Well-being and Transport: Taking Stock and Looking Forward

ABSTRACT

It is only recently that researchers have attempted to directly link transport to models of well-being and in turn try to map transport's linkages to well-being outcomes. This paper seeks to add to this new literature by introducing a dynamic model of well-being, which highlights the different domains that make up well-being, and in turn — through providing one of the most holistic and comprehensive discussions of the current well-being literature — provide an evaluation of our current understanding of transport's relationship to well-being. The paper also seeks to highlight the different dimensions and complexities of seeking to monitor and improve well-being through transport policy. It will in turn be argued that the varied and complex sets of outcomes that arise from transport policy interventions, and the multiple ways in which they affect well-being, make a well-being approach (that measures policy outcomes in terms of units of well-being) of particular value for policy-makers. However, due to the complexities in comparing positive well-being outcomes, it is argued that the best use of well-being evidence for the transport sector may be to try to minimise the negative effects on well-being caused by policy outcomes.

Keywords:

• well-being
• quality of life
• transport policy
• sustainability
• the environment

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Professor Ian Bache (University of Sheffield), Professor Greg Marsden (Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds) and the anonymous Transport Reviews reviewers for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Notes

1. ‘Thick’ social bonds are those that are based on personal experience are strong and frequent relationships. ‘Thin’ social bonds are those that extend beyond the network of the individual and based more on community norms (Putman, 2000, p. 136).

2. Light Street: 2000 average vehicle flow per day, Medium Street: 8700 average vehicle flow per day, Heavy Street: 15,750 average vehicle flow per day (Appleyard, 1981, pp. 20–25).

3. See also Currie et al. (2009), Currie and Delbosc (2010) and Delbosc and Currie (2011b, 2011c) for more on the relationship between transport disadvantage and well-being.

4. Income effects were controlled for in all the studies outlined.