In current times, we’d be hard pressed not to find ourselves
privy to multiple divisive debates. In this country, the toxic legacy of the Brexit referendum can appear to have left us with a broken society. We struggle to enter civil conversations about issues that affect us all, such as how to respond to the great existential issue of our time: the climate emergency. We might accept the scientific consensus that man-made climate change is real and urgent, but what we can and should actually do about it – and how quickly – still seems to split families, friends, and communities.
One of our major contributions to the climate crisis is transport; yet here, we are also rife with divisions. We slip easily into unhelpful tribalism based around modes of transport: motorists against bus users; pedestrians versus motorists; everyone against cyclists! I do it myself, often oversimplifying travelling in Oxford as a choice between those selfishly fuming in their congesting metal boxes, versus the clean, green angels flying past on their bikes.
These categories are really
unhelpful: many cyclists are also motorists; most train-users also use buses or
taxis; and we are all pedestrians! The words
themselves can be problematic too: it will always be difficult to promote a
‘pedestrian’ future, when the dictionary definition is: “showing little
imagination, not interesting, boring”.
These categories are also
silly: why would we define ourselves solely by our mode of transport? I walk
the kids to school, ride a bike to work, take the bus to the train station, and
hire a car for occasional trips to the countryside. What does that make me?
According to Lucy Saunders, an inspiring and highly
experienced public health consultant, finding better words to describe our
various travel choices is an important step towards showing respect for
different viewpoints, reaching agreement across groups and making much-needed
progress. Instead of classifying ourselves (and each other) as pedestrians,
drivers, cyclists etc. She suggests we talk about people; people walking,
people cycling, people driving cars, people riding on buses. The way we choose
to travel does not define us.
Lucy started by researching
the health impacts of transport, public space and urban planning. Happily, it
turns out that public spaces designed with improving people’s health in mind,
also create city streets that are – quite simply – nice places to be in; places
that foster social interaction, economic vibrancy and environmental
sustainability.
What’s more, she has
developed ten clearly defined and measurable indicators about
the health of our streets, which may just be the holy grail we’ve been looking
for: impossible to argue with! After all, who doesn’t want streets that are
easy to cross, have shade and shelter, places to stop and rest, are not too
noisy, and where people choose to walk and cycle? Is there anyone who would
protest against streets with clean air, where people have things to see and do,
and everyone feels safe, relaxed, and welcome?
‘Healthy and attractive
streets for all’: this is the ambition. Surely that’s something we can all
agree on?
