In all cities there is a close interactive relationship between urban transportationand its environmental impact on the quality of life. Behaviour in the city, such asthe journey to work, shopping trips, visiting friends, family and leisure facilities,is also closely related to the system of urban transport and special patterns ofdaily or weekly travel. In fact, the efficient functioning of the city is directlydependent upon the efficiency of the components of urban transportation.Clearly, there is no shortage of possible solutions to the urban transportationproblem. In practice, the physical expansion and increasing functionalcomplexity of urban life in many cities in the twentieth century has resulted in aproliferation in the quantity and variety of services needed by the urbanpopulation. During the last few decades urban transport and the environmentalquality of cities have became a more pressing issue of research in the future ofsustainable urban development. It has been argued that sustainable patterns oftransportation could reduce the negative environmental impact of urbantransport.This paper discusses the impact of the pattern of transportation onenvironmental aspects of urban form. The study examines some aspects of travelpattern, in terms of type of transport, patterns of the daily / weekly travels andprivate car dependency. The paper reports the results of a 135 questionnairesurvey in the city of Glasgow in Scotland, UK. The results indicate that patternsof travel could have a significant impact on the environment, and therefore, onthe quality of life (QoL). It also suggests that respondents' characteristics couldaffect of the travel pattern and travel behaviour of citizens.
586 Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century
1 Introduction
The growth and application of transport has affected the entirefunctioning of our daily activities and the structure of cities. Many argue that thefuture of our environment and urban life depends on the way we manage ourtransport and cities. The negative impact of transport on the quality of life incities has been at the centre of much research during the last few decades. It hasbeen suggested that improving current urban transport could be the mostimportant issue over the debate of sustainable urban development.The issue of the impact of patterns of travel on the quality of the environmentand urban life is also the central debate of the sustainable urban transport. Manybelieve that the car and other types of transport have improved dramatically ourquality of our life. On the other hand, others describe the environmentaldegradation in recent decades especially in big cities. Although these debates arecompletely different, all agree that the car is the reality of urban life.Despite the importance and crisis of the environmental impact of the car oncities, most of the studies remain largely theoretical, and mainly focus on a fewaspects of the impact of travel patterns. The present issue concerns the impact ofcurrent travel patterns and their environmental effect on many aspects on thequality of life.This paper is an attempt to examine the relationship between travel patterns andtheir environmental impact on the quality of life. The main concern of this studyis to address to the question ' How and to what extent could different types oftravel patterns affect the urban environment and quality of life.'The paper will explore the results of an empirical survey. The case study of theresearch is the city of Glasgow in west Scotland ,UK. This paper reports on thefindings of one section of the original survey including four aspects of urbanform; 1. socio-cultural 2. environmental 3. physical and 4. economic. The papercomprises three main parts and begins with a general review of urban transportand its impact on the city and quality of life. It then explores the outcome of thesurvey and finally the conclusion summarises the results of the study.
2 Urban transport, environment and quality of life
The recent decades have witnessed an increasing world wide interest inthe study of the quality of life and transport systems in cities. Quality of life(QoL) is indeed at the heart of academic discussion in regard to the future of thecities. There is ongoing research and discussions on improving the standard andQoL to move towards the attainment of the 'Healthy and Friendly City'.
Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century 587
Despite the fact that technological changes have improved the standard of livingin the cities, some believe that the quality of life does not necessarily improve atthe same time. Today all the cities in the industrialised countries are facingserious environmental threats caused by the growing use of motor car. Traffic isnow the single main source of environmental disruption in the cities. It currentlyaccounts for about 70% of all emissions in environment. Pollution andcongestion are growing headaches for politicians and urban planners of allnationalities. Most large cities have introduced or are planning to introduce anew transportation policy to meet the threats to the environment. In recent years,more initiatives have been taken to improve the quality of life and the urbanenvironment in many countries.The "traffic problem" has been around for a long time as an objective reality,although perhaps not in its present form. However, the sense of urgency isextremely recent. Recognition of the objective problems is only the first step in abroader process of cognition. After many years of hesitation, a rapidly growingconsensus is emerging that "cars do not work particularly well in cities", or atleast "not in all cities at all times". It is quite clear that the present relationshipbetween cities and the car is not in balance. On the other hand however, thefulfilment of travel demand is fundamental in all societies.There is little doubt that the environmental quality of the cities and itsrelationship with the transportation and travel pattern will be a very importantissue in the future of cities. There is a critical factor that makes the solution ofurban transport problems more difficult and it is the fact that we depend almostentirely on the private car. It is also the case that the car, in many respects, is theideal mode of transport for many people.A better understanding of urban transport is a general basis in defining theproblem for a long-term solution. Encouraging the people to use public transportinstead of their car is the next important step toward the solution. It is equallyimportant that the public transport system should improve in order to be able tocompete with the travel standard and convenience of private car. To make publictransport system attractive to the public it should be accessible, reliable,comfortable, safe and cheap.
3 Research methodology
The objective of this paper is to explore the relationship between travelpattern and quality of urban life. The method of investigation is based on aquestionnaire survey and interview. This paper reports on the result of onesection (Environmental impact) of the main questionnaire which includes threeother sections (Socio-cultural, Physical and Economical impact). The originalresearch examines the Impact of technological change particularly InformationTechnology (IT) on the physical form of the city and urban life. Three maincategories of respondents to the survey were; 1.General users of IT (households)2. Professional users (office workers, students, academics,..) 3. Companies who
588 Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century
provide IT services or sell the IT equipment. Questionnaires (after a pilotsurvey) were distributed through the public groups and universities, libraries andsome companies by post mail. Questionnaires were distributed through a randomsampling in the first category and through a cluster sampling in the second andthird categories of respondents. From almost 30% of the returned questionnaires(n=185) a total of 135 complete questionnaires were considered for the processof analysing the data.
4 Case study
The city of Glasgow was a medieval foundation in the fifteenth centurywith a cathedral, a university and burghal status. In the seventeenth century, itopened up trade with India and North America. By the mid-nineteenth century,another major economic transformation of the city was occurring. The discoveryof coal and iron ore around Glasgow led to the development of iron, andsubsequently steel and the shipbuilding industry which changed the economy ofthe city. During the period 1930-60 Glasgow considered new manufacturingbases such as car manufacturing. After a period of recession in 1970s the basicindustry line changed the production to electronic domestic goods, officeequipment and electronic equipment. From the early 1990s the service sectorhas grown gradually to become the main economic sector. Today, Glasgow is aprime British example of the post industrial city (Lever, 1997).The major characteristic of the structure of the city is a combination of organicand grid-iron street patterns. As in many cities in Britain regarding thedevelopment pattern of the city at large, there is a fairly dense and compactdevelopment in the central area of the city on both sides of the River Clyde. Theriver Clyde is the main element forming the city. The city centre is a goodexample of the combination between past and present in terms of urban planningand architecture. The physical form of the city in terms of housing is mainlybased upon tenements. During 1960s / 1970s, there was a comprehensiveredevelopment and housing growth that changed the fabric of the city. Perhapsthe most significant contribution to changing the city image was the conservationand restoration policy and then regeneration of the city centre which hasimproved dramatically the image of the Glasgow in the 1980s. Frey Hildebrand,1999 in his recent book argues that "Glasgow is a city which clearlydemonstrates all the symptoms of dispersal, car dependency and socialsatisfaction typical for many post-industrial cities in Europe but it is also a citywhich exemplifies great strength in its historical development, and a high degreeareas of the city centre and some inner suburbs which have escapedcomprehensive redevelopment". He says, Glasgow is therefore a good city withwhich to experiment with strategic urban design intervention. As a result of thesecomprehensive policies, Glasgow was considered one of the distinctive examplesamong the European cities. After 1992 as a City of Culture, Glasgow celebratesthe year 1999 as the city of Design and Architecture of Europe
Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century 589
5 Results and discussion
In this section some of the main findings of the survey were presentedunder two main headings; 1) Respondent characteristics 2) Environmentalimpact. The second headings examine the main objectives of this study in termsof:A. Private car dependencyB. Transport mode of travelsC. Patterns of travels for different purposes
5.1 Respondent characteristics
Respondents of the survey were from three categories through random andcluster sampling. The male/female percentage of respondents was (55.9%-44.1%). In terms of age, the three groups of (16-25) years, (26-35) years and(36-45) years with 19.3 per cent, 37.0 per cent and 25.2 per cent were the maingroups of respondents. The result also shows that 75.8 per cent of the maingroups of respondents were full time employees and 7.6 per cent were in parttime employment. Furthermore, in terms of the respondents' occupations, 21.1per cent were directors/managers, 21.2 percent office workers, 28.6 wereprofessional academics and 10.5 percent students. A large number of totalrespondents (N=135), who have full time jobs (N=100) were academics, officeworkers, managerial, and students.
5.2 Environmental impact
This section presents and discusses some of the findings of the environmentaland transport sections of the questionnaires. The purpose of this section is toexamine people's daily/weekly travel patterns.
5.2.1 Private car dependency
5.2.1.1. Car ownership Today, the car is the dominant mode for travel to work,followed by the bus and walking. Car use is also dominant for the other purposesin most cities. The number of private cars available to households and thedistribution is a key component of the transport system of every town and city.In Glasgow car ownership rose by 46% in the 10 years to 1994, however itremains lower than the Scottish or UK average at 218 per 1000 population.Glasgow city council is planning to achieve a healthy city by encouraging peopleto move from car dependency. They are trying to increase the proportion of tripsmade by public transport, cycling and walking instead of the private car. Theresult of the survey shows a high proportion of the car ownership (86/63.7%)amongst the respondents. This could be mainly because of the respondents'characteristics in terms of occupations and job situations.
590 Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century
5.2.1.2 Frequency of private car use Regarding car dependency, as Table 1shows, (62/71.1 %) of respondents who have a car, said that they use their cardaily and almost one in three of them said they often use their car weekly. Thelatter group of respondents might have part time jobs or be using other types oftransport. Although, the pattern of using a car depends upon various factorssuch as job, age, and others, the overall result suggests that car owners usuallyintend to use their private car rather than any other transport mode.
Table 1. Frequency of private car use
DailyWeeklyMonthly
No6225
%71.328.7
5.2.1.3 Average spending money on fuel on a private car per week Withregard to the economic aspect of car ownership, data from Table 2 shows thataround one in four usually spends up to 10 pounds a week. By a similarpercentage (22/25.6%) some respondents pay (21-30) pounds for their weeklyfuel. More respondents (29/33.7%) spend on average (11-20) pounds in a weekfor their private car fuel.
Table 2. Average spending money on fuel per week
Up to11 to21 toMore
102030than 30
No20292212
%23333.725.614
5.2.1.4 Miles travelled by private car on a typical week A question wasasked to ascertain approximately how many miles respondents travelled by car ina typical week. The results from Table 3 indicate that about one third (35/40.7%)who have a private car travel up to 100 miles, (25/29.1%) travel more than 100miles and (18/20.9%) travel up to 50 miles. Only a few of them travel less than50 miles a week.
Table 4. Miles travelled by private car on a typical week
Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century 591
5.2.2 Transport modes and travel patterns for different purposes
5.2.2.1 Travel to the city centre: to work It is commonly assumed that one ofthe important criteria of the travel pattern is to find out the type and the reason oftransport mode that they use in their typical daily or weekly travels. Private cardependency also affects the pattern of travel of many people. Availability andproper combination of the different types of transport could clearly change thepattern of the people. There are also other factors such as destination, time, job,climate and others that could affect the pattern of travel.The results show that a high proportion of respondents (99/79.2%) were workingin the city centre. This high percentage might be because most of the officeschosen during the questionnaire distribution were in the city centre. Table 4shows that more than half (60/58.3%) of those who are working in the citycentre travel to and from work 9-12 times in a typical week. The result alsoshows that one third of them (37/35.9%) were going to work 5-8 times in aworking week. This proportion between the two types of travel to the city centrecould be because of the full-time and part-time job of respondents and the tworesults could also confirm the characteristics of respondents regarding the fulltime and part-time job. Only a few of them (6/5.6%) have travelled less than 4times or more than 12 times to the city centre to do their work.
Table 4. Number of journeys to work in a typical week
Up to 4 Times5-8 Times9- 12 TimesMore than 12 Times
No537601
%4.935.58.0.7
93̂
5.2.2.2 Travel to the city centre: non-work Regarding travelling to the citycentre, data from Table 5 show that despite travelling to work to the city centre,three other common reasons by priority were:1. Going to Restaurant, Cafes, Pubs,... by (82/63.6%)2. Entertainment (Cinema, theatre) by (77/59.7%)3. Personal business (Finance, medical) by (60/46.5%)The results indicate that on average half of the respondents are going to the citycentre to use leisure facilities. Weekly shopping by (56/43.4%) also could beconsidered as part of social life for most of the respondents.
The overall findings suggest that although travelling to work is the main reasonto go to the city centre, social and leisure time are also relatively importantreasons. A wide range of social activities could happen during the weeklyshopping specially at weekends, such as going to restaurants, cinema, and others.Indeed the result shows that the city centre has a combination of differentactivities or multi-functions of work, entertainment and others.
5.2.2.3 Common reasons for travel in a typical working day Table 6 showsthe most common reason for respondents to travel in a typical working day. Theresult shows that for majority of the respondents (114/84.4%), travelling to workis the most important reason to travel during a day. The results also indicate thatfor less than one in ten of respondents, going to a restaurant, pub, sport(21/15.6%), daily shopping (20/14.8%) and visiting friends and family(19/14.1%) are the other reasons for daily travelling. The overall results suggestthat there are various reasons for daily travelling but that travel to work is thedominant reason. The importance of daily travel to work could affect the travelpatterns and behaviour of the respondents in everyday life.
Table 6. The most common reason for travel in a typical working day
Daily shoppingWorkEntertainment(cinema, theatre,)EducationVisiting friends, familyGoing to restaurant, pub, sportOther
No20114n1219212
%14.84.9.68.914.15.1.5
84
16
5.2.2.4 Common transport mode in a typical week The common transportmode was determined for different purposes and destinations in a typical wt k.The results presented in Table 7 indicate that respondents use different modes oftransport to go to work and to the city facilities.Working place: The results show that (50/37%) of them use public transport togo to work and approximately the same proportion (54/40%) use their car.
Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century 593
Approximately one in ten of the respondents (17/12.6%) go to work on foot. Astravel to work is the most common reason for travel both daily and weekly forthe respondents, a similar proportion of results regarding private and publicmode of transport for work could indicate a positive combination of it. Onereason for this similar combination may be because the majority of therespondents are working in the city centre. For them, using public transportcould be easier, more accessible and reliable.Daily shopping: In terms of daily travel, the results in Table 7 show thatinterestingly (587 43%) of the respondents go on foot for daily shopping. Aroundone third of them (39/28.9%) use their private car, while approximately one inten (15/11.1%) use public transport. The result regarding the high percentage ofcar use for daily shopping could be because of the respondents' job and wherethey work.Weekly shopping. Data from Table 7 shows that more than half of therespondents ( 79/58.5%) prefer to use their own private car for weekly shoppingand approximately one in five of them goes weekly shopping on foot. Theoverall result regarding weekly shopping suggests public transport is not acommon transport for weekly shopping. The different results between travellingby foot and public transport does not strongly suggest that public transport is agood choice for weekly shopping. It might have other different reasons such asrespondents' job, car ownership and other.Entertainment: It seems that in general respondents prefer to have a freer optionfor entertainment and visiting friends or family. The results presented in Table 7regarding these two factors firstly show similar results for four type of transport.Secondly it indicates that various combinations of transport types were used forthese purposes. Thirdly, the use of the private car for entertainment by(66/48.7%) and for visiting friends (82/60.7%) is the first choice for therespondents. This might be because the second purpose needs a more private andpersonal type of transport such as a private car because of the variety of thedestinations or times when visiting friends and family.On foot: The results show that except for the daily shopping (58/43%), theresults regarding the five other factors in Table 7 are similar.By Public transport: The main reasons for using Public transport were for thework place (50/37%), city centre (49/36.3) and entertainment (33/24.4%). Theresults could suggest that although the proportion of public transport is not high,respondents tend to use it to go to the city centre where they mostly work orspend time for entertainment.Private car: Although the private car is the dominant mode of transport for themajority of purposes, the results indicate that respondents use their car for morefree and personal activities such as weekly shopping (79/58.5%), visitingfriends/ family (82/60.7%) and entertainment (66/48.9%) than other activities.By bicycle: The significantly low percentage of this transport mode in this casecould be either because of the geographical, environmental conditions of the cityof Glasgow or personal characteristics such as job or age..
5.2.2.5 Number of journeys during a week and miles travelledThe result regarding the average (mile) distance from home to differentdestinations and purposes shows that around one third of the respondents walkon average 1-3 miles for work, the city centre, weekly shopping, and visitingfriends /family. Approximately one third of them travel on average 3-6 miles towork, the city centre, and weekly shopping and approximately a quarter of themtravel 7-16 miles to work, the city centre and visiting friends /family. Regardingvisiting friends/ family the average travels were different range of options.Table 8 shows the number of journeys to different destinations which could beanother indication of the importance or priority of these facilities in the city.Overall, the result indicates that three main purpose for travel in terms of thetotal number were: 1. work place (956), 2. daily / weekly shopping (296) and 3.visiting family/ friends (272). The data indicates that almost one in two journeyswere to the work place and it also shows that respondents travel to their workplace three times more than for daily/weekly shopping or visiting family,friends. Considering the total numbers of journeys for different purposes showson average almost 15 journeys per person in a typical week. One in two of thejourneys is to the work place and one in almost seven is either for the purpose ofdaily, weekly shopping or visiting friends, family.
During the last few decades, the application of information technology haschanged the way people work, communicate and use their time. The impact ofIT on urban transport is a new subject in urban studies. On the basis ofrespondents' forecasting for the next ten years, Table 9 shows the assessment ofthe impact of IT applications on different factors. The result shows that themajority of respondents believe that it could have either major or minor impacton those items. The result from Table 9 shows that about three-quarters of therespondents agree with the major impact of the application of IT on two factors:1. Living in suburbs or small towns (42.6%) 2. Decrease the number of dailytrips (40.9%). It is most likely that the application of IT such as teleworking,teleshopping, etc. and telecommunications might reduce the number of journeys,in particular the unnecessary journeys, which could help to partly solve trafficproblems.
Table 9. The assessment of the impact of IT applications (teleworking,telestudy,...) on the city in the next ten years
596 Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century
6 Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore a better understanding of travelpatterns and quality of life. The empirical findings of this study indicate thatthere is a close relationship between patterns of travel and their environmentalimpact. The result showed that the car is still is the dominant transport mode formainly optional travels such as visiting family/ friends, shopping and particularlygoing to work in a typical week. Journeys to work (114/84.8%) were the mostcommon reason for daily travelling. In terms of non-work journeys, although thecar is important, however public transport was a better option depending on itsefficiency, accessibility and other factors,. About one third of the respondentsuse either public transport (50/37%) or private car (54/40%) to their work place.By a similar proportion around one third of them use both types of transportationto go to the city centre. The majority of respondents (58/43%) go daily shoppingon foot whereas the private car (39/28.9%) is the second choice of transport.More than half (79/58.5%) use their car for weekly shopping.Telecommunications and different applications of IT could decrease the numberof daily trips and reduce the traffic congestion and pollution. Despite the factthat the car is still a more convenient mode of transport, by improving thequality of public transport in terms of accessibility, reliability and other factorswe could have a clean and sustainable urban environment.
7 Reference
1. Barbour, G., Technology, Environment and Human Values, New York:Praeg. 1980.
2. Brotchie, J., & Batty, M. (Ed.) Cities of the 21st Century:NewTechnology and Special System, Melbourne: Longman. 1991.
3. Glasgow City Council. Keep Glasgow Moving, Draft Consultation,Glasgow: Glasgow City Council, Roads & Transportation, 1998.
4. Hiidebrand, F. Designing the City: Towards a More Sustainable UrbanForm , London, New York: E&FN SPON, 1999.
5. Hayes, M. Glasgow: Planning for Development, Glasgow Planning &Development Council, Glasgow, 1997.
6. Kitwood, T. Technology, Environment and Dimension, Manchesteramaonographys Hepworth, 1984.
7. Lever, W.F. Glasgow: the post-industrial city, Butler, C.J., & Shachar, A.(Ed.) European Cities in Competition, Avebury, Sydney, 1997.
8. Marvin, S. Telecommunication and the Environmental Debate, WorkingPaper No. 20, Department of Town And Country Planning, University ofNewcastle, 1993.
9. Patrick, T. (Ed.) Technological Change and the City, The FederationPress: Sydney, 1995.
Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st Century 597
10. Reed, P. (Ed.) Glasgow: The Forming of the City, Edinburgh UniversityPress, Edinburgh, 1993.
11. O'Conghail, W., & Di Martino, V. (Ed,) New technology and Quality ofLife, The Eruption Foundation for the Improvement of Living andWorking Conditions, Dublin, 1986.
12. OCED, Cities for 21st Century, Praise: OCED Press, 1994.13. OCDE, Urban Travel and Sustainable Development, Praise: OCED Press,
