in a timely and reliable way, in conditions that ensure they are productive when they arrive at their

destination. Businesses also need to be confident that their customers can reach them without being

put off by the travelling

- Ensure that business travellers and holidaymakers can travel to and through airports and ports to

overseas destinations

- Ensure that products can be transported to people and businesses at reasonable cost and that they

can rely on products arriving at their destination on time

5.2.1 Summary

Key themes that panellists identified as challenges that transport policy makers should focus on for the

Competitiveness and productivity goal were as follows (ordered according to the frequency with which

each theme was spontaneously mentioned, the most frequently being listed first):


1. Improved public transport, including specific sub-themes - improved rail and bus travel

2. Improved road travel

There were no specific themes, other than the overarching themes described above for the first issue,

but key themes for the second issue, international travel, were as follows:

3. Faster movement through airports

4. Ensure transit is safe for air travel

5. Improved regional planning

6. Discourage air travel


GfK NOP

Specific key themes for the third issue, transportation of products were:

7. Reduced road freight

8. Improved reliability and affordability of product distribution

9. Upgrade home delivery

10. Cut road fuel tax

11. Re-open/ develop canal system

12. Source more produce locally

Panellists identified public transport improvements ahead of road improvements as the way to advance

on the productivity and competitiveness objectives. Making rail cheaper with fewer delays for

passengers, and less overcrowded at peak times, were the main suggestions, together with the idea of

making rail more central to the movement of products around the country. With regard to bus

transport, the issue most frequently mentioned was the regularity and frequency of services, especially

at peak times and in rural districts.

However, road improvements were also important to panellists, and the recommendation which

reocurred with insistence throughout responses was to reduce congestion and ease traffic flow. Some

thought the way to combat congestion was to reduce the number of cars on the road, whilst others

focussed on the need to increase the capacity of the road network, particularly motorways and primary

roads.

In relation to airport and seaport access, the main issue raised was for access by road to be reliable, as

public transport was thought impractical for many (e.g. those travelling with children, or with a lot of

luggage, or travellers with a disability). Specific suggestions included creating dedicated lanes for

airport traffic, allowing airport traffic to use motorway hard shoulders if necessary, and always

scheduling road works carefully, in particular to avoid school holidays. Continuing this theme of reliable

and speedy travel, faster movement through airports by better resourcing and streamlining of security

processes was identified as an area that most panellists wanted to see improved.


GfK NOP

Some panellists commented on the need to improve airport facilities outside of the London airports, and

transport links to these regional airports. On the other hand, a small minority wanted to see better use

of the airports which serve London, typically commenting that policymakers need to look at alternatives

to Heathrow.

Safety was a top-of-mind concern for panellists when considering the needs of international travellers.

Reassurance was required that travelling would be safe, along with a sense that everything possible

was being done to effectively minimise the risk of terrorism.

Reducing road haulage was the main suggestion made with regard to freight transport, as well as

improving the reliability and affordability of distribution through more use of rail, delivery at night and

organising transport on the basis of rail hubs, using road transport only for short distances.


GfK NOP



policy makers should be trying to achieve in each of the following three topic areas:

Q1 ensuring that people are able to travel to work, or on business, within the UK at a

reasonable cost and in a timely and reliable way, in conditions that ensure they are productive

when they arrive at their destination. Businesses also need to be confident that their customers

can reach them without being put off by the travelling

Q2 ensuring that business travellers and holidaymakers can travel to and through airports and

ports to overseas destinations

Q3 ensuring that products can be transported to people and businesses at reasonable cost and

that they can rely on products arriving at their destination on time

Two themes emerged as common across all questions. These were: improved public transport

generally, and within this better rail and bus travel specifically, and better road travel. In particular,

boosting the rail network was suggested not only as a way to move products more reliably and cheaply

around the country, but also as a way of reducing congestion and pressure on the road system.

We start therefore by discussing these two overarching themes or aims, and then describe the policy

challenges mentioned by panellists that were specific to the individual question topics.


GfK NOP

Overarching themes

Theme 1: Improved Public Transport

This concept again dominated the panellists thinking. The public transport aspects most often

mentioned in relation to desired improvements were:

Cost/affordability

Reliability/punctuality

Coordination/planning

Speed

The aspects less frequently mentioned were:

Convenience

Comfort/cleanliness/ space to sit

Regularity/frequency

Geographic coverage

This second group were mentioned less often with panellist tending to comment spontaneously more

often on the functional nature of travel rather than the ‘softer’ convenience and comfort aspects.

However, it is clear that whilst delivery of the functional aspects, such as speed, cost and reliability are

a necessary condition for an efficient public transport system, they are not sufficient as public transport

needs to provide a travelling environment that is comfortable and allows customers to arrive at their

destination in a relaxed frame of mind. The following quote illustrates the salient issues and how they

relate to this economic goal.

“Provide more frequent, fast and reliable public transport. Travelling squashed like a sardine in a train/tube carriage with frequent delays is not conducive to arriving anywhere in a condition to be productive. This is particularly frustrating when prices keep going up whilst service quality seems to be going down.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East & London, commutes by the underground)


GfK NOP

Putting the cost of public transport easily within the range of ordinary people everywhere through

subsidies and/or more consistent pricing were ideas frequently suggested; especially the idea of making

bus and rail travel cheaper than doing the same journey by car.

“Public transport should be cheap!!!! I paid £2.80 to go 3 miles on a bus last week - it would have been cheaper to use my car.” (Male, C2DE, 18-34, rural North, shops by car) “More control of rail ticket prices, including subsidy if necessary.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West and Wales, personal business by car) “The bus fares where I live vary greatly between different areas and bus companies - it is much more expensive to travel under five miles than it is to travel further afield on certain services - very annoying and a good reason for not using the buses. Introduce a consistent and reasonable pricing policy.” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, rural North region, commutes by bus)

“Cost and time are the most important factors to most people, so these are what need to be concentrated on the most.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural Midlands, shopping & leisure by car)

Reliable and punctual services were also considered vital for planning business and shopping journeys,

and many panellists wanted to have less time-consuming public transport so that time efficiency could

be - if not maximised - then at least improved. Comments on these aspects follow:

“Make sure that they keep to their own timetables” (Male ABC1, 35-54, urban North, school run by walking)

“Punctual timekeeping - many other countries manage this without any problems in more extreme weather conditions than what we experience in UK” (Female, ABC1, aged 18-34, urban South West & Wales, shops, social travel by taxi, bus, train and walking) “Reliable and frequent transport links. Cannot be too much 'hassle' or people will simply jump in their cars” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban area in South East and London region, commutes by car)

Some panellists commented on the need to improve the connections that could be made by public

transport, to provide a fully integrated public transport system. This would ensure that public transport

is a viable alternative to the car for all types of journeys.


GfK NOP

“A fully integrated, modern, and cheap transport system can only enhance a country's economic and social wealth.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban North, shops, social travel by car) “Feeder bus services to rail stations. Reasonably-priced fast coach services into employment centres from principal residential areas.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West & Wales, personal business travel by car) “Improve connections between different bus and train services to reduce waiting times” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, school run by walking) “Properly integrated transport systems such as the one we had on Tyneside before public transport was privatised but rolled out nationally.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban North, main method of transport is to walk)

Improving journey speed was seen as a key priority by some panellists. Not only would this encourage

people to use public transport, but it would also reduce time spent travelling to and from work.

“Make transport links quick enough at the moment taking a bus can triple your journey time.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural North, commutes by car) “Have more bus lanes, as it takes so long in peak times to get into cities to work.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, rural North, commutes, shops, social travel by walking) “More direct routes would encourage people to use public transport more. At the moment it is too time consuming to travel this way unless there is no other choice.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban South East and London, commute, shops, social travel by car) “Improved public transport that doesn't get caught up by delays and congestion: that is easily accessible and provides as direct a journey as possible.” (Female, 18-34 urban area North, commutes by car)

Convenience, comfort and cleanliness were themes mentioned by fair sized minorities of panellists.

They wanted to see public transport services running regularly at convenient times of the day, in a less

crowded, cleaner condition. The comments below describe how panellists saw that improving these

aspects could contribute to making the travelling conditions in the UK more productive for passengers.

It is clear from many of these responses that panellists want not only a quick, affordable and reliable

service, but also a travelling environment where everyone can get a seat and travel in reasonable

comfort.


GfK NOP

“A stress-free comfortable environment” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East and London, shops and social travel by walking) “Less crowded and arrive on time” (Male, 35-54, rural South East and London, social travel car and walking) “They should try to ensure that customers have as pleasant and timely a journey as is possible, after all we pay a lot for these journeys.” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, rural Midlands, commute & social travel by car) “Provide enough service so that everyone gets a seat. Provide clean, comfortable and safe travelling environments” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East & London, commute shop &, school run by car)

Improved frequency of services was cited by some as another issue to address. This clearly links in with

the requirement described above for less crowded travelling conditions, as more frequent services will

reduce levels of overcrowding, particularly at peak times. However, it also supports the perceived need

to improve the viability of public transport as an alternative to the car, if more frequent services are

available at times when people want to travel. There was also specific mention of increasing services

at peak times to cope with higher levels of demand, to improve both the travelling conditions and the

reliability of services for those making journeys at these times.

“Better and more frequent public transport” (Male, 35-54, urban South East and London, social travel by car) “Frequent, convenient services from major hubs.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes by car) “More transport available at peak times to ease stressful overcrowding” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban South East & London, social travel by bus) “Provide a regular enough service so that people can arrive at their destination on time and not have to wait around.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East & London, commute, shops, school run and social travel by car) “Buses at peak times always seem to be very overcrowded, so there obviously needs to be more transport at these times.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural Midlands, shops & leisure travel by car)


GfK NOP

Finally, there were a few comments specifically about the need to extend the geographic coverage of

public transport services. Most of these described the problems of using public transport in rural or hard

to reach areas. Without an adequate local service, there simply was no public transport system that

some panellists felt they could use.

“Addition of buses on rural routes” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commute, shop & social travel by car) “Stop reducing/cancelling bus services in hard to reach areas. There is no public transport to where I work so I am forced to use my car.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East & London, commute, shop, social travel by car) “It needs to exist! It doesn't where we live. I have to drive, my husband also has to drive, and even though there is a train, it will not get him to and from work at an appropriate time. And getting to any airport is difficult.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “At present there are not enough services to be able to use public transport to get to and from work. Either there are geographical gaps or the services are simply not frequent enough.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural Midlands, shops & social travel by car) “More services for rural areas” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East and London, shops by car)

Looking at those mentioning the general theme of improved public transport as a way of improving the

competitiveness and productivity of the UK economy, panellists from ABC1 backgrounds were more

likely to advocate better public transport provision than C2DE panellists although large proportions of

both social groups did so. More rural than urban residents and those aged 35 – 54 years wanted better

public transport. Perhaps not surprisingly commuters were also more likely than non-commuters to

advocate improved public transport, although again, large proportions of both groups made this

suggestion. Regionally, most mentions came from the South West and Wales, followed by the South

East and London.

In addition, public transport improvements were also seen by panellists as key to facilitating travel to

airports and sea-ports. Their suggestions on this topic covered a number of different areas:

Better rail and bus links to air/seaports – improved surrounding transport infrastructure

More shuttle/express services

Specific bus/coach improvements - dedicated lanes/room for luggage

Ensuring public transport alternative to air/seaports is affordable


GfK NOP

Better public transport access to air/seaports was suggested by panellists a lot more than improved

road links to airports and sea-ports. Their comments focussed on upgrading the rail and bus

infrastructure to provide more reliable and affordable services and to include more shuttle and fixed-

fare taxi services from rail hubs. The following quotes illustrate their specific suggestions:

“Simplify alternative travel and improve infrastructure to and around major airports and ports.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car) “Improved rail and bus services to airports would discourage car use.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban South West and Wales, shops by bus or walks) “Limit the use of cars in/to airports/ports by provision of adequate public transport, including dedicated fixed-price taxi-buses to nearby suitable points such as rail-heads.” (Male, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East & London, commute, shop & social travel by car) “Public transport must provide convenient connections to major airports from all parts of the country, not just from London.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South East and London, commutes by car)

Reliability is a key issue for these types of journey, as there has to be confidence in the ability of any

system to deliver the customer on time for the next leg of the journey.

“A dependable service is paramount.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South Eat and London, shops & social travel by tram or underground) “Reliability has to be the most important area as cannot afford to be late but neither does one want to have to travel very early to ensure meeting connections.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car) “Suggest they go to Zurich airport or somewhere similar and copy the reliability, cleanliness and frequency of the rail connections.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car)

A few panellists highlighted the need to improve the linkage of Eurostar with the rest of the UK, to

make the rail option a more attractive alternative to flying. This was seen as a national asset that could

be more widely used via better integration of services with the rest of the country.

“Better linking of Eurostar with the rest of the UK (services from the north of England direct to the continent to reduce transfers).” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “Prepare for the growth of rail travel through the Channel Tunnel as more people realise that it offers real competition against air travel for much of Europe.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East, shops personal business, social travel by train)


GfK NOP

Sub-Theme 1a: Improved rail travel

When considering each of the three issues in this competitiveness and productivity section, the panel

members discussed improvements to the rail network slightly more often than improvements to bus

services.

To make rail transport more conducive to a productive population, panellists identified the issues of

cost, reliability and comfort most often as needing attention, in that order. The general perception was

that rail fares are too high, that reliability needs to be improved, and that overcrowding needs to be

reduced at peak times. Listed below are some comments on these features of rail travel that panellists

would like to see improved for the benefit of passenger productivity:

“Train fares are much too high for the average person and certainly don't compete with the car.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban South West & Wales, shop by bus and walk) “Costs should increase by inflation only; trains travel on time and a reasonable chance of getting a seat.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East and London, commutes by train) “Trains should be more frequent, with more coaches provided so that trains do not resemble cattle trucks at peak times.” (Female, ABC1, 55+ rural North region, shop by car) “Provide the extra capacity of railways to cope with existing and expected growth, so that people can use trains to get to their work or business knowing that they will get a seat, arrive on time and at a reasonable cost.” (Male, ABC1, aged 55+, rural South East and London, shop& social Travel by train)

Panellists that were most likely to make suggestions for rail service improvements in relation to

improved travelling conditions were three times more likely to be from the ABC1 social groups than

C2DE. They were also less likely to reside in the North but across other demographic demarcations,

levels of mentions were similar.

In relation to improving the reliability and cost-effectiveness of moving products and freight around the

country, boosting the rail network was the theme most frequently mentioned. The dominant idea was

to develop the rail network for freight transport so that it is able to replace road haulage to a greater

degree. The panel members expressed an interest in increased use of the rail system for freight

transport, especially at night and over long distances. They also suggested creating a national freight


GfK NOP

network with rail as the backbone, rather than road; and of building new lines and distribution hubs so

that trucks and vans just carried products to their final destinations, not over long-distances.

“Encourage greater use of rail to transport goods, open up new rail routes.” (Male, 55+, urban South East and London, shops, school run and leisure by car) “Transport more goods by railways and start using the canals again in the UK. This will reduce the number of heavy goods lorries on the roads.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, shops & social travel by bus and walks) “Use an upgraded rail system to take lorry traffic from the roads, especially foreign lorries.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East & London, shops & social travel by car) “The rail system should be used more for movement of products, particularly overnight where the tracks are not fully used. Not only would this reduce pollution, but it would provide money that could be invested in the rail network to the benefit of passenger transport.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East & London, commutes by underground) “More freight on the railways and less on the roads. Railway freight hubs should be set up across the country - lorries should only take freight from the hubs to it's final destination.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “More needs to be made of our railway system for moving freight and the use of smaller, more energy efficient vans to shift smaller items and for deliveries, instead of large trailer lorries.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East & London, shop & social travel by car)

Specific comment was made about adapting existing rolling stock to allow the transportation of HGVs or

special containers by rail. The predominant theme, again, was to remove the freight traffic from road

and onto the rail system.

“The only way is to put long distant HGV's onto special trains, like the trains that use the Channel Tunnel, and have special sidings that the HGV's can drive off.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, most frequent journey is to walk to shops) “Encourage greater use of containers that can travel by road, rail, barge or ship. Encourage large businesses to re-open rail sidings that once existed to connect them to the rail network. Somehow transfer much of the lorry borne goods travelling between the UK and Europe to rail.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East & London, shops & social travel by train)

In relation to boosting the rail network’s role in freight transport around the country, more panellists

who were aged 35 years or over made this suggestion, and more men than women.


GfK NOP

Sub-Theme 1b: Improved bus travel

As well as rail improvements, it was also felt appropriate for Government to stimulate improvements to

bus services. The bus issue most mentioned was the regularity and frequency of services, especially at

peak times and in rural districts. This ties in with the priorities identified overall for transport system

improvements; i.e. enabling panellists to plan and use their time effectively. The panel members

especially wanted to be able to rely more on buses to get them to their destinations on time.

“Buses are just not running well enough to be reliable. You just don't know if you will get there on time.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commute, shop & social travel by car)

Some panellists also mentioned the need for improved cleanliness, reduced overcrowding and the

facility to get a seat.

“Buses (and trains) should be frequent, they should turn up [on time] so you have confidence in them. You should be able to get a seat on them, and not be herded around like you are a chicken in a coup!” (Male, C2DE, 18-34, rural North, shops by car) “Clean, comfortable and plentiful buses rather than the dirty, infrequent services that currently abound.” (Female, ABC1, 55+ rural North region, shop by car) “Buses at peak times always seem to be very overcrowded, so there obviously needs to be more transport at these times.”

(Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural Midlands, shop and leisure by car)

Several also wanted more dedicated bus lanes to reduce delays, again improving reliability.

“Buses should be a priority vehicle like in some other European countries, it would ensure a smoother journey without unnecessary delays” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East and London, commutes by bus) “Bus only lanes would help.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South West and Wales, shop & social travel by bus and walk)

There was also some concern expressed about the level of fares, and how this acts as a disincentive to

travelling by bus:

“There is no incentive to sit on a boring stuffy bus when fares are so expensive” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural North region, school run by car)


GfK NOP

“If fares were at a more realistic level they might attract more passengers.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban South West & Wales, shops by bus and walk)

Comments about improved bus services came from across the whole range of the panel, but younger

panellists aged under 35 were most likely to suggest bus improvements as a way of improving the

productivity and competitiveness of the economy, as were those who commute by public transport, and

those who reside in the North.

Theme 2: Better Road Travel

When different modes were considered in relation to acceptable travelling conditions, private road

travel was mentioned by fewer panellists than the number who made suggestions about public

transport in total. However, more panellists made suggestions about road travel than specifically about

rail, and more than specifically about buses. Road improvements were therefore seen as important for

improving traveller productivity and, in particular, for easing access to air and sea-ports around the

country. There were also many suggestions about better road provision for freight transport, but this

was fewer than the number of suggestions made to improve the rail network for transporting freight.

In relation to improving travelling conditions for productivity, the bulk of panellists’

recommendations concentrated on reducing congestion and improving traffic flow, but mentions were

also made about improved car-parking provision and lower costs for road travel. These points are

listed below in order of recommendation most often discussed:

• Reduce congestion and improve traffic flow

• Improve roads and motorways with increased capacity

• Provide better and cheaper car-parking and park-and-ride schemes

• Lower fuel costs and road taxes

Congestion on the roads was a key issue for panellists. There were a variety of different causes

identified, but the underlying theme was the need to reduce the amount of car congestion on the

roads, either by increasing the capacity of the network, or taking action to reduce the number of cars

on the road.


GfK NOP

“The big problem for all road users is congestion. What Government seems unable to accept is that this is the direct result of large scale house building in the south east of the country.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East and London, shop and social travel by car) “Scrap all cars over 10 years old as our roads are now gridlocked. A reduction in the number of cars on the road is required. Manufacture only small cars with low carbon emissions.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, shop & social travel by walking & bus) “Rather than talking a lot of hot air about fuel tax reducing the number of cars on the road and therefore pollution, government should do something to increase road capacity to reduce journey times. The people I come across on the roads are commuters and no amount of fuel tax will reduce that.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East & London, commutes by car)

A few panellists mentioned specific ways of reducing congestion, such as developing information

systems to keep traffic away from congested areas of the network, keeping through traffic out of town

centres, and staggering the opening of school hours, by way of example.

“Develop a National System informing people of traffic congestion, delays and local works-holdups. Then publicise the system so that it is used. It must be free. The problem with congestion is more traffic adding to it!” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West and Wales, shops & social travel by car) Segregation of local and through traffic around town centres. (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West and Wales, personal business travel by car) “It would help immensely if school hours could be staggered and children were either bussed to school or here's a novel idea, walked to their local school rather than needing a car journey.” (Male, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban Midlands, commutes by car)

Increasing the capacity of the road network was a theme that occurred with some regularity, as a way

of easing congestion and improving travel conditions on the road. Most comments focussed on the

motorway and primary road network, increasing the number of lanes, where appropriate, and

upgrading existing roads.

“Bigger motorways” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, commutes car) “Ensure that enough roads are built” (Female, ABC1, 35-54 urban North, shops & social travel by car) “Motorway links are better but there is some way to go. Spend road tax on improving roads.” (Female, C2DE, aged 55+, rural South East & London, social travel by car) “Sooner or later the roads will have to be made wider, it should have been done years ago, but the problem is that no-one had the brains to think ahead and see that the population would double, so now we have too much traffic on our roads.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shops & social travel by car)


GfK NOP

“Invest far more in the primary road network, including the development of new and widened motorways.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban Midlands, commutes by car)

The next most commonly mentioned aspect of improved road facilities was the idea of improving park

and ride type schemes, to reduce congestion in town centres, and improve overall journey times into

town centres.

“More park+ride - keep cars out of cities. Park+ride should be a free service to encourage more usage. Priority in cities should be given to buses/cyclists/pedestrians.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “There should be more park and ride schemes which employers should pay for, to enable their workers to not worry about the stress of travelling into a town centre by car and having problems finding a parking space.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural Midlands, social travel by bus)

In addition, a handful of panel members made suggestions about changing working patterns, and

therefore the distances that people have to travel to get to work or to do business, rather than the

transport provision itself to enhance productivity; as follows:

“The most sensible answer to this is to try and encourage people to live nearer to where they work.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban South East and London, shops & social travel by car) “More government sponsored 'video conferencing' hot-spots to reduce the need for travelling.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “It is naturally important that people can get to work in an efficient, cost effective manner, but far more can be done to get work into the home, at least a few days per week.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural North, shops & social travel by car)

In relation to airport and seaport access, the main concern raised was for access by road to always

be reliable, since public transport is seen as impractical for many (e.g. rural dwellers, travellers with

children, those with a lot of luggage and travellers with a disability). Panellists want Government to

ensure that the main airport access roads are usually kept free from congestion, delays and road-

works, especially at peak times such as holidays. Specific suggestions included creating dedicated

lanes for airport traffic, allowing airport traffic to use motorway hard shoulders if necessary and always

scheduling road-works very carefully, in particular to avoid school holidays. A few respondents

expressed a need for more and cheaper parking at airports.


GfK NOP

“Have lanes of traffic to airports dedicated to airport traffic.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural Midlands, commute by car) “On key routes to airports have contingency plans to open the hard shoulder to traffic. This is already a success on the M42.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West & Wales, shops & social travel by car) “Have an adequate road network and available parking at airfields and ports.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, Urban South West & Wales, commute, shops by car) “The access roads to airports must be free of the congestion that makes the estimated journey so hard to plan; also plenty of parking at airports” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South West & Wales, commute & shop by car)

A smaller minority wanted better road signage to and around airports, as well as more signage and

assistance within airports. Other travellers focused on the need for ample advance warning of airport

access problems - such as road-works or public transport delays - with guidance always offered on

alternative routes.

In relation to freight transport, reducing road congestion was again a common comment along with

improving the scope and condition of the road network, so that goods could be transported more

quickly, safely and efficiently.

“Provide a road structure capable of taking current HGVs safely without risk to other road users.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East and London, shops and social travel by train) “Improve the road network so goods can be transported faster and more effectively.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South West and Wales, social travel by car) “Make roads for lorries and large vans to travel around the country in separate lanes allocated for them on motorways and dual carriageways.” (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes, shops & social travel by car)

A few panellists suggested road pricing as an option to pay for the development of the road network,

and for keeping primary road routes congestion free.

“Our major road networks should be well maintained & controlled with minimum delay-causing congestion. Consider tolls for roads - revenue to be used to improve the road system.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, main travel is to walk to shops)


GfK NOP

“It would seem that for the foreseeable future road transport will be the primary method of transporting goods. The main problem is road congestion. A tax neutral system of road pricing is undoubtedly the best way apportioning road space - the government should introduce this as quickly as possible.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East and London, main travel is to walk to shops)

ABC1 male panellists, those aged 35 or older, those living in rural areas and overwhelmingly those who

are private vehicle users were most likely to suggest road improvements as a way of making conditions

more productive for travellers. Traffic flow specifically (and removing traffic calming) was raised as an

issue by the same sorts of panellists, although congestion was discussed equally by panellists from both

C2DE and ABC1 backgrounds. Additionally C2DE men were most likely to suggest increasing road

capacity and improving the condition of the roads.

Those most likely to mention improving road access to air/sea-ports were more often ABC1s, based in

rural locations and somewhat more liable to living in the South West and Wales. The panellists who

mentioned improving road transport for freight distribution again tended to be ABC1, but on this issue

mainly those aged 35-54.


GfK NOP

Ensuring Business travellers and holidaymakers can easily travel to and through airports

and ports to overseas destinations (topic 2)

Theme 3: Faster movement through airports

As described above, good road access to airports (and sea ports) was seen as an important issue by

some panellists. It was also apparent that many panellists identified faster movement through airports

as an issue to address, so that the entire journey from origin to “take-off” was as efficient as possible.

Their responses indicated that they saw streamlining of check-in processes as central to easing

movement through airports, providing safety was not compromised. (This theme was not mentioned in

connection with seaports.) Panellists’ suggestions on this theme covered a number of different areas:

Improved security process

Reduced queuing

Employing more staff/especially security staff

Improved check-in process

Improved baggage process

Increased automation

Speedier check-in, better baggage handling and more streamlined and efficient security were

specifically mentioned by many. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many wanted less queuing and ‘waiting

around’ in airports. Several also wanted to see more airport staff, in particular security staff, as well as

more security stations and greater up-take of reliable new technologies that could speed up processing

such as online check-in.

One element of the check-in process attracted the most comment, and this was ‘security measures’.

There was evidence of a feeling that whilst security is vital it is currently inefficiently handled at many

airports. These points are illustrated in the selection of quotes that follow:

“Achieve the right balance between security and ease of movement through the airport.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes via walking) “Decrease the (inevitable) delays caused by checking in and security inspections.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East and London, Leisure travel by car)


GfK NOP

“Have enough security personnel and equipment to process all passengers quickly, even at peak times.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, shops & social travel by car) “A larger number of security desks so that people get through quicker” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban North, commute by bus and bike)

The panellists that discussed minimising queues by streamlining airport processes were more likely to

be ABC1s, and marginally more likely to be city and urban residents than rural.

Theme 4: Ensure transit is safe

Safety was, unsurprisingly, a top-of-mind concern for panellists when considering air and sea travel,

particularly in relation to airports and planes. Safety as a single concept was mentioned by around one

in ten panellists responding to this section, who were often female and from lower socio-economic

backgrounds. What was sought was reassurance that travelling in the vessels themselves would be

safe, along with a sense that everything possible was being done to effectively minimise the risk of

terrorism.

“That security is top priority but discrete.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car) “We need to maintain high levels of security so that passengers can travel in safety.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East & London, commutes by car) “Safety and security is a massive issue. Security rules should be well publicised in advance, so there is no excuse for people wasting time. (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes by car) Safety and security are high on the agenda, whilst access to airports should not just be limited to those who are actually travelling, care needs to be taken in who is wandering around the airports and using taxis etc.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban North, shop & social travel by car)

However, it was recognised that a balance had to be struck between the requirements of the travelling

public and the need to ensure their safety.

“Safety is the primary concern, however too much hassle needs to be stopped” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commute, shop and social by car)


GfK NOP

Those who mentioned prioritising transit safety were more likely to be female, and slightly more likely

to be from C2DE than ABC1 backgrounds.

Theme 5: Improved regional planning

This theme covered both better provision for London and less London-centric development with

improved transport links to regional airports.

The panellists who suggested better regional distribution pointed out that improved airports around the

country would reduce the burden on London airports, and on long-distance travelling both to the capital

and through the city to reach the airports which can offer a large number of flights to a wide range of

destinations.

“Distribute the money available for airports throughout the country rather than centred on London. This would prevent huge amounts of long distant travelling by people from the north of England.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, disabled, rural North, social travel by car & walk) “Airports (outside London) have poor public transport links.” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, living in the Urban area in the North, most frequent journeys are school runs; main method of transport is a car) “Increase the number of destinations available from local ports and airports. Local facilities are much more convenient, usually much more friendly and prevent long journeys to distant facilities saving fuel. Also, aircraft can usually take off and land at local airports without much delay and no stacking to await landing and take off slots. This must have an impact on fuel used by such aircraft.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural North, social travel by car or walking) “It would surely ease congestion around London if a greater percentage of the flights flew from more local airports.” (Female, C1DE, 55+, rural North, shops & social travel by car)

A few panellists wanted to see better use of the airports which serve London, for example greater

choice of flights from Stansted and Luton and better alternatives to Heathrow. They suggested

learning from some of the ‘super’ efficient modern airports they have experienced overseas, such as

Singapore’s Changi airport.

“In London reduce the burden on Heathrow and Gatwick by increasing the choice of flights at Stansted and Luton thus reducing the traffic on the motorways surrounding Heathrow and Gatwick.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East & London, commute, shop and social travel by car)


GfK NOP

“Policy makers should seriously consider viable alternative/s to Heathrow, instead of trying to 'improve' the dinosaur Heathrow which must be one of the most expensive old airports in the world.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, walks to shops) “Are the policy makers studying how other countries manage to have the super airports they have? e.g. Singapore's Changi Airport?” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban South East & London, walks to shops)

The panellists who proposed better regional airport facilities with better transport links to them tended

to reside in rural locations in the South West, Wales and the North of England; they were more likely to

be over 55. This makes intuitive sense since travelling long distances would be more draining for older

people who live well away from the large airports.

Theme 6: Discourage air travel

As the form of transport that is thought to contribute most to global warming, some strong views

emerged here, from a minority, focussing on promoting/favouring rail and sea options over air

wherever possible, and penalties/higher taxes for individuals who frequently fly for holiday purposes.

Some recommended favouring business air travel only, and imposing limits on leisure travel. This

environmental point was more likely to be made by people who were middle aged and older.

“Ban internal flights of less than 250 miles and improve the railways!” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “First that there must be a limit on such travel. Business should make far more use of the internet rather than indulging in personal visits. Holidays overseas should be rationed to one air trip -per annum but unlimited trips by rail/boat.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South West and Wales, shops by car) “I would like to see a leisure short haul tax introduced for those flying more than once a year for holiday purposes. I would also like to see the competitive tax free fuel currently offered to airlines scrapped. Instead air lines should be taxed and trains buses and ships should get the duty free fuel! Finally, all air travel should be subject to VAT.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West & Wales, Shops and social travel by car) “Encourage that holidays be taken in the British Isles and discourage all air travel. This will help to reduce Carbon Emissions made by the Airlines”. (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East, commutes by train)


GfK NOP

Ensuring products can be transported to people and businesses at reasonable cost and reliably (topic 3)

Theme 7: Reduced Road Freight

The invitation to offer a comment on freight haulage and the delivery of goods seemed to tap into a

feeling of frustration with the number of big lorries and HGVs on the roads. Many implied that getting

rid of some of these trucks would be a good thing in itself; many also noted that it would reduce

congestion and pollution. Reduced road haulage or relieving the reliance on road haulage came

through from many panellists’ responses to this question. Even those who suggested boosting the rail

network usually did so with a view to removing some of the pressure off the road network, and

reducing the number of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) on the roads. Restricting road haulage to night

travelling or to outside of towns were specific suggestions which were made; while several others

spontaneously suggested rail transport of goods between towns and lighter vehicle/lorry transport for

goods within towns and local areas from a network of rail hubs.

“Lorries and trucks transporting goods should avoid peak travelling times if possible to ease congestion, road rage etc.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commutes by car) “Cut back on HGV lorries and improve the rail network. Then make it more economically viable for goods to be transported by rail.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, shops & social travel by car) “Large delivery trucks should operate during night hours and leave the roads more free during the working day for lighter traffic.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car) “To have freight travelling and deliveries made between 8pm and 6am that way travel is quicker, less fuel is consumed and shop deliveries are made in a timely fashion.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54 rural Midlands, commutes by car) “Promote and maybe subsidise the rail network for transportation of freight. This may involve the establishment of more rail goods yards for local lorries to pick up containers but roads would be less congested if the goods which were all travelling to the same city shared a train instead of crowding the roads.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East and London, shop, commute & social travel by car)

Those who resided in the South East and London and panellists over the age of 35 were more likely to

mention the need to have fewer HGVs on the road. Also, considerably more male than female

panellists made this comment.


GfK NOP

Theme 8: Improved reliability and affordability of product distribution

When asked to consider the transport of products, some panellists wanted to see a reliable, punctual

system, and this was emphasised by urban residents in particular. Some panellists also mentioned the

need for cheaper distribution costs. Some also noted that delays were not an acceptable part of any

product delivery system, especially if businesses were operating on ‘just-in-time’ arrangements, and

that delays were more likely to occur with rail transport. Examples of suggestions on this theme are

given below:

“Reduced costs for volume business” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural North, commutes by car) “Reliability of services, timetabling of services, consistency of scheduled services.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East & London, shops by car) “Fuel prices need to be reduced for businesses to ensure that the costs are reasonable. Businesses need to look at more efficient ways of utilising their resources, and be rewarded for that” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South West & Wales, shops by car)

Both genders emphasised reliability and technical efficiency, but more women than men mentioned

cost, affordability and discounts for higher volumes.

Theme 9: Upgrade Home Delivery

A minority of women (in the main), commented on home delivery systems including the post, and

suggested ways to improve them and to further safeguard consumer rights. Many appeared to be

thinking about delivery of items purchased via catalogue or internet ordering. Around one in ten of

those who answered this section made suggestions about the postal or home-delivery system. Some

discussed the need to increase security to ensure that items do not go missing in transit.

“Better ability for people to trace / track there goods. Better security is required to make sure items are not stolen, and that they are handled with care. Maybe use a mixture of different transport types to speed things up.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East & London, commute, shop and social travel by car)

“We should be able to send things securely without having to worry about things going missing. The people involved should have big penalties towards them if this happens.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural Midlands, shops by bus transport is a bus)


GfK NOP

Others commented on the costs of the postal service and how prices needed to be reduced.

“Fair priced and secure services, offering a guarantee of service.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South West and Wales, social travel by car) “Sending goods either by Royal Mail or privately is an extremely costly business. Price structures need to be addressed.” (Female, 55+, urban North, shops by car)

A few other comments were made, for example the need to have deliveries outside office hours for

those at work during the day, and ensuring the transparency of any delivery system so that the

customer can trace items during transit.

“Efficient home delivery systems which cope with the fact that many customers are not at home during the day (e.g. by using Post Offices or other outlets as depositories which are open outside office hours).” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East & London, commutes by car)

Panellists based in rural areas were marginally more likely to mention home delivery issues, and the

great majority were aged 18-34, and female.

Theme 10: Cut road and fuel taxes

Road taxes and fuel prices were seen by a few panellists to be inhibiting and damaging the freight

trade and raising delivery costs. There were calls for relief generally, and specifically for the delivery of

essential foodstuffs, and for using more fuel-efficient haulage vehicles.

“Cut the taxes on fuel so that companies can afford to use the lorries.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, rural Midlands, shops & social travel by car) “Provide discounts on tax, diesel etc for business users, especially when providing essential items such as food.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East & London, shops & social travel by car)

The idea of reducing fuel and road taxes was most commonly mentioned by those aged 35-54, and

those who resided in the South West and Wales.


GfK NOP

Theme 11: Re-open/develop canal system

Re-opening and developing the old canal system was another suggestion that came up. The idea was

again to move product transport away from road haulage and to free up the road system from heavy

goods lorries. Those who suggested making more use of canals often did so in conjunction with

recommending more use of the rail system over the road system for internal transportation of freight.

“Freight should also be encouraged through both subsidy and legislation to use rail and canals where possible.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, rural South West and Wales, shops & social travel by car) “Cut down on road haulage. Open up the old canals, there are a network of these right across the country and put to use again would take a great deal off the roads.” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban South East & London, shops & social by car)

Panellists aged over 55 were most likely to mention using the canal system more.

Theme 12: Source more locally

Finally, a number of different suggestions were made about shortening the distance of supply chains,

including: a ‘miles travelled tax’; everyday groceries being sourced within 30 miles; and encouraging

more industry within the UK.

“If supermarkets sold more home produced products and less from abroad I am sure that this would help.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shops & social travel by car) “They should look at a 'miles travelled tax' on certain foods and other products to ensure that products aren't transported ridiculous distances even when local alternatives are available. Milk/meat/vegetables. should be sourced locally where possible.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “Encouraging more industry in the UK in the first place so that such goods do not need to be imported” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car)

Those who suggested greater local sourcing of products were more likely to be over 55, from ABC1

backgrounds, and to be resident in rural areas.


GfK NOP

5.3 Equality

Goal 3: To promote greater equality of transport opportunity for all citizens, with the

desired outcome of achieving a fairer society


How to enhance access to health, education and other services, and help people get out and about to

see friends and family and visit the shops, considering:

- the needs of different social groups including transport services for disabled people, and

potentially disadvantaged groups

- how transport can help to tackle disadvantage in local areas including relatively deprived

regions and areas

- some types of area also have particular needs, for example rural areas and new areas of

housing development

5.3.1 Summary


Equality goal are:

(These are ordered according to the frequency with which each theme was spontaneously mentioned,

the most frequently being listed first).


1. Cheaper public transport

2. Make it easier for certain customer groups to access public transport

3. Better public transport links and integration of public transport

4. Better public transport infrastructure for rural areas


GfK NOP

Equality of opportunity for our panellists means removing specific barriers to use, by ensuring everyone

can afford to travel by public transport and everyone can easily use public transport, recognising the

specific needs of the disabled and the elderly. Cheaper public transport recurred throughout the

responses we received, for all types of public transport including bus and rail. Some went further and

suggested that transport needs to be free or heavily discounted for certain groups, such as those with a

disability and the elderly. Aside from cost, it was recognised that the other main barrier to use for

certain people - the elderly, mothers with pushchairs and those with a disability - was the problem of

accessing the public transport system. So it was felt necessary to make it easier to get onboard public

transport vehicles and access stations, via use of low-floor buses, more open-plan decks, and ramps or

lifts at stations.

However, panellists felt that equality of opportunity also means having a public transport option that is

a realistic alternative to the car for all types of journey, and this was seen to require investment in

public transport services to ensure that there are better public transport options – that is better public

transport links and better integration of services, and better public transport connections between local

communities in rural areas.



policy makers should be trying to achieve in each of the following topic:

Question: How to enhance access to health, education and other services, and help people get out and

about to see friends and family and visit the shops, considering:

the needs of different social groups including transport services for disabled people,

and potentially disadvantaged groups

how transport can help to tackle disadvantage in local areas including relatively

deprived regions and areas

some types of area also have particular needs, for example rural areas and new areas

of housing development

There were four key themes that emerged from the panel responses and these are described below.


GfK NOP

Theme 1: Cheaper public transport

This was a theme that recurred throughout responses to this question. For some the key issue was to

make fares more affordable so that all groups could use public transport. This desire for cheaper fares

covered all types of public transport, including buses and rail services.

“Make public transport affordable and accessible to all who need it - not just have it available because a private company can make a profit from running it.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South East, disabled, shop/social by car) “Cheap and regular bus service” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban South West, social by car)

Some went further and suggested that public transport needs to be free or heavily discounted for

certain groups, such as those with a disability and the elderly. This would provide transport

opportunities for those people who otherwise would not be able to travel as they could not afford the

fares.

“Reduced fares for people with less money (OAPs, Students) ….” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban South West, commute by bus and walking) “Free public transport for disabled people and low income families. Greater assistance for single parent low income families” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural North West, commute by car) “Student discount available on all forms of transport” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South East, commute by car)

Recommendations came from the whole spectrum of panel members. However, the idea of cheaper

public transport was almost twice as likely to be articulated by those resident in rural areas compared

with those in urban areas, and the same was true of those aged 35 -54 (nearly twice as likely)

compared with other age groups. Interestingly, those with a disability were less likely to spontaneously

mention this idea, although this may reflect that they already have price discounted travel options.


GfK NOP

Theme 2: Make it easier for certain customer groups to access public transport

Aside from cost, it was recognised that the other main barrier to use, for certain sub-groups, was the

problem of accessing the public transport system. Some people such as those with a disability, the

elderly and mothers with pushchairs struggle physically to board different public transport services, and

therefore it was felt important that public transport was made easier for these customers to use. This

included comment about access to stations well as getting on public transport vehicles.

“More transport to cater for wheelchair users and young families with pushchairs.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural East Midlands, shop/social by car) “Accessibility is vital. Buses, trains, underground and stations must be brought up to date. There are many inaccessible stations, even if the transport is accessible, you can't get to it! (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East, disabled, school run/shop/social by car and walking,) “Step free access, ramps or lifts to as many stations as is practical” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban London, commute/shop/social by train)

Some panellists specifically mentioned how difficult it was for those in wheelchairs and those with

buggies to get on bus services, and the need to introduce low floor buses, and more open-plan lower

decks, to allow easier access.

“Buses should have wheelchair access and then somewhere to park the wheel chair or pushchair without folding it. Push chair users should be no more frowned on than wheel chair users, both have a nightmare using public transport.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban South East, disabled, shop/social by car) “Equality should mean exactly that. Therefore, the whole community should be considered therefore incorporating all those transport needs. For instance, designing buses with a more open-plan lower deck (more pull-down seats) for those in wheelchairs and women with buggies. Also seating areas designated for those with children and elderly individuals”. (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban London, shop/social by walking) “People with prams on buses are limited on to about two at maximum. If it was easier and had more room, they might go out more. Maybe even a specialised bus every hour would help them more.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban London, commute by bus)

Making public transport accessible and easier to use was more often raised by females, C2DEs, those

resident in London/ South East, and South West and Wales, and those with some kind of disability that

limits their daily activities.


GfK NOP

Theme 3: Better public transport links and integration of public transport

As described above, it was felt that reducing fares or introducing free transport, and improving

accessibility for certain customer groups, would remove the existing barriers to use and promote

greater equality of opportunity. However, many panellists also believed that equality of opportunity

could only be achieved if policymakers addressed the fundamental need to improve public transport

services to ensure that any journey could be made by public transport (as a realistic alternative to the

car). If everyone had the option to make their journeys by public transport, this would provide equality

of opportunity.

So, many focussed their responses on the need to provide more bus and train services, to provide

better links between different services, and in particular to integrate public transport services such that

all journeys could be made by public transport. Some panel members concentrated specifically on the

need to provide more bus services.

“Frequent, efficient public transport - local minibuses running from village to village, including wheelchair access. Ring and Ride in rural areas.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural North West, shop/other by car) “Reliable bus links and bus timetables should reflect the needs of the people e.g. for people attending college from a rural area, the bus should leave at a time helpful to lecture times.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South East, commute by car)

Others cited the need to improve train services, specifically commenting on the need to provide more

regular and frequent train services.

The issue of better integration of public services, to ensure that any journey could be made by public

transport, was felt to be important by many. This was sometimes articulated as a general comment

about the need for “integration”. However, others spontaneously mentioned the need to “join up” bus

and rail services, or different bus services, to provide this integration.

“Have a 'joined up' policy where problems are thought through properly, and can be relied upon to work well.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South East, shop/social by car) “Integrate local taxi, small mini & midi bus/vans in with local bus services to enable door to bus stop service. Encourage volunteers to travel on buses to assist with people getting on/off.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban London, shop/social by train)


GfK NOP

“Have integrated systems of public transport that are cheap and reliable - the old Sheffield model was great - 5p to go anywhere.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban North East, shop/social by car)

Those mentioning better bus links tended to be ABC1s, those living in rural areas, and people aged less

than 35 years. ABC1s were also more likely to mention better rail links. Integration of public transport

services was mentioned almost exclusively by ABC1s.

Theme 4: Better public transport infrastructure for rural areas

The need for better public transport options in rural areas might be seen as part of the demand for

better transport links in general (theme 3 above). However, the range of comments about the lack of

transport options in rural areas was marked, and therefore, in our view, merits a distinct category as a

separate theme. The core transport requirements of the rural community were described as the

provision of more regular services.

“More regular transport links in rural areas.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural Eastern, social by car) “Ensuring that public transport runs through areas such as villages on a frequent basis…” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West, commute by car)

However, some panel members identified specific issues that residents in rural areas faced, and from

this made suggestions about priority actions for policymakers. For example, one of the perceived

challenges faced by rural residents was public transport access to hospitals and other essential services.

A few commented, therefore, on the need to provide better public transport links to these types of

establishments.

“… Access is very important as it stops people from travelling to various services, or getting out for their own well being. Keep the cost of single/return journeys as low as possible as this also stops people. This is especially important in rural areas as the nearest educational/health centre could be several miles away.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South East, commute by train)

Others noted the dearth of transport services that connected villages in the local area, so whilst there

might well be a bus service to the local hub town, there was no public transport option for journeys

between local villages. This requirement for better transport connections between places in the local

community was commented upon by some of the panel members.


GfK NOP

“Public transport should provide a comprehensive network of services, not just to/from city centres. Services should be regular and frequent even in rural areas - once or twice a day is not enough.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East, commute by bus and walking)

Better public transport infrastructure was raised as an issue predominantly by those living in rural areas

(almost three times as many mentions as among those resident in urban areas), and also more often

by those based in the South West and Wales.


GfK NOP

5.4 Health, safety and security Goal 4: To contribute to better health and longer life-expectancy, through reducing the risk

of death, injury or illness arising from transport and promoting travel modes that are

beneficial to health.


- Reducing the numbers of people killed or injured in transport accidents

- Ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately protected from crime and terrorist

attacks.

- Improving peoples’ health and life expectancy through encouraging use of healthier forms of

travel such as walking and cycling

5.4.1 Summary


Health, safety and security goal are described below. Interestingly there were no overarching themes

that came out in response to all the above three issues, but different themes emerged for different

issues within this overall goal.

Specific key themes for reducing the number of people killed or injured in transport accidents

were as follows (ordered according to the frequency with which each theme was spontaneously

mentioned, the most frequently being listed first):

1. Better road layout/road markings/road design

2. Higher standards of driving

3. Stricter speed controls

4. Tougher penalties

5. Enhanced public transport safety

6. Increase use of public transport


GfK NOP

Specific key themes for ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately

protected from crime and terrorist attacks were as follows: (again, by frequency of mention):

7. More police/security staff

8. More cameras/CCTV/monitoring of transport

9. Better lighting at bus stops and rail stations

10. More checks and monitoring of potential suspects

The specific key themes for improving peoples’ health and life expectancy through

healthier forms of travel such as walking and cycling were as follows (ordered by frequency

of mention):

11. Improve provision for cyclists/safe lanes/facilities

12. Improve safety/lighting/reduce street crime

13. Educate and promote walking and cycling

When thinking about how to reduce the numbers of those killed or injured in transport accidents

panellists focused very much on road safety. Panellist felt that DfT should therefore consider

implementing policies that aim to improve current road layouts, taking into account traffic volumes.

Suggestions in this area included: measures to slow traffic down, safer road design, clearer road signs,

more pedestrian crossings, more use of purpose built cycle lanes, better diagnosis of local causes of

accidents and the introduction of appropriate preventative measures, and the use of more speed

cameras. Many also felt that driving skills in general need to be improved through better education,

stricter driving tests and the introduction of repeat driving tests, particularly for those who offend on

the roads. Stricter speed controls, particularly in built-up areas was another theme that recurred with

some regularity. There was a small minority who advocated a ‘zero tolerance’ approach towards

offenders, with drink driving being seen as a particular area for tougher penalties.

Some felt the answer is to get people off the road and onto public transport. However, proponents of

public transport recognise that to encourage use, public transport needs to improve its services and

reduce its cost so that it is a realistic alternative to private car usage.


GfK NOP

When thinking about how to ensure people can travel in safety and be protected from crime and

terrorists, some wanted to see policies put in place that increased levels of security by putting more

transport police on transport routes. Many felt that a high level of visible security and policing would

deter crime. A minority felt that increased level of surveillance would help and a few suggested a policy

that included enhanced and more targeted checks on potential suspects.

Finally when considering ‘improving health and life expectancy through healthier forms of transport

such as walking or cycling’, many said policies needed to be put in place to introduce more and safer

cycle and foot paths that were pleasant to use. By keeping cyclists away from busy sections of the

road, people would be encouraged to cycle more, and this would also enhance the safety of cyclists on

the road. Panellists also recommended better lighting and path maintenance, and policies that promote

and educate young people to use healthier forms of transport such as cycling.


GfK NOP



policy makers should be trying to achieve in each of the following three topic areas:

1. Reducing the numbers of people killed or injured in transport accidents

2. Ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately protected from crime and terrorist

attacks.

3. The improvement of peoples’ health and life expectancy through encouraging use of healthier

forms of travel such as walking and cycling

Notably there were no overarching themes across the three questions, therefore each will be reviewed

separately.

Reducing the numbers of people killed or injured in transport accidents (topic 1)

Themes spontaneously mentioned by panellists in response to this question were mainly based around

‘roads’, more specifically the safety of roads and safety from other drivers, as well as improving driving

standards and employing tougher penalties for dangerous drivers. However, a minority of people also

mentioned alternative policy themes such as enhancing public transport safety and reducing the cost of

public transport.

Theme 1: Better road layout / road markings / road design

This was seen as a key issue to address and suggestions covered a number of different road and traffic

improvements. In order of most mentioned:

slow traffic down

safer design of roads generally

clearer/more pedestrian crossings/road markings

improve town planning

safer/better/more safer cycle lanes

identify cause of accidents and introduce appropriate preventative measures

more speed cameras in built up areas and accident hotspots


GfK NOP

Whilst the slowing of traffic was the most mentioned theme there are those who recognise this must be

enforced intelligently with priority to residential locations and softer controls on open roads and

highways.

“More emphasis on safe driving (i.e. lane control) - less on ensuring not 1 mph over the speed limit on open roads (i.e. motorways / dual carriage ways) - strict speed limits in residential areas 'flexible / sensible' limits outside residential areas.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West / Wales region, commute car) “Differential speed limits to suit differing areas” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural North region, shop and social travel by car) “Enforcement of speed zones, crossings for pedestrians.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East and London, commute by bus)

A few also suggested that clearer road signs before junctions and slip roads would improve safety.

“Priority should be given to improving road layout at junctions etc.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East region, commute by bus or walk) “Better signage before junctions on motorways a mile before is to short.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, rural Midlands region, commuting by car)

A minority suggested better planning of roads to incorporate pedestrian ways and purpose built cycle

lanes/paths. It was felt that separating the flows of the three modes of travel would enhance the

safety of cyclists and pedestrians.

“Design of roads to reduce hazards. Development of separate routes reserved for cyclist and pedestrians.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West and Wales region, shop and a social travel by car) “Better provision for cyclists - well lit off-road routes where possible, separate from pedestrian traffic.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural area in the North region, commute by car)

Panellists also recognise that it is important to identify the ‘actual’ cause of accidents and recommended

more cameras in built up areas / accident hotspots. This would reduce the incidence of dangerous

driving behaviours.

“Investigate the real reason for accidents that cause death then take appropriate action, e.g. if the reason is speeding and it's too easy to speed then install measures to make speeding not possible etc.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East region, shop and social travel by car)


GfK NOP

“Put more cameras in accident hot spots.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North region, shop & social by car)

Whilst the policy suggestion for better road layout, road markings and road design came from across

the panel as a whole, this theme was more likely to be mentioned by those aged between 35 and 54,

and much more so by those who live in the North.

Theme 2: Higher standards of driving

In addition to implementing better road designs, it was also felt that the Government should raise the

standards of driving and vehicles on the road. In particular the Government should be looking at

addressing the challenges of improving the training and education of drivers in general, as well as

maintaining high standards of existing drivers by regular checks / re-tests. There were calls for stricter

driving tests, and the introduction of repeat tests, particularly for those who offend on the roads. The

theme of providing better education for drivers reoccurred also in a number of comments from the

panel.

“This is a difficult one, bad and dangerous driving really cannot be controlled but a more rigorous driving test and compulsory motorway tuition may help. Further tests after any conviction for motoring offences may help.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban Midlands region, shop and school run by car) “Driving tests should be harder. There are so many that DON'T signal when they are going to turn a corner.” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban South East / London region, shop by bus) “Make people re-sit driving tests every few years.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East and London region, commutes by car) “Educate drivers to be more observant of cycles / motorcycles.” (Male, C2DE, 18-34, rural Midlands region, commuting, shop and social travel by car, motorcycle and bike)

Some panellists also recommended policies that increased the driving age to 21 years and above, or at

least restricted the types of cars that very young people can drive.

“Enforce R plates for new drivers as in Northern Ireland, and restrict the sorts of cars those under 21 can legally drive.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54 rural South West / Wales region, commute and school run by car) “Raise the driving age this will prevent many, many accidents, all young drivers want to do is speed, we have school kids on motor bikes they haven’t a clue what they are doing to other drivers.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shop and social travel by car)


GfK NOP

Those who suggested higher standards of driving were more likely to live in rural areas, in the

Midlands, and to be aged 55+.

Theme 3: Stricter speed controls

Whilst there was a minority of panellists that believed it is not speed that kills but dangerous driving,

many felt that reducing speed limits would help reduce the number of people killed in transport

accidents. There was also a group of people who suggested that speeding could be further

discouraged through more speed cameras; particularly in built up areas.

A number of panellists responding to questions about health, safety and security mentioned their

frustration with the volume of speed cameras on motorways instead of focusing on residential and

accident hotspots. There was a strong belief that speeds needed to be restricted in built up areas.

Also, there were positive mentions of both flashing speed boards and ‘average speed cameras’,

panellists stating that they are far more successful at keeping the traffic flow constant and steady and

therefore safe.

“Cut the speed of vehicles. Less deaths and vehicles run more economically so less fuel used.” (Female, 55+, rural North region, shop by car) “I would put more speed cameras up where appropriate; also make it a lower speed limit through villages.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural North region, shop by car) “More of the flashing speed boards, they work really well, it flashes up and drivers suddenly remember they are driving, and start paying attention.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural Midlands, shop and social travel by car) “More of the average speed cameras, rather than the static or handheld devices where you get penalised for a split second point in time. Where the average speed systems are in use traffic flows better, and speeds are adhered to, which in turn stops the dangerous racing and braking between speed cameras.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban area in Midlands, commute by car) “Shift speed enforcement from highways to built-up residential areas. I do not believe that speed cameras on motorways and trunk roads have much of an impact on safety as it is not speeding that kills, but dangerous, inappropriate driving.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West and Wales region, commute and school run by car)


GfK NOP

There were very few differences in the profile of those mentioning stricter speed controls, it was an

opinion mentioned by many people. However, car drivers were slightly less likely than the average to

mention this as a theme.

Theme 4: Tougher penalties

There were a few hard core panellists that strongly believed tougher penalties and zero tolerance was

the answer to reducing the risk of injury or death through transport accidents. Penalties and zero

tolerance were mainly focused on dangerous driving. Recommendations covered tougher enforcement

of laws on speed limits, and the use of mobile phones whilst driving, and tougher custodial sentences

for serious offences such as dangerous driving and drink driving. Notably, a few suggested reducing the

alcohol limit to zero to clarify exactly what drivers can and can’t drink before driving.

“Zero tolerance of drivers with a drink/drug influence in an accident - there should be a compulsory prison sentence for such people.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban area in Midlands, shop and a social travel by car) “On the roads there should be a no-tolerance approach to dangerous activities, particularly driving while under the influence of alcohol/drugs (reduce the alcohol limit to zero so that everyone is clear what that limit is and because an arbitrary limit can not take into account the variable effects of alcohol on different people) and stronger (including custodial) sentences should be imposed on those found guilty.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East and London region, commutes by underground) “ Heavier fines for people using mobile phones.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, rural South East and London, social travel by car)

Males were much more likely to mention tougher penalties than females. People aged 35-54, and

those living in the South East were also more likely to mention this theme.

Theme 5: Enhance public transport safety

A smaller proportion of people considered the safety aspects of public transport such as buses and

trains. Panellists recommended the implementation of policies that would monitor, maintain and

enforce safety systems for all types of public transport.

It was felt that policies should be put in place that ensure all public transport drivers are highly trained

in driving skills, and also in a range of health and safety matters.


GfK NOP

“Ensure that public transport is fitted with all available safety features and is properly maintained. Drivers should be fully trained and regularly assessed for performance and ability.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural North region, commutes by car) “Better training for drivers/operators of public transport, to stop these gung-ho drivers.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North region, shop, school run and social travel by car or walk) Well trained drivers which follow safety rules. Have the drivers take health and safety courses and first aid.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East and London, commutes by bus or walk)

There was a general consensus that safety measures and equipments should be implemented

throughout public transport, covering things like the fitting and use of seat belts on buses and coaches,

having visible security staff or community police at rail stations and on-train, better platform lighting at

stations, and increased protection for drivers and public alike. People also see the benefit of increased

surveillance such as CCTV and security cameras. (There is some overlap here with themes 7 and 8

described below in connection with ensuring that people can travel safely and are adequately protected

from crime.)

“Seat belts should be available on public transport to reduce injuries if involved in an accident.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural north region, commutes by car) “More rail guards, guards on buses, and better street, bus stop, station & platform lighting.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East and London, social travel by bus) “If necessary security should be provided on public transport including CCTV cameras.” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, shops and social travel by car)

There were only minor demographical differences in those mentioning this theme of enhanced safety

for users of public transport. However those who use public transport were much more likely to

mention this as a theme compared with those who travel predominantly by private car, and the same

was true of those whose main form of transport is to walk.


GfK NOP

Theme 6: Increase use of public transport

Finally some panellists thought that encouraging the use of public transport would inevitably reduce

injury or death by reducing the number of cars on the road. Policy recommendations included the

following: increase the standard and coverage of services, and reduce the cost.

“Reduce the number of private vehicles on the road system by having a fully integrated modern transport system. Then the number of accidents involving personal injury would decrease.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban area in North region, shop and social travel by car) “Encourage people to use public transport thereby reducing total travel journeys by car, therefore potentially decreasing the potential for accidents.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural North region, shop, school run and social travel by car)

Those who mentioned this theme were more likely to be ABC1s, although it was cited by both car and

public transport users alike.

Ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately protected from crime and terrorist attacks (topic 2)

Theme 7: More police/security staff

As described above, some panellists felt that increased police presence and security staff would ensure

safer travel on public transport such as buses or trains. This came up with some regularity in

connection with the issue of ensuring that people can travel safely and are adequately protected from

crime and terrorist attacks. One of the recommendations was for plain clothed transport police, as well

as for improved training and greater investment in security.

“I think community police should patrol trains, trams, metros and stations. The presence would deter yobs and make people feel safer.” (Male, C2DE, aged 18-34, rural North region, shops by car) “Protection for people on foot - more visible police presence on streets. A police service that focuses on us, the people…. Have more supervisory staff on buses and trains, to enforce discipline and safety, especially on late night transport” (Male, ABC1, aged 55+, rural South West and Wales, commutes and school run by car) “Security staff to travel as ordinary passengers so that no one knows whether they will be caught if they create trouble or dangerous situations.” (Male, C2DE, aged 55+, rural North region, social travel by car)


GfK NOP

Interestingly males were more likely than females to suggest more security staff, indicating that this is

a theme that is relevant regardless of gender. Higher social grades were more likely also to suggest

this theme.

Theme 8: More cameras / CCTV/ more monitoring of transport

Again, this came out as a specific theme in connection with ensuring people can travel safely, with a

minority of panellists spontaneously mentioning policies to increase the number of surveillance cameras

which would help travellers feel safe and secure. However, there was a subset of people that felt this

policy on its own was not a good enough deterrent. They thought that it would only help if response

times could be improved, and if those who committed crimes knew they would be caught.

“Cameras and alarms on public transport with a rapid police response rate to alarms” (Male, ABC1, aged 55+, rural South West and Wales, commutes and school run by car) “Install CCTV systems and use systems like ‘bobbies on buses’ etc.” (Male, aged 18-34, rural South East and London, commutes mainly by walking) “Ensure that all public transport is fitted with CCTV and offenders are severely dealt with when apprehended.” (Male, ABC1, aged 55+, rural North region, commute by car)

This theme was suggested by only a minority - however females were more likely than males to

suggest increased security cameras.

Theme 9: Better lighting at bus stops and rail stations

A minority of panellists felt that action should be taken to improve the lighting at transport stops,

particularly in rural or remote locations.

“Provide better lighting in stations. (Female, ABC1, aged 35-54, urban North region , commuting by car) “Better lighting on train stations, some security person on platforms, security cameras that work.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban South East and London, commutes by bus)

Of the minority who mentioned this theme, they were more likely to be female, living in the South and

using public transport, particularly bus users.


GfK NOP

Theme 10: More checks and monitoring of potential suspects

Also there was a minority of people who said that they are happy for police and security staff to

perform checks and visual monitoring in order to stop terrorism and crime in general.

“Terrorism is more tricky but I think the way ahead is more police (again) but with more powers to arrest..””. (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East and London, shop, school run and social travel by car) “Enhanced monitoring of potential suspects, whilst minimising inconvenience to others.” ( Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, shop, school run and social travel by car)

Only a minority mentioned this theme of enhanced checks and monitoring of potential suspects, but

they were more likely to be aged over 55, not working and using their own private transport.

It is important to also note that there are some who do not believe that anything more can be done

about the threat of terrorism, and that security checks and procedures should be kept at the current

level.

“There’s adequate protection already.” ( Female, ABC1, 55+, rural South East and London, shops by car) “We'll never be completely free from any risk of terrorists but that risk can be kept low and they seem to be doing a great job at it so just keep up the good work.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South West & Wales, commutes by car) “Difficult to say what can be achieved on this. If someone gets on a bus carrying a bomb there is not much the bus driver can do about it.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shop and social travel by car)


GfK NOP

Improving peoples’ health and life expectancy through healthier forms of travel such as

walking and cycling (topic 3)

Theme 11: Improve provision for cyclists/safe lanes/facilities

Most recommendations in this whole topic area were focused on improving the facilities for cycling on

the roads. The majority of panellists wanted policies that would introduce safer cycle lanes and paths,

with better lighting and improved surfaces, away from fast moving traffic. By keeping cyclists away

from busy sections of roads, it was felt that this would encourage people to cycle more, as well as

enhancing the safety of cyclists on the road. In addition, some specifically mentioned increased

investment to extend the network of cycle lanes and paths.

“Improve pathways and cycle-ways.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East and London, commutes by car) “Also provide specific cycle lanes that are set up and thought through so they do not finish half way down a road.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East and London, commutes by train & walks) “Improving cycle networks to take cyclists away from busy roads.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West and Wales, commutes by car) “Improvements to cycle path - more interlinking paths avoiding main roads” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban North, commutes by car) “Ensure that cycle routes provide complete direct routes not lots of short unconnected bits that don't go to where most people want to go. Wherever possible build dedicated segregated cycle routes.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East & London, commutes by bus & walking)

Those who mentioned improved provision of cycle lanes and paths were much more likely to be from

the higher social grade groups, aged 35-54, living in South West or Wales, and to be commuters.


GfK NOP

Theme 12: Improve safety/lighting/reduce street crime

Some panellists felt that policies that improved safety on the streets would encourage people to use

healthier forms of transport such as bikes or walking. This could be done through ensuring paths are

safe and well lit at night. There is clearly some overlap here with a theme identified in the Quality of

Life section – the need to provide an enhanced pedestrian experience to improve the experience of

travelling by foot (see Theme 5 in section 5.5). It was also felt that a higher police presence with

regular patrols would make people feel more confident about using foot and cycle paths.

“Make it safe to walk anywhere” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban North, shops by car) “Make safety a priority - better lighting, paths, policing etc” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban North, commute & social travel by car) “If it was safe to go walking people would walk we need more police to be seen in the area.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shop & social travel by car) “Road and street crime are on the increase. Our roads are not safe. Again more patrolling and well lit streets should help.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East & London, commute, shop, school run and social travel by car)

Panellists suggesting this theme were more likely to be C2DE’s, aged over 35, and car users.

Theme 13: Educate and promote walking and cycling

There were a few panellists who felt policies that aimed to promote and educate would encourage

healthier lifestyles. Targeting young people was also highlighted as being particularly important, with

some panellists saying that children should be encouraged to walk to school, and others commenting

on the need to increase awareness and understanding of how to cycle safely.

“Walking is simply a matter of education, walking bus to schools is an option which has had limited success in the area in which I live.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban Midlands, shop, school run and a social travel by car) “Encouraging parents to walk their children to and from school, thus reducing the rush hour traffic and allowing children and parents a chance to have some exercise and interact with each other.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban North, shop & social travel by car) “Education at an early age would assist. Perhaps the old 'Road Safety Scheme' where police officers go into schools and teach the children about safe cycling should be considered.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban Midlands, shop, school run and a social travel by car)


GfK NOP

“More efforts to get children to walk to school and an increase in physical activity at school would be good.” (Female, C2DE, aged 35-54, urban South East & London, shop, commute & social travel by walking & bike) “It might be best to begin in schools through initiatives that will feed through to the rest of the family. For example children could be encouraged to walk to school (with their parents) if possible.” (Male, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East & London, commutes by the underground)

Those mentioning this theme were slightly more likely to be older, living in rural areas, and resident in

the Midlands, South East and North.


GfK NOP

5.5 Quality of life

Goal 5: The impact that transport has on the local environment - the noise level, local air

quality, the landscape in both towns and cities and in the countryside, local wildlife and

quality of water in rivers


- Enhancing the quality of journeys that people make by public transport, and the experience of

travelling by road and on foot

- Moderating the impact that transport has on the local environment

5.5.1 Summary


Quality of Life goal were (ordered according to the frequency with which each theme was

spontaneously mentioned, the most frequently being listed first):


1. Improved public transport provision

2. Improved road transport

3. Reduced air pollution/ carbon emissions and development of more environmentally-friendly transport options

Specific key themes for improving the quality of journeys that people make by public

transport and the experience of travelling by road and by foot (topic 1) were as follows (again

ordered according to the frequency of mention):

4. Safe travel

5. Enhanced pedestrian experience

6. Cleaner and more comfortable public transport


GfK NOP

There was one specific theme mentioned for moderating the impact transport has on the

local environment (topic 2):

7. Protection and promotion of green areas, wild habitats and wildlife

To contribute to an improved quality of life for all transport users and for all those affected by

transport, the consensus was again to strengthen the UK public transport system infrastructure and

assist it in becoming more environmentally friendly, since this would achieve the double-objective of

reducing the number of private journeys and their multiple emissions, and introduce low-impact

technology most quickly into England and Wales.

Through their emphasis on public transport, panellists are expecting Government to take a lead in

becoming environmentally friendly, but they do not just focus on public transport. The road network

was the subject of many recommendations which could improve citizens’ quality of life and minimise

negative effects on the environment - chief among these recommendations were: keeping roads well

repaired through efficient road works; reducing congestion through better planning and discouraging

private motoring; and introducing tighter emission checks on vehicles.

Panellists also wanted policy makers to tackle issues that related directly to individuals’ health and life

expectancy. They were: reduce air pollution, notably by encouraging the development of more

environmentally-friendly transport options; ensure that is was safe to travel; promote a better

pedestrian experience through well repaired pavements and safer, and well lit walkways; and reduce

stress, discomfort and exhaustion through clean and comfortable public transport.

Only a fairly modest minority of panellists (around one in ten) focussed on protection and promotion of

wildlife, wildlife habitats and green spaces when considering what transport policy makers should be

trying to achieve in terms of quality of life and reduced impact on the environment. However, they did

so compellingly and with perhaps a broader and more long-term view of human quality of life within the

context of the natural world. Planting more trees along transport routes, considering wildlife migration

routes and different species, checking waterways and simply preserving existing green areas were

specific suggestions. It is worth noting that the desire for a reduction in green-house gases and air

pollution and the associated recommendations for improved public transport and more ‘green’ transport

options imply awareness of and concern for the wider environment as well.


GfK NOP


GfK NOP



policy makers should be trying to achieve in each of the following two topic areas:

Q1 The quality of journeys that people make by public transport, and the experience of

travelling by road and on foot

Q2 The impact that transport has on the local environment - the noise level, local air quality,

the landscape in towns, cities and the countryside, on local wild life and the quality of water in

rivers.

The two questions covered human travellers on the one hand and the environment on the other,

although naturally the needs are not exclusive. One respondent referred to this need for balance

explicitly.

“I think there needs to be a balance between taking care of the environment. i.e. greenery and wildlife and taking care of humans.”

(Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commute, shop & social travel by car)

Overarching themes

Theme 1: Improved public transport provision

In relation to improved quality of life, better quality journeys and better impact on the environment,

various frustrations with public transport appear to be affecting panellists’ quality of life when travelling.

Private and public transport users detailed public transport improvements in equal proportions. The

feature most often cited in relation to quality of life and public transport journeys was ‘the ability to

travel in comfort and have a seat’. This aspect was closely followed by the affordability, reliability and

frequency of public transport options.


GfK NOP

The following quotations illustrate the ways panellists think improved public transport could contribute

to a better quality of life:

“Provide regular transport that I can get a seat on.” (Male, ABC1, 34-55, rural Midlands, commutes by car) ”Reduce over-crowding on the trains and tubes this would allow people to enjoy journeys more” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East, commutes & social travel by train) “In peak times the buses are very full and crowded and sometimes three will not stop and we are left waiting and late for work. It makes people want to buy a car and add to the congestion.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South East, commute, shop & social travel by walking, taxi & bus) “Public transport must provide a fully integrated, reliable and affordable means of travel. Many short to medium length journeys outside London or major cities cannot easily be made by public transport, and longer train journeys are often too expensive by public transport.” (Male, ABC1, 34-55, urban South East, shop & social travel by car) “The public transport system is at the root of all this. It does not provide people with a convenient reliable or economical alternative to private transport at present. If it did, fewer would use their cars which would solve many problems.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West, commute, shop & social travel by car)

A few panellists drew all the main threads of discourse together, as in the following quote:

“Better bus/train services at a reasonable cost will take car journeys off the roads. This will reduce pollution/noise in all areas. And hopefully this will mean less pollution running into rivers.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban North, disabled, business, shop & leisure by car)

Commuters made more suggestions about ‘better public transport’ than non-commuters. Panellists

who lived in rural or mixed urban/rural locations were also more likely to discuss this theme (those who

are presumably more reliant on good public transport connections), as well as residents of the

Midlands.

Theme 2: Improved road transport

The points that panellists made on this theme were, in order of most mentions:

reduce noise pollution (e.g. tighter vehicle checks for noise and more bypasses for HGVs)

tighter emission checks on vehicles

reduce congestion, and therefore emissions, via better planning of the road network

improve road services and ensure road-works are carried out efficiently


GfK NOP

reduce number of cars/amount of freight using the existing road network

The concerns of those panellists who most often discussed reducing noise pollution spanned many

different issues, from the noise generated by heavy goods vehicles, and poor exhausts, to the noise

pollution generated by “noisy” roads.

“Quieter engines, cleaner engine emissions.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, shop, school run & social travel by car, taxi and walking) “Quieter HGV's.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban South East, shop by walking) “Encourage the use of 'whisper tarmac' on all roads.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, shop by car)

The recommendations for more checks on vehicle emissions are considered more fully in the next

section, ‘Theme 3: Reduced air pollution’; however, the point is noted here since it certainly is part of

panellists’ view of road transport as their repeated linking of the idea of road congestion with air

pollution testifies.

To reduce congestion and improve traffic flow, panellists had many suggestions. Some of these

comments focussed on the need to keep traffic moving and thereby reduce emissions from slow

moving or stationary traffic. Indeed, some saw traffic calming measures as impeding good traffic flow,

and indeed felt they caused frustration and added to pollution by slowing vehicles down. It is useful to

note, however, that there were more panellists who recommended increasing traffic control and

lowering speed limits as a way of making traffic planning better, compared with the number of

panellists that wanted to remove traffic calming and relax speed limits.

“Keep traffic moving, the faster the better. Stationary traffic produces more air pollution than moving traffic.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, shop by car) “The negative impact of transport in these areas is mainly caused by so called traffic calming measures. Open up the closed roads, reinstate dual carriageways where they have been reduced to single lane, increase speed limits in all except high road occupancy areas. Freely moving traffic causes less pollution.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural North, shop, business & leisure by car) “Reduce the speed of cars” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban Midlands, shops by car) “Bringing down the speed limit to 20mph in towns etc. would be beneficial”. (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural Midlands, shop by walking)


GfK NOP

Improvement of the road network was a recurrent theme in this section, with some panellists

mentioning the need for more lanes on particular motorways, bypasses as appropriate, and ensuring

adequate road infrastructure for new business or housing developments:

“When developing new commercial or housing areas, keep in mind the need for adequate routes in and out that will not become congested therefore increasing pollution.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East, commute by car) “Bypasses reduce noise and air pollution in towns and cities, and the verges provide safe havens for wildlife.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural South West and Wales, leisure by walking)

Well maintained and repaired roads were also mentioned by a number of panellists, most often in

relation to the quality of journeys. Several discussed tighter monitoring of road-works to ensure they

finished on time and were not scheduled to happen at the same time as other utility works or during

school holiday periods. The selection of quotes presented below give a feel for the range of comments

that were made about road surfaces and repairs:

“Good, well maintained roads without pot holes and good drainage for surface water.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural North West, disabled, commute & shop by car) “Roads need better upkeep, and pay more attention to regulating works and avoiding over-runs.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East, shop & social travel by car) “Force companies doing road works to complete them without weeks or months of disruption. This is a major cause of traffic and pollution.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban London, disabled, shop & social travel by car) “Stop utilities digging up roads at will and if essential have three monthly checks on their repairs and fix any subsidence.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural North West, commute & shop by car)

A few panellists also referred to the idea of reducing the number of cars on the road, and road freight

in particular, as another way to ease congestion, the view being that better road transportation does

not require building more roads, but rather a reduction in the number of vehicles that use the existing

road network.

“Reduce the number of cars on roads by improving public transport and encouraging car sharing.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural Midlands, commutes by car) “Cut down on the amount of road traffic.”


GfK NOP

(Female, ABC1, 55+, urban North, other by walking)

Private car users tended to mention issues to do with improved road network provision more often than

other panellists. Those that discussed well repaired road surfaces were most likely to be male, and

resident in the South West and Wales. Those who suggested well monitored road-works were most

likely to reside in metropolitan or urban areas.

Theme 3: Reduced air pollution / carbon emissions

Approximately a third of the panellists who responded to this section spontaneously raised the issue of

air pollution and reducing emissions from vehicles to improve the quality of life. Some asked for

‘cleaner air’, ‘better air quality’ and ‘a reduction in air pollution’, whilst others indicated more awareness

of climate change and specifically asked for ‘lower carbon emissions’, ‘carbon footprints’, ‘more carbon

off-setting’ or ‘a reduction in greenhouse gases’.

“Pollution is becoming a real concern and action needs to be taken.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commute by car) “Lower CO2 emissions” (Female, 18-34, urban South East, shop by car) “Reduction of greenhouse gases.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East, commute to college by bus) “Less emissions from vehicles, so it’s healthier to walk in towns and cities.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, disabled, shop, school run & social travel by walking/car/taxi) “[Policy makers] should consider the climate changes due to pollution.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, urban North, disabled, shop by car)

Another common recommendation here was encouraging the use of more environmentally-friendly

fuels and vehicles, e.g. low emission public transport such as electric trams and buses. Some explicitly

made the link between better, cleaner public transport and a reduced need for private transport.

“Public transport should be cleaner inside and less polluting.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, North, disabled, shop, business & social travel by car & walking) “Public transport needs to be as environmentally friendly as possible (i.e. low emissions), with as small an impact on the local environment as possible.” (Female, ABCI, 18-34, rural Midlands, shop & social travel by car) “Reduce pollution by buses, replace diesel buses with many more, smaller electric or hybrid vehicles.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East, disabled, shop & social travel by car) “A much larger effort needs to be made to develop low-carbon emission public transport or even electric buses. The air in busy cities would be cleaner if there were zero carbon emissions


GfK NOP

coming out of public transport; a tram system could be developed in busy city centres like London.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban South East, commute by bus)

It was also felt appropriate for Government to tighten controls on private vehicle emissions and several

different suggestions were made here, including regular checks on emissions, not allowing old vehicles

on the roads and discouraging lorries and bus engine idling.

“Check for carbon emissions on both private and public vehicles” (Female, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, social travel by bus) “Vehicles should be quiet, fuel efficient, reliable and easy to maintain.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South West, commute & shop by car) “People should drive cleaner cars and newer models and no car should be allowed after 8 years of life” (Male, ABC1, 55+, rural Midlands, commute, school run & shop by car) “Make bus and lorry drivers turn off their diesel engines when not in use. They are often left idling for 10-20 minutes.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban North, social travel by car) “With regard to air and noise pollution, set up system to ensure that all vehicles are regularly serviced and well maintained.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban South East, shop & social travel by car)

Several car driving panellists linked congestion to air pollution and recognised that their desire for

faster, more freely moving traffic was also better for the environment. When sitting in traffic it is easy

to become conscious of, even fixate upon, many engines emitting fumes. Because the panellists

themselves linked reduced congestion to lower emissions there is some overlap with the better roads

theme here:

“Traffic should be encouraged to travel from A to B quickly and economically and not forced to travel slowly as this increases pollution and makes drivers short tempered & accident prone.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South West, commute & shop by car) “Easing of congestion would lead to less CO2 emissions anyway.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, urban Midlands, commute, shop & social travel by car)

Some panellists also made the link between pedestrianised town centres and lower emissions/less

congestion/better quality of life. However, it was recognised that making town centres car-free required

investment in “park and ride” or public transport facilities for this policy to work.

“More centralized pedestrianisation of towns, but only with cheap and plentiful car parking outside the zone…” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East, disabled, shop by car)


GfK NOP

“Encourage pedestrianism……Reduce the cost of public transport to encourage car drivers to leave their cars at home and therefore reduce the amount of congestion.” (Female, ABC1, 35-54, urban Midlands, commute by car)

As part of this issue, emissions from air-travel were discussed with a few panellists suggesting that air-

travel be managed more closely to reduce night flying and replace short-haul flights with high speed

rail, and to tax aviation fuel so that air travel prices were equivalent with other modes. A selection of

these comments follows:

“Good rail links to minimise internal flights. Restrict night flights.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural North, shop by car) “More high speed rail lines to encourage use of trains rather than planes. Fuel tax on aviation fuel to put them on the same level as every other form of transport. No more runways or airports to discourage the use of flying as a means of transport for other than long haul.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, rural South East, disabled, shop by car)

Unsurprisingly, urban residents tended to be more concerned about air pollution than rural residents.

Panellists from lower socio-economic groups were slightly more prone to suggest lower emission public

transport, while those who discussed easing congestion to reduce pollution, and reducing green-house

gases specifically were more often from the higher social grades and aged over 35. Commuters

recommended ‘greener public transport’ specifically more often than non-commuters; also people with

disabilities and slightly more male panellists than female.


GfK NOP

Improving the quality of journeys that people make by public transport and the experience

of travelling by road and by foot (topic 1)

Theme 4: Safe travel

When asked to consider the concepts of ‘quality of life’ and ‘transport’, safety and the idea of getting

safely from door-to-destination appeared to be a top-of-mind issue and a fundamental priority for many

people. It is understandably a basic need when stepping out of one’s home – confidence that road

travel will be as safe as possible, that pathways will be smooth and well-lit and that public transport will

be well monitored and supervised.

“Safe roads and safe public transport.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural South West, other by car) “Better lighting and more police so people feel safe walking the streets.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, rural East Midlands, commute by car)

“Safety is paramount, any means people take should be safe.” (Female, 35-54, urban North West, commute by car & bus)

The idea of safety was mentioned by panellists from all demographic groups, but slightly more so by

commuters. Almost all people who considered personal safety important mentioned creating a safer

walking experience. Unsurprisingly safer walkways with good lighting at night, was brought up more

often by women than men.

Theme 5: Enhanced pedestrian experience

Unsurprisingly, improving the pedestrian experience by ensuring that pavements are well-repaired,

wide enough and well-lit emerged as important for improving the experience of travelling by foot.

There was some overlap with the safety theme here since many panellists who mentioned safety also

made suggestions for a better safer, walking experience. An enhanced pedestrian experience came up

as a specific recommendation to improve peoples’ health and life expectancy through healthier forms of

travel such as walking (see Theme 12 in section 5.4).

Smaller numbers of panellists requested improved road-crossings and signposts and more policing of

local streets. A few panellists also recommended general promotion of walking and of landscaping

paths and surroundings to make the option of travelling by foot a more attractive choice.


GfK NOP

“Provide pavements wide enough to walk on and smooth enough not to be continually tripping up” (Female, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, commute, shop & social travel by car) “Travellers on foot need to be safe, with adequate road crossings and pavements.” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural West Midlands, shop & social travel by car) “Improve pavement quality and overall feeling of safety through better lighting and policing.” (Male, ABC1, 34-55, urban West Midlands, disabled) “Many footpaths are in need of repair, or have vehicles parked on them obstructing wheel chair users.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural North East, disabled, shop & social travel by car) “The footpath network should be expanded, at a safe distance from the road network.” (Female, 18-34, urban South East, disabled, social travel by car) “Create properly designed, landscaped pedestrian routes.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban North East, commute by car) “Encourage walking by making the experience as enjoyable as possible by improving the paths and surroundings.” (Female, C2DE, 18-34, urban Yorkshire, commute, shop & social travel by car)

Those who lived in rural or mixed rural/urban areas and those aged over 55 most often discussed

creating better pedestrian experiences than urban or younger panellists. In particular, older people

were more concerned with the evenness and state of repair of pavements as well as improved lighting

and policing to reinforce their sense of safety and security when walking out and about.

Theme 6: Cleaner public transport

A minority of panellists (around one in ten who answered this section), spontaneously mentioned clean

public transport, since they felt this would directly improve the quality of their journeys.

It is sometimes unclear whether the panellists meant clean in terms of emissions (as described in

Theme 3 above) or clean in terms of litter/dirt/graffiti-free public transport. Cleanliness of public

transport was often mentioned in conjunction with other attributes such as ‘comfortable’, ‘safe’,

‘reliable’ and ‘affordable’ but as a single word or concept it did come up frequently in panellists’

comments, as follows:


GfK NOP

“Public transport needs to be reliable, clean and safe.” (Female, 35-54, urban Midlands, commute by bus) “Cleaner public transport and more courteous drivers” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban North, business & social travel by car) “Comfortable clean transport” (Female, ABC1, 18-34, rural South West, shop by bus) “Safety, cleanliness and reliability.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, business, shop & social travel by underground)

Cleaner public transport was mentioned most by those aged 35 – 54 years, and those who are frequent

public transport users – often commuters. Residents in the Midlands were considerably more likely

than residents of other regions to request cleaner public transport.

Moderating the impact transport has on the local environment (topic 2)

Theme 7: Protection and promotion of green areas, wild habitats and wildlife

A sizeable minority of panellists made suggestions specifically about the natural environment. Their

comments focussed on what can be done beside transport routes; including planting more trees and

more native trees, and also adding tunnels for migrating species and even bird boxes to ‘green’ the

landscape along transport routes. Some mentioned trees and bushes were the best foil for the noise of

busy roads and railway lines.

“Use living hedges and planting to suppress noise rather than static sound barriers.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, shop by car) “We need to do more to prevent roads from cutting off and isolating areas of open land and woodlands to encourage sustainable populations of wildlife.” (Male, ABC1, 35-54, urban Midlands, commute & social travel by car) “Identify migration routes and provide tunnels for badgers, toads, etc. crossing busy roads.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South East, shop by car) “Have wild areas beside the roads to allow wildlife to thrive. Plant more native trees and bushes alongside roads.” (Female, C2DE, 55+, urban North, disabled, shop & social travel by car) “Carry on with the excellent planting schemes the DfT has already started.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban North, commute by car)


GfK NOP

“Landscape and develop the wildlife corridors created by motorways and major roads (add ponds/wetlands). Also provide routes under motorways/roads for wildlife.” (Male, C2DE, 55+, rural South West, disabled, shop & social travel by car)

To a much lesser extent, there were suggestions about better monitoring of waterways in ways not

directly linked to transport. The main focus was on the need to keep our water supplies clean and free

from pollution.

“Better checks on drinking water and fresh water rivers and streams, keep a better eye on businesses who are rumoured to have polluted these fresh water sites.” (Male, C2DE, 35-54, urban North, shop, school run & social travel by car, taxi and walking) “River authorities need funds to keep waterways clean and usable.” (Female, ABC1, 55+, rural North, shop by car) “Closer monitoring of river pollution by sea vessels, and of farmers depositing dangerous chemicals on their land which leeches into our water sources.” (Male, ABC1, 55+, urban South West and Wales, commute by car)

Interestingly, maintaining existing green spaces seemed to be more of a concern for younger

individuals, under the age of 35, while cleaner waterways and more checks on waterways were top-of-

mind for people over 55, and for residents in the North of England.

Tree planting beside roads was suggested most often by urban residents, and urban dwellers were also

more liable to want to see protected wildlife and wildlife habitats than country dwellers. The protection

of wildlife habitats tended to be suggested by those aged 35 – 54 years rather than younger or older

panellists.


GfK NOP

6 Policies themes that transcend different goals

Improved public transport was a theme that came up in relation to all five goals. Better provision of

bus, rail and other public transport services was clearly identified as a key requirement. It was the only

theme that transcended all the goals defined by the Department. However, other initiatives were

identified that addressed specific issues across more than one goal. For example, improved use of the

road system was suggested, in one shape or another, across all goals except the Equality goal.

Improving the safety of transport users applied to the Health, Safety and Security goal (not

unexpectedly), but also to the Competitiveness and Productivity goal. Development of green

technology and the encouragement of its use featured in responses to both the Quality of Life and

Climate Change goals, whilst improved facilities for cyclists and walkers were themes common to both

the Quality of Life and Health, Safety and Security goals. There was clear evidence of an awareness

and concerns about climate change issues from panellists across all of the goals. This research has

identified policy initiatives that could be followed to achieve specific goals, and it has also highlighted

actions that could be adopted to achieve a number of different goals.

The table below demonstrates the main overarching policy findings across all five strategic goals.

Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5 Main cross cutting

policy themes Climate change

Competitiveness & productivity

Equality of transport

Health, safety & security

Quality of life

Improved public transport

Improved roads

Improved transport & travel safety

Improved cycle & foot path/lane provision

Development & use of green transport / technology


GfK NOP

Public Transport Improvement

Across all the five goals it is ‘improved public transport’ that elicits the most mentions and policy

recommendations.

If we assess the fundamental transport needs that were expressed by the panel, first and foremost

panel members thought that public transport should be reliable, regular and timely. They wanted

public transport services to arrive punctually and predictably and to deliver them to their destinations

with fewer delays. Public transport also needed to be convenient and accessible, which in the minds of

panel members meant having bus stops and train stations within easy walking distance from people’s

homes and from work places and shopping and leisure facilities. Improved convenient access in outer

city and rural areas was considered important as well as the assurance that transport modes would be

easily accessible for groups such as elderly travellers, people with a disability and parents travelling

with babies and children. It was also considered that public transport needs to be affordable, so that it

is viewed as a realistic alternative to the car, and can be used by everyone. And lastly users, and

potential users, need to be reassured that they can travel in safety, without being impacted by

disruptive actions of other travellers, and free from the threat of crime or terrorism.

Panellists considered the provision of a public transport system that meets all of these needs will help

address, in some part, issues that are relevant for all the Department’s five goals. So, it was

considered that a viable, effective public transport alternative could encourage people to use other

modes of transport other than the car and therefore help achieve the Climate Change goal. Panellists

believed that an efficient public transport system would provide a key building block in the development

of a competitive and productive economy. They considered that an affordable and accessible public

transport system will open up travel opportunities to all members of the general public regardless of

geography and demography. Panellists considered that a public transport system that is safe and

secure to use will enable people to travel free from the fear of crime and terrorist attacks. Finally,

panellist perceived that an improved public transport system will improve the quality of the journeys

that are made, and by attracting people off the roads will improve the quality of the environment

generally.


GfK NOP

Improved use of the road system

The second most often mentioned policy theme was improved use of the road system. Overall the key

themes and recommendations across the goals were how to reduce the number of cars on the roads,

the development of greener fuels / cars, and how to improve the quality of the road system via better

road access, improved road layouts, markings and road surfaces.

More specifically within the climate change section the main policy recommendations put forward by

panellists were to encourage the development and use of greener vehicles and cleaner fuels, to

encourage people to car share and to use park and ride schemes. These ideas also featured as

suggestions to improve the quality of the environment. However, this should not be seen simply as an

anti-car theme. Investment in the road system was seen as a positive way of improving access to

strategically important parts of the network, such as air and sea ports, where public transport alone

may not meet the needs of the travelling public. Road widening where appropriate, improved road

layout and surfaces, and better road signage and markings were perceived as helping to ease traffic

flows and thereby improve the safety of those travelling on the roads. So, investment in the road

network, allied with policies designed to encourage appropriate use of the car to meet transport needs,

is a policy theme that is relevant for many of the Department’s goals.


GfK NOP

Enhancing the safety of transport users

Feeling safe is a fundamental need of the travelling public. When we travel, we need to be reassured

that we are safe from the disruptions of other transport users, and that we can travel without fear of

crime or terrorism. Policy initiatives designed to enhance our safety whilst travelling transcend both the

Competitiveness and Productivity and the Health, Safety and Security goals. It is clear from the

panellists that we will not travel if we do not feel it is safe to do so, and if we feel unable to travel our

ability to generate wealth for the economy is compromised.

This safety topic covered both road and public transport usage. With regards to road safety panel

members wanted to see policies implemented that would enforce higher standards of driving, such as

raising the age limit and reviewing driving tests. Many recommended stricter speed controls, whilst

some thought more intelligent speed control should be implemented, such as variable speed limits

depending on road type and time of the day. Policies that enforced tougher restrictions, penalties and

a zero tolerance on dangerous drivers would be welcomed by many.

Panellists also wanted to see policies implemented that would make travelling by public transport safer.

They wanted to feel that the mode of transport itself is well maintained and regularly serviced, that

staff are better trained in health and safety matters and know what to do in an emergency situation.

They also want to feel safe from other travellers, and a sizeable minority (about a third of those

answering the Health, Safety and Security section) would welcome generally the introduction of more

security and transport police and more surveillance to deter crime.


GfK NOP

Improved cycle and footpath/ lane provision

Only a minority made this policy recommendation, but it was a theme that repeated in both the Health,

Safety and Security, and Quality of Life sections.

The perceived barriers to using healthier forms of transport such as cycling or walking were; poorly

maintained cycle and foot paths, street crime, and general lack of provision of safe paths that are well

lit. Some panel members therefore recommended solutions such as the improvement of existing foot

and cycle paths, and investment in new such facilities to encourage greater use of these travel

methods. However, whilst it was recognised that it is healthier to cycle or walk, it was noted that there

are clearly some journeys that cannot be made in this way, the main barriers being distance and

location.

Development and use of “green” transport

As might be expected, this theme transcended both the Climate Change and Quality of Life sections.

Developing greener alternatives and encouraging their use either through incentives, moral persuasion

or regulation came up repeatedly as a policy to address climate change issues, and also as a means to

reduce air pollution and carbon emissions and thereby improve the quality of the environment.


GfK NOP

7 Travel Behaviour

At the beginning of the survey panellists were asked about their travel behaviour covering:

Travel method used in last 12 months

Frequency of travel

Purpose of most frequent journey

Main method of travel on most frequent journey

Most important need when making most frequent journey

7.1 Travel method used in last 12 months

Panellists were asked what methods of travel they had used in the last 12 months.

Unsurprisingly the results showed that panel members used more than one method of transport.

Walking was the most mentioned, this is primarily because everyone at some stage had walked from A

to B (i.e. walked to the local shop or park etc). It is important to note that this is not an indication of

distance, frequency or main transport mode; rather it simply means nine out of ten people have walked

to get from A to B at some point in the last 12 months.

Walking was closely followed by using a car as a passenger; again this shows that there is a large

proportion who may not have their own car but travel with someone who does, e.g. a friend, family

member or partner etc. They may even share a car which they use sometimes as a passenger and

other times as a driver.

Interestingly seven out of ten said they had travelled by bus, the same proportion as car drivers. Six

out of ten had travelled by train and just under half by tube.


GfK NOP

Figure 3: Methods of travel used in last 12 months

Base: All respondents (n=606)

92%82%

69% 68%61%

55%45%

20%14% 11%

3%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Walk

Car /

passe

nger

Bus

Car /

drive

rTra

inTax

i

Underg

round

Bycyc

le

Light r

ail /

tram

Inte

rnal

flig

hts

Motorb

ike


GfK NOP

7.2 Frequency of travel

All those that had travelled in the last 12 months by ‘car’ or ‘bus’ were asked how frequently they

travelled by these modes:

Car / van drivers:

Drivers were more likely than passengers to travel by car on a daily basis. The majority of all

drivers tend to drive at least once a week with half driving daily.

Car / van passengers

Passengers were more likely to travel once or twice a week by car. They tend not to be daily

passengers

Bus users

Frequency of bus usage was more evenly spread from daily to once or twice a year

Figure 4: Frequency of travel


8%

17%

17%

12%

14%

19%

10%

1%

49%

35%

11%

2%

1%

1%

6%

23%

29%

18%

11%

9%

3%

Every day

More than twice a week, but not daily

Once or twice a week

Less than once a week but more than twice a month

Once or twice a month

Less than once a month but more than twice a year

Once or twice a year

Less than once a year

Car/van drivers Car/van passengers Bus users

Base: All car/van drivers (n= 413) Base: All car/van passengers (n= 495) Base: All bus travellers (n= 418)

8%

17%

17%

12%

14%

19%

10%

1%

49%

35%

11%

2%

1%

1%

6%

23%

29%

18%

11%

9%

3%

Every day









8%

17%

17%

12%

14%

19%

10%

1%

49%

35%

11%

2%

1%

1%

6%

23%

29%

18%

11%

9%

3%

Every day









49%

35%

11%

2%

1%

1%

6%

23%

29%

18%

11%

9%

3%

Every day









Base: All car/van drivers (n= 413) Base: All car/van passengers (n= 495) Base: All bus travellers (n= 418)

GfK NOP

7.3 Purpose of most frequent journey

All those who had travelled in the last 12 months were asked the main purpose of their most frequent

journey.

Essential activities such as shopping and commuting were the most popular answers, followed by

visiting friends, personal business and leisure pursuits.

Figure 5: Purpose of most frequent journey

51%

48%

31%

31%

24%

17%

11%

6%

5%

1%

Shopping

Travelling to or from work

Visiting (friends or relatives)

For personal business (e.g. bank, doctor)

Leisure (play sport, socialise)

Enjoyment/no particular purpose

Taking children to/from school

Caring (for relatives or friends)

Other

No regular journey

Base: All those who have travelled in the last 12 months (n= 605) Multi-coded

51%

48%

31%

31%

24%

17%

11%

6%

5%

1%

Shopping

Travelling to or from work

Visiting (friends or relatives)

For personal business (e.g. bank, doctor)

Leisure (play sport, socialise)

Enjoyment/no particular purpose

Taking children to/from school

Caring (for relatives or friends)

Other

No regular journey

Base: All those who have travelled in the last 12 months (n= 605) Multi-coded


GfK NOP

7.4 Main method of travel on most frequent journey

All those who had travelled in the last 12 months were asked the main method of travel used for their

most frequently made journey.

Driving a car was the most popular choice. Next most favoured methods were the bus or walking (less

than 20% for each). Fewer still use the train or the car as a passenger for their most frequently made

journey.

Figure 6: Main method of travel on most frequent journey

55%

17% 17%12%

7%2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Car /

driver

BusW

alk

Car /

passe

ngerTra

inTax

i

Undergro

und

Light r

ail /

tram

Bicycle

Other

vehicl

e

Inte

rnal

flig

hts

Motorb

ike HGV

Base: All those who have travelled in the last 12 months (n= 605)


GfK NOP

7.5 Most important need when making most frequent journey

Panellists were then asked, ‘what is the one most important aspect to you when travelling?’

Overall two thirds said that speed of use, ease of use, and absence of delays were their top priorities,

i.e. efficient transport from A to B. Understandably this is why over half choose to travel (most

frequently) by car rather than by bus or train.

For the remaining third, safety, cost and comfort were the main concerns when making their most

regular journey.

Figure 7: Most important travel need

Two thirds of people want

efficient transport to get from A to B with the least amount of

hassle

31%

23%

13%

9%

8%

7%

5%

4%

0%

Speed of transport/time journey takes

Ease/convenience of use

Absence of delays/congestion

Safety from accidents

Cost of transport

Comfort of travel

Other

Feeling of personal safety from other travellers

Cleanliness of transport


31%

23%

13%

9%

8%

7%

5%

4%

0%





Cost of transport

Comfort of travel

Other



31%

23%

13%

9%

8%

7%

5%

4%

0%





Cost of transport

Comfort of travel

Other





GfK NOP

The chart below compares the results from two groups; those who commute and those that travel for

other reasons (i.e. Shopping, school run, personal business such as bank, doctors etc, leisure &

recreation, caring or visiting friends / relatives, and personal enjoyment).

For commuters it is paramount that their journey is speedy and without delays, in order to get them to

work on time with as little stress or inconvenience as possible.

Those whose most frequent journey is not commuting have different priorities. They were almost half

as likely (as commuters) to mention ‘speed’ or absence of delays but were much more likely to mention

‘ease / convenience of travel’. These travellers have less time pressures than commuters so instead

their focus is on ease of use and convenience of travel, i.e. how easily can they get from A to B and

how convenient are the travel choices?

Figure 8: Most important travel need - commuters vs. others

Base: All whose most frequent journey is commuting (n= 288)

41%

18%

17%

7%

7%

5%

3%

2%

0%





Cost of transport

Comfort of travel

Other



27%

25%

10%

10%

8%

8%

6%

5%

0%





Comfort of travel

Cost of transport

Other



Base: All whose most frequent journey is for another reason (n= 429)

* Other reasons Commutersss

* Other reasons; Shopping, school run, personal business such as bank, doctors etc, leisure & recreation, caring or visiting

friends / relatives, and personal enjoyment.


GfK NOP

The charts below compare the results from two groups; car / van drivers and bus travellers.

Figure 9: Most important travel need - Drivers vs. Bus travellers

34%

25%

14%

9%

7%

4%

4%

3%

0%





Comfort of travel


Other

Cost of transport


Base: All whose most frequent journey is by driving a car/van (n= 333)

34%

25%

14%

9%

7%

4%

4%

3%

0%





Comfort of travel


Other

Cost of transport







Comfort of travel


Other

Cost of transport





Cost of transport


Other


Comfort of travel



25%

24%

23%

11%

6%

4%

4%

2%

1%

Base: All whose most frequent journey is by bus (n= 100)



Cost of transport


Other


Comfort of travel



25%

24%

23%

11%

6%

4%

4%

2%

1%


25%

24%

23%

11%

6%

4%

4%

2%

1%


Bus travellers Car/van drivers

The two most important factors to car/van drivers were, ‘speed of transport/journey time’ with one

third of all mentions, followed by ‘ease and convenience of transport’ with one quarter of all mentions.

Safety from accidents was considered more important by drivers than by bus travellers; this could

reflect the safety record of the two alternatives.

The three most important factors to bus travellers were ‘speed of transport’, ‘ease/convenience of use’

and ‘cost of transport’, all mentioned by about one in four bus users. Bus travellers were less likely to

describe ‘speed of transport’ as their most important need compared with drivers, indicating this was a

lower priority for them. However, bus travellers were much more likely to say ‘cost of transport’,

suggesting that cost is a key driver of modal choice for this group.


GfK NOP

8 Appendices

8.1 Profile of the panellists who answered each questionnaire section

Table 2: Demographic description of panel members by section

Questionnaire Section

Demographic Segment

What want from transport system

Climate Change

Competitiveness & Productivity

Equality of Opportunity

Health, Safety & Security

Quality of Life

Gender

Male 49% 48% 49% 48% 50% 50%

Female 51% 52% 51% 52% 50% 50%

Age

18-34 29% 27% 30% 28% 30% 29%

35-54 36% 36% 35% 36% 35% 35%

55+ 36% 37% 36% 36% 35% 35%

Region

North 27% 25% 27% 25% 28% 28%

Midlands 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 23%

South West and Wales 15% 17% 15% 16% 14% 14%

South East and London 36% 37% 36% 37% 36% 35%

Urban vs Rural

Urban / Metropolitan 58% 59% 58% 59% 57% 58%

Rural / Mixed Urban/Rural 42% 41% 42% 41% 43% 42%

Social Grade

ABC1 53% 50% 54% 50% 55% 53%

C2DE 40% 43% 40% 42% 38% 40%

DK 7% 7% 6% 8% 6% 6%

Base 606 199 304 201 305 203


GfK NOP

8.2 Questionnaire

LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE PANEL QUESTIONNAIRE

VERSION: WAVE 1 - Main Final 14/03/08

J437450

SECTION 1 - PANEL RECRUITMENT

The Department for Transport (DfT) wishes to set up a Citizen’s Panel in order to better understand

public attitudes and perceptions of transport and transport policy. The views of the panel will be fed

back to ministers and those responsible for developing transport policy

We are delighted therefore to offer you an invitation to join this panel.

DfT is particularly interested in your views on the issues that it needs to address over the next 5 -15

years to ensure that transport meets the needs of the public, businesses, the wider economy and the

environment. We have identified 5 goals behind transport policy:

1. Climate change

2. Competitiveness and productivity

3. Equality of opportunity

4. Health, Safety, and security

5. Quality of Life

We anticipate that panel members will receive regular (perhaps monthly) surveys from the DfT over the

next twelve months or so, and we are looking for people who will be prepared to participate in all of

these surveys.

As a thank you for your time, we will be offering a series of rewards:

• ipoints for every completed survey

• An additional ipoint bonus for those completing a minimum number of surveys from the

Department for Transport’s Citizen’s Panel over the year


GfK NOP

You will also still be able to take part in other GfK surveys on different subjects.

For the sample to be completely representative, it must include all people regardless of how often they

travel or use public transport. Please do not worry if you do not travel often, as we are interested in

your attitudes and your perceptions of transport and transport policy.

The first survey starts today and will close on 24th March.

S1. Would you be willing to join this DfT panel?

Yes GO TO SECTION 2

No GO TO N1

ASK IF ‘NO’

N1. Why do you not want to take part? MULTICODE

My answers would not be interesting

Not paid enough to do it

I am not interested in this subject

I’m not going to be around

Other


GfK NOP

SECTION 2 – PANEL PROFILE

We would now like to ask you some questions about yourself. These are just to ensure that we have a

panel that is nationally representative, and results will be held in the strictest confidence.

Q1 Do you have any long-standing illness, disability or infirmity? By long-standing I mean anything that

has troubled you over a period of time or that is likely to affect you over a period of time?

1. Yes

2. No

IF YES

Q2 Does this illness or disability (Do any of these illnesses or disabilities) limit your activities in any

way?

1. Yes

2. No

Q3 Which methods of travel have you used in the last 12 months, that is since March 2007?

PLEASE ONLY INCLUDE TRAVEL WITHIN GREAT BRITAIN.

- By travel we mean all journeys you make, however insignificant. Please include all travel and

journeys made during the week and at the weekend.

- ‘Walk’ means a journey on foot 5 minutes or more.

- If you have not been out in the last 12 months please tick ‘Not been out in last 12 months’.

1. Walk (journey on foot of 5 minutes or more)

2. Car/van - as driver

3. Car/van - as passenger

4. Motorcycle/moped/scooter

5. Taxi/minicab

6. Bicycle

7. Bus (including coach/private bus)

8. Train

9. Underground/metro

10. Light rail/tram


GfK NOP

11. Internal flights

12. HGV

13. Other vehicle

14. Not been out in last 12 months

IF CAR/VAN - DRIVER:

Q5 How often do you travel by car/van as a driver?

1. Every day

2. More than twice a week, but not every day

3. Once or twice a week

4. Less than once a week but more than twice a month

5. Once or twice a month

6. Less than once a month but more than twice a year

7. Once or twice a year

8. Less than once a year

IF CAR/VAN – PASSENGER:

Q6 How often do you travel by car/van as a passenger?

1. Every day








IF BUS TRAVELLER

Q7 How often do you travel by bus?

1. Every day





GfK NOP





ASK ALL EXCEPT THOSE NOT BEEN OUT IN LAST 12 MONTHS

Now we would like you to think about the journey you make most frequently. By most frequent

journey we mean the journey between two geographical places that you make most often.

Please only include personal journeys and travel to and from work. Do NOT include driving which is

part of your work (e.g. as a lorry or taxi driver, delivery worker or travelling salesperson).

Q8 What is the main purpose of your most frequent journey?

IF THERE IS MORE THAN ONE MAIN PURPOSE, PLEASE TICK ALL THAT APPLY.

1. Travelling to or from work

2. Going shopping

3. Taking children to or back from school

4. For personal business (e.g. going to the bank, the doctors, etc.)

5. Leisure (going to play sport/socialise etc.)

6. Caring (caring for friends or relatives)

7. Visiting (visiting friends or relatives)

8. Enjoyment/no particular purpose

9. Other (Please Specify)

10. Don’t know

11. No regular journey

ASK ALL EXCEPT THOSE NOT BEEN OUT IN LAST 12 MONTHS

Q9 What is the main method of travel you use on this journey?

IF THERE IS MORE THAN ONE MAIN METHOD, THEN PLEASE SELECT THE METHOD USED FOR THE

LONGEST PART OF THE JOURNEY IN TERMS OF DISTANCE.

1. Walk

2. Car/van - as driver

3. Car/van - as passenger

4. Motorcycle/moped/scooter

5. Taxi/minicab


GfK NOP

6. Bicycle

7. Bus (including coach/private bus)

8. Train

9. Underground/metro

10. Light rail/tram

11. Internal flights

12. HGV

13. Other vehicle

14. None of these

15. Don’t know

Q9 And finally when making this journey, what is the most important aspect to you when travelling?

SINGLE CODE ONLY

ROTATE PRECODES

1. Speed of transport / length of time it takes to make journey

2. Absence of delays / congestion

3. Safety from accidents

4. Feeling of personal safety from other travellers

5. Comfort of travel

6. Cost of transport

7. Cleanliness of transport

8. Ease/ convenience of use

9. OTHER SPECIFY____________


GfK NOP

SECTION 3 – OVERALL

The Department for Transport is interested in your views on the challenges that it needs to address

over the next 5 -15 years to ensure that transport meets the needs of the public, businesses, the wider

economy and the environment.

We would like your views on the things the Minister in charge of transport needs to be addressing in

developing overall policies for transport. Please think about general issues rather than the detailed

specifics of problems with your current journeys, as it is not the purpose of this questionnaire to send

your responses on to individual transport companies.

Q10 First of all, what are the most important things you want the transport system to do for you?

PROMPT: Please write in as full and detailed answer as possible.


GfK NOP

SECTION 4 - CLIMATE CHANGE

One of the goals of transport policy is to ensure that transport plays its proper role in tackling climate

change. This covers:

- Making it easier for people and businesses to make more environmentally friendly choices about

the way they travel

- Reducing emissions that contribute to climate change from journeys in the UK or internationally

Please tell us what you consider to be the most important issues that need to be addressed

to ensure that transport plays its part in tackling climate change.

Q11 Making it easier for people and businesses to make more environmentally friendly choices about

the way they travel.

Please write in below the most important things policy makers should be trying to achieve

in this area.

Please write in as full and detailed answer as possible.

Q12 Reducing emissions that contribute to climate change from journeys in the UK or internationally


in this area.


Q13 DELETED


GfK NOP

SECTION 5 - PRODUCTIVITY AND COMPETITIVENESS

One of the goals of transport policy is to ensure that the transport system contributes to the improved

productivity and competitiveness of the UK economy. This covers:

- Ensuring that people are able to travel to work, or on business, within the UK at a reasonable cost

and in a timely and reliable way, in conditions that ensure they are productive when they arrive at

their destination. Businesses also need to be confident that their customers can reach them without

being put off by the travelling.

- Ensuring that business travellers and holidaymakers can travel to and through airports and ports

to overseas destinations.

- Ensuring that products can be transported to people and businesses at reasonable cost and that

they can rely on products arriving at their destination on time.. This includes transport of products

within the UK but also from and to overseas through airports and ports.


to ensure that transport plays its part in the improved productivity and competitiveness of

the UK economy.

Q14 Ensuring that people are able to travel to work, or on business, within the UK at a reasonable cost

and in a timely and reliable way, in conditions that ensure they are productive when they arrive at their

destination. Businesses also need to be confident that their customers can reach them without being

put off by the travelling.


in this area.


Q15 Ensuring that business travellers and holidaymakers can travel to and through airports and ports to

overseas destinations.


in this area.



GfK NOP

Q16 Ensuring that products can be transported to people and businesses t reasonable cost and that

they can rely on products arriving at their destination on time.


in this area.



GfK NOP

SECTION 6 - EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY

One of the goals of transport policy is to ensure equality of opportunity for all transport users

and potential users. This covers enhancing access to health, education and other services, and

helping people get out and about to see friends and family and visit the shops, considering:

the needs of different social groups including transport services for disabled people, and


how transport can help to tackle disadvantage in local areas including relatively deprived

regions and areas

some types of area also have particular needs, for example rural areas and new areas of

housing development


to ensure that transport plays its part in ensuring the equality of opportunity for all

transport users and potential users.

Q17 Enhancing access to health, education and other services, and helping people get out and about to

see friends and family and visit the shops, considering:

the needs of different social groups including transport services for disabled people, and


how transport can help to tackle disadvantage in local areas including relatively deprived

regions and areas

some types of area also have particular needs, for example rural areas and new areas of

housing development


in these areas.


Q18 DELETED


GfK NOP

SECTION 7 - HEALTH, SAFETY AND SECURITY

One of the goals of transport policy is to ensure that the transport system is safe, secure and

improves peoples' health. This covers:

- Reducing the numbers of people killed or injured in transport accidents

- Ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately protected from crime and terrorist

attacks.

- The improvement of peoples health and life expectancy through encouraging use of healthier forms of

travel such as walking and cycling


to ensure that the transport system is safe, secure and improves peoples’ health.

Q19 Reducing the numbers of people killed or injured in transport accidents


in this area.


Q20 Ensuring that people can travel in safety and are adequately protected from crime and terrorist

attacks.


in this area.


Q21 The improvement of peoples’ health and life expectancy through encouraging use of healthier

forms of travel such as walking and cycling.


in this area.



GfK NOP

SECTION 8 - QUALITY OF LIFE

One of the goals of transport policy is to achieve an improved quality of life for all transport users

and those affected by the transport system. This covers:

- The quality of journeys that people make by public transport, and the experience of travelling by

road and on foot

- The impact that transport has on the local environment - the noise level, local air quality, the

landscape both in towns and cities and in the countryside, local wild life, and quality of water in

rivers.


to ensure that the transport policy achieves an improved quality of life for all transport

users and those affected by the transport system

Q22 The quality of journeys that people make by public transport, and the experience of travelling by

road and on foot


in this area.


Q23 The impact that transport has on the local environment - the noise level, local air quality, the

landscape both in towns and cities and in the countryside, local wild life, and quality of water in rivers.


in this area.



GfK NOP

SECTION 9 – CONCLUSION

Thank you for your time in completing this survey. Your views are important in helping shape the

Government’s future transport policy, and we will be providing you with some of the key findings from

this survey in due course.

We look forward to your continued participation in the Department for Transport’s Citizen’s panel, and

your views on other important transport topics.

If you have any queries about the panel please contact Bethany Shinkins, an Executive from GfK NOP,

on 020 7890 9035

PILOT SURVEY ONLY

We are interested to find out what you thought about this initial survey for the Department for

Transport. Would you be willing for someone from GfK NOP to telephone you in the next couple of

days to find out your views – the interview will only take 10-15 minutes, and can be arranged at a time

that is most convenient for you. If we contact you for the telephone follow-up we will offer you

additional ipoints as an appreciation of your time.

Yes – ok for telephone follow- up

No – not ok

IF OK FOR TELEPHONE FOLLOW-UP

Please could you write in your contact telephone number, and when would be most convenient to

contact you.

Contact Telephone Number:

Day/time most convenient to contact:


GfK NOP

8.3 Analytical methodology and sampling

8.3.1 Panel Recruitment

The DfT wanted to create a sub-panel of c.600 members for Wave 1 to facilitate being able to return to

the same participants each wave. It was required that “these panel members would be recruited from

across the country to ensure a regional spread.”

We recruited the sub-panel from GfK NOP’s online access panel, which consisted of approximately

300,000 panellists. GfK NOP follows ESOMAR best practices and consequently all our panellists “double

opt in” to take surveys from GfK. They supply us with much information about themselves, which we

keep to facilitate targeting of niche samples. We recruit them from participants in our offline surveys

and from the websites and lists of literally hundreds of companies with whom we have partnered.

The key characteristics of our GfK NOP UK Global Panel are:

Multi – sourced: Panellists are recruited online via a wide range of permission e-mail recruitment,

affiliate networks, our reward partner and web site advertising. This avoids potential bias associated

with panel recruitment from a single source or single methodology. We recruit from literally hundreds of

web sites.

Research only: GfK panellists are only contacted by us for the purposes of conducting market

research. Our panellists are not exposed to third party advertising or direct marketing campaigns, nor is

their personal data sold to third parties.

Carefully managed: We invite panel members to take surveys, in accordance with a set of panel

management rules. These rules are designed to minimise possible biases and to provide a positive

experience for the panel member. Each panel has a dedicated panel support team available to provide

help and assistance to the panellists.

Frequently refreshed: We continually recruit new members to our panel. This ensures that the panel

is dynamic in nature and reflects any changes in the online population that might be occurring.


GfK NOP

Incentivised by intrinsic and extrinsic rewards: Our research shows that panellists desire three

types of rewards. They wish to be members of a community, in which they can express their views and

receive active feedback, as well as rewards. Consequently, all our panel members join the GfK

community, and are reward by membership of that community, and by the use of our points scheme.

This ensures that we have validated personal data from all panellists, thus removing any bias from

multiple memberships, and we carefully monitor the participation rates of members to ensure that all

panellists are fairly represented in both the samples and the resultant data.

Deeply Profiled: At recruitment we collect, a large amount of the personal and household information

and once they have “double opted in & started to take surveys we then offer panellists the opportunity

to expand their profile information by completing separate business sector profiling surveys.

The following information is collected at the recruitment stage and so freely available to our clients for

analysis.

What languages do you speak?

Region via Postcode

Gender

Age

Ethnicity

Marital Status

Presence of Children in Household

Employment Status

Industry Type

Income

As some of these may change overtime whilst it is possible to sample by them we advise checking that

the criteria are still valid prior in the interview schedule.

As the panel did not contain travel behaviour all panellists were asked about frequency, mode of travel

at the beginning of the survey.


GfK NOP

Privacy & Data Protected: Each panellist, whether they are a member of a GfK proprietary panel or

one of our many custom proprietary panels is treated with a high degree of concern for privacy and

procedures are carefully followed to ensure respondent privacy is protected. We subscribe to the

privacy policies outlined by CASRO, www.casro.org and the European ESOMAR code

(http://www.esomar.org/).

Selection of panel members to the DfT’s sub-panel will be based upon a quota sample. The exact quota

details will be discussed further with the DfT, but at this stage we propose to set quotas against a

national profile based on: Gender, Age, Urban/Rural, and Region.


http://www.casro.org/

http://www.esomar.org/

GfK NOP

8.4 Maximising Panel Participation At Future Waves

The key to optimising participation is to realise that panel members join panels for a number of reasons

both intrinsic and extrinsic. We therefore reward participants in three ways:

a) Through our points collection system which ensures that respondents are fairly compensated

for their participation. The rate of reward is the points equivalent of £1 per 10 minutes of a

completed interview

b) Through engaging the respondents in a conversation and by seeking to build a community

around the panel. Being transparent as to the identity of the client and design the

questionnaire and other material to reflect the client’s brand identity.

c) Participants would ideally be rewarded by information derived either from the panel or via

information requests from the client. The “you said, we did” mantra is the ideal but we have to

take care to avoid conditioning the participants.

As to the “optimum frequency” of contact the key is to undertake more rather than less. We would

recommend that contact is at least monthly.


Documents

Public Attitudes to Transport DfT's On-line Citizens' Panel