‘Forced Car Ownership’ in the UK and Germany: Socio-Spatial Patterns and Potential Economic Stress Impacts

Giulio Mattioli

doi:10.17645/si.v5i4.1081

Abstract

The notion of ‘forced car ownership’ (FCO), born out of transport research on UK rural areas, is used to define households who own cars despite limited economic resources. FCO is thought to result in households cutting expenditure on other necessities and/or reducing travel activity to the bare minimum, both of which may result in social exclusion. Social exclusion research, on the other hand, has paid much attention to ‘material deprivation’, i.e., the economic strain and enforced lack of durable goods arising from low income. However, the FCO phenomenon suggests that, among households with limited resources, the <em>enforced possession</em> and use of a durable good can be the cause of material deprivation, economic stress and vulnerability to fuel price increases. In this study, we use 2012 EU ‘Income and Living Conditions’ data (EU-SILC) to shed light on FCO in two European countries (UK and Germany). Through secondary data analysis we are able to show: the social and spatial patterns of FCO; key differences between FCO and ‘car deprived’ households; the intensity of social exclusion, material deprivation, and economic strain among FCO households; and overlaps between FCO and economic stress in other life domains (domestic fuel poverty, housing cost overburden). The results also show contrasting spatial patterns of FCO in Germany (higher incidence in rural areas) and UK (similar incidence in urban and rural areas), which can be explained in light of the different socio-spatial configurations prevalent in the two countries. We conclude by discussing implications for future research and policy-making.

Highlights

Since the early 2000s, there has been increasing research on the connections between transport and social exclusion, notably in the UK (Lucas, 2012; Ricci, Parkhurst, & Jain, 2016; SEU, 2003) and Australia (Currie, 2011; Currie, Stanley, & Stanley, 2007), but more recently in other countries such as Germany (BMVBS, 2012)
Previous research has found these factors to be associated with low-income, car ownership and use (e.g., Lucas, Bates, Moore, & Carrasco, 2016; Mattioli, 2014; Stokes & Lucas, 2011)
forced car ownership’ (FCO) are relatively more likely to include children and employed adults in the middle age groups, to be on low-to-middle incomes and to have a mortgage. This profile is consistent with previous research from Australia, suggesting that in developed countries FCO tends to affect similar households— the finding that FCO often have only low levels of work intensity suggests a potential new direction for future research

Summary

Introduction

Since the early 2000s, there has been increasing research on the connections between transport and social exclusion, notably in the UK (Lucas, 2012; Ricci, Parkhurst, & Jain, 2016; SEU, 2003) and Australia (Currie, 2011; Currie, Stanley, & Stanley, 2007), but more recently in other countries such as Germany (BMVBS, 2012). ‘Recurring characters’ in transport and social exclusion research include low-income households, older and younger people, women, immigrants and ethnic minorities, people with a disability, and people in unemployment (which collectively form a considerable proportion of the population). All of these groups are less likely to drive cars than the average of the population for reasons including, but not limited to, the affordability of owning and operating vehicles. Based on 2001 census data, the authors define FCO as households with ‘low incomes’ (lowest quartile), and ‘high car ownership’ (two or more cars). Multivariate analysis of spatial data shows that the share of FCO is negatively related to public transport supply and positively related to distance to activity centres, with opposite effects for the proportion of low income households with no cars

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion