Affordability deserves a permanent place in mobility policy

Almost a quarter of Dutch motorists experience financial pressure because of high fuel prices. Among motorists with a below-average household income, this rises to 39%. Of this group, 28% say fuel costs are causing financial difficulties. These are the findings of research published by the ANWB this week.

The findings relate to an issue that deserves greater attention in mobility policy: transport poverty. This concerns not only people without access to transport, but also those whose essential journeys consume an increasing share of their disposable income.

Dependence

The Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis (KiM) makes an important distinction here. People may deliberately choose to live without a car and be 'car-free'. Others are 'carless': they would like to have a car but are prevented from doing so by, for example, their financial situation, health or lack of a driving licence. KiM also identifies households experiencing 'forced car ownership'. They struggle to afford a car but see too few alternatives because of where they live, their work or their personal circumstances.

This last group is particularly evident in the ANWB research. For them, a car is not necessarily a luxury but often a prerequisite for reaching work, education, healthcare or family. This applies, for example, to people who travel outside normal working hours, work on a business park or live somewhere with limited public transport. People who start early, work at night or have variable shifts cannot automatically rely on a bus or train. Cutting back on car use is then less straightforward than is sometimes assumed.

Alternatives

Public transport itself is not always affordable either. Costs can mount considerably, particularly when several family members travel a longer distance together. KiM previously found that 10% of adults in the Netherlands have difficulty paying for transport. Specifically for public transport, 7% find the cost of using buses, trains, trams or the metro difficult to afford while also having limited financial security. For part of the population, cars are expensive and the available alternatives are also difficult to afford.

Transport poverty is therefore about more than the presence of transport. A nearby bus stop or a station within cycling distance does not offer a viable alternative if the journey is too expensive, the service does not run when needed or the total journey time does not fit everyday life. The same applies to shared mobility: it can be a valuable addition, but only if it is available, easy to understand and affordable.

Tailored solutions

There is no universal solution. Circumstances vary too much between areas and target groups. Affordability can, however, be given greater weight in mobility research and policy. Journey times and theoretical accessibility are not the only relevant factors: costs, availability at different times and the practical usefulness of alternatives also matter.

Possible measures also vary. In some areas, improving public transport or flexible transport services may help. Elsewhere, targeted discounts, safer cycling connections or agreements with employers on commuting may be more effective. Over the longer term, spatial planning decisions also play an important role, for example by locating housing, jobs and amenities closer together.

Shared mobility can also form part of this approach. Peer-to-peer car sharing makes a privately owned car available to others. This makes better use of the existing fleet, allows owners to recover some of their costs and gives people without a car occasional access to one. Neighbourhood car-sharing schemes and small-scale transport services can also make a local contribution.

The opportunities nevertheless vary greatly by location. An alternative that works well in an inner-city environment may not be a realistic choice in a village, suburb or business park. This is precisely why mobility policy should extend beyond encouraging or discouraging individual modes of transport.

Ultimately, accessibility is about whether people can actually participate in society. As long as some people need a car but struggle to afford it, while the alternatives are not always affordable or practical either, affordability deserves a full place in mobility research and policy.