CWIS Investment Modelling
The Conservative government knew in 2020 that the public money it was investing in active travel was insufficient to meet its own goals.
The government commissioned Arup AECOM to run models to find out how much it would cost to meet the 2025 active travel goals in the 2017 Cycling & Walking Investment Strategy (CWIS). CWIS was updated in 2022 but the same goals were retained.
The Investment Insights report that the consultants wrote was withheld from the public, but publication has recently been forced in Transport Action Network’s court case against the government’s cuts to active travel funding.
The government notes in a foreword to the Investment Insights paper that the costs given in the consultants’ models are no longer valid due to inflation and the CWIS Investment Model will have to be updated.
In other words, due to government delay decent active travel networks will cost us more.
CWIS Goals
The 2025 goals in the CWIS were to:
- increase cycling stages from 0.8 billion (in 2013) to 1.6 billion
- increase walking to 300 stages per person per year (already met in 2019, for reasons not fully understood)
- increase the percentage of 5 to 10 years olds walking to school from 49% to 55%
The Insights report stressed the potential for more active travel.
‘For instance, two out of every three personal trips are within five miles, which is an achievable distance to cycle for most people, and many shorter journeys are also suitable for walking’.
para 2.9 of the insights report
In the 5 year period from 2016-21, funding for active travel from all sources was around £2.4 billion.
At the time of the Insights report (February 2020), Boris Johnson was just about to announce £5 billion over 5 years for buses and cycling. Subsequently, £2 billion of that funding was allocated to cycling and walking.
The Insights report made clear (para 2.13) that it was ‘unlikely that it will be sufficient’.
Investment Models
The consultants modelled the results of a large number of interventions.
They included capital/infrastructure measures like area-wide cycle networks and flagship walking and cycling links, and revenue interventions such as cycle training and travel planning.
Multiple scenarios were used, and they were grouped into:
- central scenarios
- lower cost scenarios needing traffic restraint or land-use planning and
- higher cost capital-intensive scenarios
Traffic restraint could mean higher parking charges or LTNs.
Land-use planning includes housing development built in places and with designs that minimise car dependency and encourage walking.
The lower cost scenarios provided
‘…an indication of the maximum extent to which investment could be reduced while still achieving the CWIS aims, under favourable conditions’.
para 3.16 of the insights report
The higher cost scenarios were for capital projects only – so, for example, building cycle tracks but doing no School Streets or behaviour change campaigns.
‘Firm and Committed Investment’
The models described the impact of ‘firm and committed investment’.
We know that subsequently the government’s approach was anything but firm and committed, in particular once Mr Sunak was installed as Prime Minister.
In March 2023, active travel funding was cut so that the 2020 promise of £2 billion over 5 years was reneged on.
Spending went from £283 million a year in the 3 years up to 2022/23, down to a projected £50 million per year for the next 2 years.
Cost of Meeting Cycling Goal
The models showed that the goal of doubling cycling by 2025 would not achieved with the funding then allocated to it. Then-current funding would be likely to deliver only around 40% of the target.
The extra £2 billion over 5 years for active travel announced around the time of the Insights report would also be insufficient to achieve the goals.
Under the central scenarios, between £5.3 and £8.2 billion would be needed to achieve the target of doubling cycling to 1.6 billion stages.
£2 billion therefore represented between 38% and 24% of the funding required, even if it was all spent on cycling.
Using the lower cost scenarios, it would need £3.4 to £5.4 billion. This is due to
‘…the enhanced impact of cycling interventions when combined with traffic restraint measures’.
para 5.8 of the insights report
The report said that meeting the cycling goal in 2025 was only possible under the lower cost scenarios, because the other scenarios required more infrastructure that local authorities were unlikely to be able to deliver in the time left.
The higher cost scenarios would require £11 to £14.3 billion.
Cost of Meeting Walking to School Goal
The central scenarios showed a cost of £420 to £450 million to reach 55% of 5 to 10 year olds walking to school.
Revenue interventions like School Streets and walking promotion campaigns are very good value for money, the report said, but need to be accompanied by infrastructure improvements.