Part of transport policy in the UK is the sustainable transport hierarchy. There are lots of versions of this, as it turns out - see for example here and here.
But generally put, the hierarchy has a number of tiers:
- Walking and wheeling
- Cycling
- Public transport
- Taxis and shared vehicles
- Private cars
- Air travel
Generally, modes are more sustainable as you go up the list - lower pollution, lower carbon emissions. The more active travel modes at the top of the list are also much healthier. They're also more efficient as you go up the list - cars in particular are incredibly inefficient users of the precious space in urban environments. And the costs of providing the infrastructure vary quite widely - there are massive external costs associated with motor transport, which are much higher than the direct income from taxation.
With that, policy should prioritise modes further up the hierarchy. You do see a fair amount of talk about this, although action is far less obvious.
One recent change to the Highway Code, for example, prioritises pedestrians and cylists over vehicles turning into side roads.
But generally, the reality is that the default is to prioritise the car, sometimes subtly. Consider Cambridge Railway station. Come by car or taxi, and you arrive close to the front door. Cyclists are a bit further away, and have to navigate steps. Bus users are down the end of the street. Pedestrians have all sorts of obstacles to navigate.
There are lots of other examples. Pedestrian crossings - if they exist at all - are routinely placed and timed for the convenience of motorists. Bus and cycle lanes are configured and only exist where it's convenient for motorists.
To improve matters, one might consider a range of interventions. These have to be done with care - simply concentrating on one level in the hierarchy runs the risk of causing harm at other levels. Although, generally, an intervention at a specific level is more likely to benefit the tiers below it, while running the risk of harming levels above it.
One example here is that ways to encourage cycling can harm pedestrian activity - shared paths are obviously bad, but taking pavement space for cycle parking also make the lives of pedestrians much worse.
One extreme consequence of the above is that if you want to improve the lot of motorists, you should work to improve the tiers above - as people shift to walking, cycling, or using public transport then you reduce congestion, and that's really the best way to benefit motorists.
Conversely, designing for cars makes the levels above less attractive, which pushes more people towards car use, increasing congestion and making life for motorists worse.
