Abstract
Park and ride (P&R) schemes are often promoted as an efficient means of extending the effective catchment of public transport networks into car-dependent areas with low population densities, such as rural districts. However, using P&R typically requires the traveller to have access to a car. As car ownership is often used as an indicator of social inclusion, providing P&R for motorists is not an obvious means of reducing exclusion from travel opportunities. Nonetheless, the present article argues that policies to promote interchange from cars to bus or rail can act as a force for either greater or less social exclusion, depending on who can access the services and what the alternative options would be in the absence of P&R being provided. The conditions under which inclusion is most likely to be promoted are reviewed. Key findings are that P&R facilities should not be developed at the expense of investment in conventional public transport and that the services should not be exclusively aimed at motorists. A particular situation in which motorists on relatively low incomes might benefit from P&R provision is where they would otherwise face high access charges to urban areas, in the form of road tolls or parking fees.
Highlights
Introduction of P&R has contributed to the justification for additional public transport priorities on the A90 between the bridge and Edinburgh
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH Park and ride (P&R) IS MOST LIKELY TO INCREASE SOCIAL INCLUSION The foregoing analysis suggests the following factors are likely to maximise the social inclusion value of P&R schemes in most cases (a) parking provision integrated within public transport networks that are accessible to all traveller groups (b) location of P&R in places and at distances from the destination that are likely to result in significant traffic
Parkhurst[14] has proposed ‘link-and-ride’ as an alternative to bus-based P&R located at the edge of urban areas, which meets many of the above criteria (Fig. 2)
Summary
Adapted from Parkhurst,[11] Table 6, based on data collected by WS Atkins (1998).[10]. These data are suggestive of the existence of a group who feel obliged to own cars despite having to make sacrifices elsewhere in their household budgets This implies that some households might experience economic and mobility exclusion as a result of higher charges for accessing a town on which they are dependent for goods and services. 3. CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH P&R IS MOST LIKELY TO INCREASE SOCIAL INCLUSION The foregoing analysis suggests the following factors are likely to maximise the social inclusion value of P&R schemes in most cases (a) parking provision integrated within public transport networks that are accessible to all traveller groups (b) location of P&R in places and at distances from the destination that are likely to result in significant traffic
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
