1. University of Westminster
School of Architecture and the Built Environment
Can the travel planning process be improved? A Kent case
study.
MSc Transport Planning & Management - 2012
Thomas King

2. Acknowledgements
I would like to thank all those that have assisted me in the production of this
study and throughout the duration of the course. In particular I would like to
thank the following:
Peter White and Peter Stanley who have supported me during the year in the
development of my study. Many thanks for your advice.
My employer, Kent County Council who have provided the financial
assistance to permit me to complete this course, and to my colleagues Katie
Pettitt and Charlotte Owen who assisted with the development and collection
of the study data as part of a wider paper on ‘Making Workplace Travel Plans
Work’.
My family and friends who have supported me throughout the two year course.
Lastly I would like to thank those who assisted me in the data collection stage
of this study by agreeing to be interviewed.
2

3. Abstract
Despite popularisation of the terms over 20 years ago Agenda21 and
sustainability are still current, topical issues, which attract attention and
stimulate debate at the highest levels of global governance. This study
examines the early ideas of sustainability to understand the role it has played
within global and UK national policy. One of the key local impacts as a
consequence of this global debate has been the creation of Travel Plans as a
method to minimise the impact of growing traffic associated with new
developments. By examining the rise of global and national policy, this study
seeks to understand how Kent County Council, and organisations within the
County have developed, implemented and operated their Travel Plans.
Of particular interest is the view that Travel Plans are not producing the
outcomes originally intended. As a result, the research undertaken as part of
this study is designed to look at site-specific examples to understand the
problems associated with trying to implement and run a successful Travel
Plan. Importantly this will touch on the wider issues of national policy, local
government and the problems faced by businesses trying to achieve tangible
results. This study will conclude by highlighting the key areas that need to be
tackled at both the national, local and organisational level if Travel Plans are
to become successful and more widespread across the UK.
Word count: 19,938
3

4. Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 4
1.1. Aims .................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Structure.............................................................................................. 4
1.3. Conclusion .......................................................................................... 5
2. Literature review ...................................................................................... 6
2.1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 6
2.2. Sustainability “Agenda21” ................................................................... 6
2.3. Theoretical approaches to sustainability ............................................. 8
2.4. National and local policy background .................................................. 9
2.5. Travel Plan background .................................................................... 11
2.6. PPG13............................................................................................... 11
2.7. NPPF................................................................................................. 12
2.8. Travel Plan types .............................................................................. 13
2.9. International Travel Plans and fiscal incentives ................................. 14
2.10. Corporate social responsibilities ........................................................ 15
2.11. Conclusion ........................................................................................ 18
3. Methodology .......................................................................................... 20
3.1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 20
3.2. Choice of topic .................................................................................. 20
3.3. Study design ..................................................................................... 20
3.4. Qualitative data ................................................................................. 22
3.5. Quantitative data ............................................................................... 23
3.6. Data analysis ..................................................................................... 24
3.7. Ethical considerations and data protection ........................................ 24
3.8. Conclusion ........................................................................................ 25

5. 4. Results & analysis ................................................................................. 26
4.1. Online survey responses ................................................................... 26
4.2. Creation............................................................................................. 27
4.3. Implementation .................................................................................. 30
4.4. Reviewing.......................................................................................... 31
4.5. Engagement ...................................................................................... 33
4.6. Success............................................................................................. 34
4.7. In-depth telephone interviews ........................................................... 36
4.8. Response summary .......................................................................... 38
4.9. In-depth telephone interview analysis ............................................... 41
4.10. Kent County Council interviews ......................................................... 42
4.11. Sustainable Transport Manager interview ......................................... 43
4.12. Senior Development Planner interview ............................................. 44
4.13. Conclusion ........................................................................................ 46
5. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 48
5.1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 48
5.2. To explain the origins of Travel Plans ............................................... 48
5.3. To identify past and present policies relating to Travel Plans............ 49
5.4. To investigate how KCC manages the Travel Plan process.............. 51
5.5. To research how companies are managing their Travel Plans.......... 52
5.6. To identify constraints within the travel planning process ................. 53
5.7. To establish how Travel Plans can be improved ............................... 55
5.8. Limitations ......................................................................................... 58
5.9. Further research ideas ...................................................................... 58
6. References & Bibliography................................................................... 60
6.1. References ........................................................................................ 60
6.2. Bibliography ...................................................................................... 64
2

6. Appendix
Appendix A - Online survey results
- Online survey letter
- Online survey responses
- ‘Making Workplace Travel Plans Work’ Paper
Appendix B - In-depth telephone interview transcripts
List of figures
Figure 01 - The research process.
Figure 02 - Online survey responsibility responses.
Figure 03 - Online survey ‘why’ responses.
Figure 04 - Online survey key features responses.
Figure 05 - Online survey problems responses.
Figure 06 - Online survey implementation problem responses.
Figure 07 - Online survey updating responses.
Figure 08 - Online survey behavioural changes.
Figure 09 - Online survey engagement responses.
Figure 10 - Online survey satisfaction responses.
Figure 11 - Online survey successful / unsuccessful key points.
Figure 12 - Online survey improvement responses.
Figure 13 - Online survey improvement responses.
List of tables
Table 01 - Follow-up interview sites.
Table 02 - KCC iTRACE database breakdown.
Table 03 - Online survey response breakdown.
Table 04 - Follow-up interview sites.
3

7. 1. Introduction
This study seeks to explore the issues surrounding Travel Plans and the wider
policies that have developed over the past two decades. It will encompass the
pressures of global, national and local policies, which have continued to
evolve from the very early ideas of Agenda21 and sustainability.
The main focus of the study will be to look at existing Travel Plans required as
part of a Section 106 agreement, and where possible, Plans which have been
developed on a voluntary basis. In order to deconstruct the current situation in
the UK I will be contacting businesses that have introduced Travel Plans,
initially to understand how their Plans were developed, but also to identify the
possible impacts this has had on changing employee travel behaviour.
Crucial to understanding how Travel Plans could be further enhanced, it is
important to determine if the current fluid situation surrounding national and
local government Travel Plan policy is impacting upon their long-term viability.
If it is, what policy changes are required? and what can one learn and indeed
recommend having considered the thoughts and opinions of businesses that
have implemented plans in recent years?
1.1. Aims
This study has a number of aims:
1. To explain the origins of Travel Plans;
2. To identify past and present policies relating to Travel Plans;
3. To investigate how KCC manages the Travel Plan process;
4. To research how companies are managing their Travel Plans;
5. To identify constraints within the travel planning process; and
6. To establish how Travel Plans can be improved.
1.2. Structure
In order to achieve these aims, this study will be structured into the following
sections:
(a) Literature review - concerned with framing the context of the study
from an abstract stage, moving towards a more concrete account of
today’s situation. In order to do this, the study will look at the origins of
sustainability and the original Agenda21 movement. It will then focus
on the national and local government policies that have been
developed. It will also cover international examples, along with the
move towards fiscally incentivising Travel Plan development.
(b) Methodology - this section is concerned with identifying the study
choice and design. It will also identify the use of quantitative and
qualitative data and set out how this is going to be analysed to help
answer the main aims of this study.
4

8. (c) Results - this section will include analysis of research undertaken via
contacts obtained by accessing Kent County Council’s iTRACE
database of implemented Travel Plans. To enhance the initial research
further, additional in-depth interviews will be undertaken with a
selection of the initial respondents. As part of understanding how
Travel Plan policy is changing at the more local level, interviews will
also be carried out with key members of staff at Kent County Council.
(d) Conclusion - to conclude this study and answer the original aims, the
conclusion will firstly deal with the responses to the initial survey;
secondly the in-depth interview information will be introduced, and
finally the results from the interviews undertaken with Kent County
Council. This will all be used to try and answer the main aims of the
study and to understand what needs to be done to improve the
performance and longevity of Travel Plans in the UK.
1.3. Conclusion
By setting this study within the context of current planning policy regime and
also including the origins of Travel Plans, it is envisaged it will be possible to
set the scene for making suggestions for future improvements to the UK’s
travel planning process. By collecting data from live Travel Plans the study will
be able to establish what progress has been made, and where improvements
could or should be introduced. Today’s society is a dynamic one, with issues
of sustainability and new environmental policies continually being adapted
and developed by successive governments. This study will also seek to
evaluate the current situation by connecting live Travel Plan examples with
current Government policies and looking at how they perform. In order for
Travel Plans to continue, there is a real need to have a better understanding
of what businesses require from future policies. This will enable businesses to
introduce Travel Plans that produce meaningful results, as opposed to just
being a ‘box-ticking exercise’.
5

9. 2. Literature review
2.1. Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to set the study within a context that will introduce
the reader to the notion of Travel Plans, as well as the national and local
polices that have guided their development over the past two decades.
The literature review will seek to focus on the rise in importance of the term
“sustainability” in the public and political conscience and the ideas of
Agenda21. It will then look at the increasing prevalence of Travel Plans and
the history surrounding the securing, enforcing and monitoring of such Plans
as a result of national policies, such as PPG13. In addition to this, the review
will look at the rise in corporate and social responsibility, and the changing
attitudes this has brought towards sustainability and Agenda21.
This chapter has been structured in such a way to allow the reader to follow
the ‘journey’ of Travel Plans from the theoretical abstract ideas, through to the
polices that have led to a change in attitude by many companies towards their
social responsibilities. A key question throughout this literature review is
whether current policies are successfully influencing and changing travel
behaviour to produce more sustainable patterns of commuting for the
foreseeable future.
2.2. Sustainability “Agenda21”
Agenda21 is a voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations first
produced at the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (“UNCED”) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. The Agenda21
plan fundamentally outlines the understanding that the environment must be
integrated into all the policies and actions of industry, Government and
consumers, and attempts to address the causes of environmental degradation
as a means of creating a more sustainable economy and society. Agenda21
has played an important part in raising the awareness of sustainability as a
term and as a global movement towards creating a more ecological balance.
Since the early 1990s, issues of Agenda21 have been considered to be one
of the world’s most important concepts for beginning to deal with the subject
of sustainability. Lele (1991, p.613) remarked that its development is a
‘metafix’ that will unite everybody from the profit minded industrialists and risk
minimising subsistence farmers to the equity seeking social workers. These
local environmental strategies are not only linked to changing national
priorities, but also reflect the particular economic, environmental and political
challenges impacting on decision making in each locality (John, White & Gibb,
2004, pp. 151-168). Peck (1998, pp. 5-21) suggests that the issues of
Agenda21 offer more means to contribute to democratic renewal in the UK
than perhaps any other function of local government.
As it stands, Agenda21 does not have a formal authority of its own to direct
others to green their policies; hence it relies on a more ‘bottom-up’ approach
to integration. To speed up reform, past and present Governments have
6

10. looked to capitalise on the ideas of Agenda21. However, as a term, Agenda21
has now been superseded by the term ‘sustainability’ (Wilkinson, 1997, pp.
153-173). This builds on the work of Agenda21, but also starts to draw on new
policies and binding regulations as part of the planning process. It also seeks
to widen the scope of Agenda21 to cover areas such as: jobs; energy; cities;
food; water; oceans; and disasters (RIO+20 UN, 2012).
Given heightened awareness and political pressures, the world’s governments
can no longer afford to ignore the environmental agenda (Cocklin and Blundel,
1998, p. 59). With the development of national and international policies, we
are starting to see planning policies that set out more detailed parameters for
local authorities to follow. Currently, local economic pressures, interests and
traditions have led to significant spatial variations in local environmental
politics and policies. O’Brien and Penna, (1997, p. 186) believe that some
aspects of the economic and political system privilege some strategies over
others, this has resulted in certain places and regions benefiting more so than
others.
In England there is evidence of a marked variation in the commitment and
approaches towards sustainability and Travel Plans. These appear to reflect
‘local contingencies’ and depend upon how local authorities have chosen to
manage their interests. Research by Emma Young in 2011 highlights one
difference - Travel Plan enforcement. Her study showed that out of 86 Local
Authorities, 46 knew of examples where Travel Plans subject to planning
conditions or Section 106 agreements had not been implemented, yet very
little evidence is available to demonstrate how Local Authorities have been
enforcing planning conditions. It is clear from Young’s study and others that
different local authorities are prioritising some environmental policies over
others, and developing different ways of managing local economic-
environmental tensions to satisfy both local and political needs and interests.
An alternative interpretation is that uneven development and rollout of
Agenda21 has arisen as a result of the rapidly changing landscape of local
and regional governance and state agendas; termed ‘local strategic
selectivity’. Without strong governmental prescription of targets and definitions,
a wide range of interpretations have developed. Furthermore, competing
pressures and resource constraints has meant Agenda21 was unlikely to top
the agendas of most local authorities that continue to be preoccupied with
increasing economic development (Patternson & Theobald, 1996, p. 10).
Consequently, as Agenda21 became incorporated it was simultaneously
being detached from the key priorities in local and regional governance. In
2000 the then Labour Government introduced the Local Government Act. This
gave greater discretionary power to local authorities to promote economic,
social or environmental wellbeing, whilst also requiring community strategies
to be prepared.
Bruff and Wood (2000, pp. 519-539) saw this change as a move away from
market-based concerns, to one more in touch with the wider conceptions of
local services and priorities. It is also a reverse to a traditionally conservative
approach to encourage innovation and closer working between local
authorities and their partners to improve communities’ quality of life (DETR,
7

11. 2000, p. 7). Pinfield& Saunders (2000, pp.15-18) believe on the other hand
that this Act marks a shift to a ‘weaker’ meaning for the term ‘sustainable
development’ in comparison with the spirit of local Agenda21.
2.3. Theoretical approaches to sustainability
Sustainable development has been discussed extensively over the past two
decades in political, economic and social forums alike; however the meaning
of the word is something that remains contested. The geographical scale at
which sustainability is viewed is most often global, dealing with the conceptual
issues rather than actual policy change. Breheny (1992) believes it is this lack
of empirical applicability, which has resulted in the discipline of sustainability
becoming so contested. The range of literature on the topic is extensive and
encompasses varying fields as detailed earlier in the literature review.
Sustainable development ought to mean the creation of a society and an
economy that can come to terms with the life-support limits of the planet. But
as Class (1997, p. 2) has discovered, the current approach to sustainable
development can only be described as a “chimera, a theoretical position that
attracts attention, stimulates debate and raises awareness about the scope
and transition to a less unsustainable world”. The main difficulty with
sustainable development lies not just in its ambiguity; there is a real issue of
democratic probity at stake, if a majority honestly does not want to pay what it
sees as ‘the price’ for sustainable development, who is to deny them their
legitimate wish? As Shen (1997, p.76) explains “a multifaceted approach is
necessary”. Muschett (1997, p.81) explains in his work that “sustainable
development occurs when management goals and action are simultaneously
ecologically viable, economically feasible and socially desirable; these imply
environmental soundness and political acceptability”. The term ‘sustainable
development’ has had widespread political usage because of its broad
application and vague definition. If we are to tackle these problems,
sustainability requires a fundamental shift in value and behaviour (Smith,
Whitelegg & Williams 1998). This includes a shift from materialism to a more
holistic view of what constitutes quality of life. Intangible, but also real
elements of human contentment such as social cohesion, community and
self-development must also be given greater priority.
Today sustainable development is a socially motivating force, in O’Riordan &
Voisey’s (1997) book Sustainable development in Western Europe the
authors perceive that because we globally understand our long-term survival
is at stake, we will continue to develop the term ‘sustainability’. This may
ultimately prove to be the most important driver towards envisioning a
sustainable future. Muschett (1997) believes that in order to break through
these barriers, government leadership, private sector ingenuity and public
support will be required. Regulatory obstacles will also need to be removed to
support this process.
Key to tackling regulatory obstacles is the hierarchical assignment of
responsibility, which to a certain extent is still held by a central authority.
Kairiukstis (1989) believes that the objectives of sustainable development
may be achieved more easily if the process of socioeconomic development
8

12. and environmental change are implemented on a more regional, or local scale.
Going back to Rio in 1992, the importance of local authorities and
municipalities was stressed as a way of achieving sustainable development.
Beck (1992, pp.37-74) suggests we are slowly moving in the direction of more
local frameworks where we will no longer see politicians exclusively carrying
out many tasks. As a consequence, numerous social and environmental non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) have become important political actors,
opening up a whole new area of ‘sub politics’, potentially adding an additional
layer of complexity to a system already poorly understood.
2.4. National and local policy background
The implementation of a sustainable approach to planning relies on the
creation of strong national and local policies and guidance to support Travel
Plans. Bond and Brooks’ (1997, pp. 305-321) work shows that national
guidance is often created in a hope to provide impetus for further
methodological development at a more local level. In July 1998 the Labour
Government released a white paper on transport policy ‘A New Deal for
Transport: Better for Everyone’, this was intended to decrease the
dependence on the private car, (T. Rye, 2002, p287-298) whilst promoting a
policy to encourage the voluntary take up of Travel Plans.
National Government policies are about providing local authorities with the
information and guidance necessary to enable them to become proactive. In
the case of Travel Plans it is about putting in place the necessary support
structures to enable collaborative working between public and private
organisations. National policies are ideal for creating a top-down approach for
tackling issues such as a national plan for dealing with traffic congestion, or
national strategy for reducing CO2 emissions, they do not however provide a
solution to deal with the more localised issues, for instance, tackling the very
source of the problem hampering the success of Travel Plans; the
stereotypical views people hold of the private car. A study by Lek in 1999
found that 61% of 14 - 16 year olds viewed a car as essential to their lives. In
order to tackle these views Pacione (2002) believes that national policies
need to be implemented and tackled at the local level. It has also been argued
by Allen, Anderson & Browne (1997, pp. 3-6) in their study Urban Logistics
that Pacione’s idea of implementing change at the local level must also be
backed up by more prescribed national plans in order to promote the purpose
of greener credentials to the widest possible audience.
In response to national frameworks produced by the Government, local
authorities have drawn up localised Regional Spatial Strategies to try and
tackle some of these problems. The South East Plan (2009) has a chapter
focused on transport, which highlights the importance of transport issues
within Kent and the wider south east region. The policy states:
“Monitored travel information for the south east shows an increase in overall
travel per person since 2004, including an increase in travel by car […] the
need to re-balance the transport system in favour of sustainable modes is
recognised throughout this Plan […] our vision is a high quality transport
system to act as a catalyst for continued economic growth”
9

13. As part of the South East Plan, all local authorities are required to ensure their
local development documents and transport plans identify any developments
that could create additional traffic constraints on the transport network and
ensure a Travel Plan is developed. More recently Local Authorities have been
creating their Local Development Plans; the bulk of which involves the
establishment of the Local Development Framework (“LDF”) Core Strategy.
The policies contained within the LDF are then used to outline policies against
which all development within an area is assessed. LDF policies take their
guidance from national Planning Policy Statements and from policies
contained within Regional Plans.
Government policies, both nationally and locally are designed to facilitate
change, for example Travel Plans are about changing travel habits and
ensuring shorter commuter trips are able to occur by green modes or by
public transport, and where this is not possible, to support alternatives such
as car sharing schemes (Banister, 1999). However, according to the UK
round table on sustainable development (Southwood, 1996, p. 5).
“There is no magic solution to the many problems caused by present land
transport patterns and trends”.
For this reason we need to have a greater range of co-ordinated strategies to
minimise current and anticipated future adverse impacts. In 1999 the
Transport Bill provided the legal framework for a number of measures
designed to support travel planning, including the introduction of work place
parking charges (Green et al, 2011, pp. 235-243). One of the only Councils to
introduce this policy has been Nottingham County Council. Businesses with
more than 11 spaces will be charged £288 a year per space, rising to £380 by
2015. The levy has been introduced to pay for transport improvements,
including the extension of Nottingham's tram network. Many employers have
decided to pass on some or all of the charge to their staff while some have
reduced their number of car parking spaces. AA president Edmund King said
that schemes such as this will damage the economy and hit employees who
just can't afford it (BBC News, 2012). It remains to be seen if this new policy
measure has been effective at reducing congestion and creating a modal shift
towards public transport.
Presently in the UK the planning process is the only national mandatory route
by which a Local Authority can require a Travel Plan to be produced (Roby,
2010). It has long been acknowledged that the current setup is overly
burdensome to ensure any commitment and that outcomes are enforced (LTT
Issue 575). Similarly, even following the introduction of national policies which
allowed devolution of power to local authorities to develop congestion
charging zones and workplace parking levies, very little progress has been
made on the case for private firms to voluntarily create and implement a
Travel Plan. Furthermore, given the nature of modern development, it is often
the case that suburban and city-edge sites are being required to produce
Travel Plans, as opposed to existing inner-city sites where there is often
greater need. Existing national policies make no attempt to tackle this problem
(Enoch et al, 2003). Research by Rye and MacLeod in 1998 concluded that
employers must believe that there is a transport problem which impacts upon
their site and in addition to this, that they have a responsibility, or some
10

14. responsibility to solve it. As a consequence, any future policy changes are
going to need to engender confidence in the national system, whilst locally it
is going to be important to develop ownership and accountability if Travel
Plans are to be successful.
2.5. Travel Plan background
A great deal of information now exists on what Travel Plans are and how to
develop them. However, the effective implementation of such plans has been
far from easy to secure (Coleman, 2000, p139-148). A Travel Plan can be
described as:
“A package of measures implemented by an organisation to encourage
people who travel to/from that organisation to do so by means other than
driving alone by private car”.
Presently, Travel Plans are introduced to solve a very local problem, which
may be site or area specific and generally relate to congestion or a parking
shortage (Bradshaw, 2001). Kent County Council’s guidance on securing,
monitoring and enforcing Travel Plans in Kent (2012) defines a Travel Plan
as:
“A strategy for managing multi-modal access to a site or development
focusing on promoting access by sustainable modes.”
From a point 20 years ago when Travel Plans where unknown in the UK, they
have now become a central part of UK policy, especially English transport
policy and the wider “Smarter Choices” (2005) agenda. This is mainly down to
global influences, such as the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, which spawned a
new movement demanding greater accountability for the global environment.
Today, Travel Plans can be implemented voluntarily, though it is more likely
that a Travel Plan will be required as part of a new, or expanding development
that requires planning permission. It should be remembered that even when a
Travel Plan is being provided, it cannot justify the siting of a development in a
totally unsuitable location. However, a sufficiently strong Travel Plan may help
to counterbalance the disadvantage of a site where sustainable access,
without Travel Plan measures would be less than ideal.
2.6. PPG13
Travel Plans were first included within national planning policy in Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13 (“PPG13”) in March 2001. PPG13 stated that:
“The Government wants to help raise awareness of the impacts of travel
decisions and promote the widespread use of Travel Plans amongst
businesses, schools, hospitals, and other organisations. Local Authorities are
expected to consider setting local targets for the adoption of Travel Plans by
local business and other organisations and to set an example by adopting
their own plans.”
11

15. PPG13 did not set out any standard format, or content for Travel Plans. It did
however state that their relevance to planning lies in the delivery of
sustainable transport objectives, including:
 Reduction in car usage and increased use of public transport, walking
and cycling;
 Reduce traffic speeds and improved road safety and personal security
particularly for pedestrians and cyclists; and
 More environmentally friendly delivery and freight movements,
including home delivery services.
PPG13 was also supported by a number of other guidance documents
including:
 Making residential Travel Plans work: guidelines for new development -
DfT, 2007;
 The Essential Guide to Travel Planning - DfT, 2008; and
 Good Practice Guidelines: Delivering Travel Plans through the planning
system - DfT, 2009.
2.7. NPPF
In 2012 PPG13 was superseded by The National Planning Policy Framework
(“NPPF”), this combined existing guidance into one easily accessible
document. The emphasis on sustainable transport has remained consistent,
and NPPF continues to place an importance on the use of Travel Plans. It
recommends that Travel Plans should be submitted alongside all planning
applications that are likely to have a significant transport implication
(Communities & Local Government, 2011, point 89). In the locating and
designing of developments, NPPF states the need to:
 Efficiently deliver goods and supplies;
 Priorities pedestrian and cycle movements;
 Have access to high quality public transport facilities;
 Create safe and secure layouts;
 Minimise conflict between traffic and cyclists or pedestrians;
 Avoid street clutter;
 Where appropriate establish home zones;
 Incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low vehicles;
and
 Consider the needs of people with disabilities by all modes of transport.
12

16. NPPF goes on to emphasise that the primary purpose of the planning system
is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, which it
defines as:
"Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (Report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development, 1987).
Sustainable development is central to the economic, environmental and social
success of the country and is the core principle underpinning planning. For
the planning system, delivering sustainable development means:
 Planning for prosperity (an economic role) use the planning system to
build a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that
sufficient land of the right type, and in the right place, is available to
allow growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating
development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;
 Planning for people (a social role) use the planning system to promote
strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing an increased
supply of housing to meet the needs of present and future generations;
and by creating a good quality built environment, with accessible local
services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health and
well-being; and
 Planning for places (an environmental role) – use the planning system
to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment, to
use natural resources prudently and to mitigate and adapt to climate
change, including moving to a low-carbon economy.
2.8. Travel Plan types
The framework recommends that three components; economic, social and
environmental, should be considered in an integrated way, looking for
solutions that deliver the best-combined approach. It is envisaged that the
planning system must play a much more active role in guiding development
towards a sustainable solution. A key requirement to facilitate this will be
delivered through a Travel Plan. It is recommended that all developments
generating significant amounts of movement should be required to produce a
Travel Plan. This is however only possible if Travel Plans are embedded
within Local Planning Policy, including Local Development Frameworks.
Travel Plans have three distinct process stages, somewhat different to the
historically drawn out process, which led to confusion and failure of past
Travel Plans under PPG13:
1. Framework Travel Plans. These are normally secured at Outline
Planning Stage, and may be submitted or secured as part of a Full/
Detailed Planning Application, provided there is a clear and agreed
pathway for submission of a Detail Travel Plan.
13

17. 2. Detailed Travel Plan. These should be submitted with a Full/Detail
Planning Application. In some cases it may be deemed appropriate that
the Developer or Site Management Company oversees the Plan.
Alternatively, the requirement may be devolved to individual tenants,
however where this occurs, the Developer or Site Management Company
who submitted the Travel Plan retains overall accountability, with tenants
requirements secured through the Tenancy Agreement.
3. Small Business Pro-forma Travel Plan. These are normally for multi-use
sites with a number of small business units. It may be unnecessarily
onerous to require the development of a Detailed Travel Plan by each
individual tenant. In such circumstance it is generally appropriate for the
Developer and Site Management Company to develop a ‘top down’
approach to the Travel Plan (as described above).
2.9. International Travel Plans and fiscal incentives
In other countries, a whole regulatory framework governs how businesses
deal with getting their employees to work. In the USA, some State/Provincial,
regional and local jurisdictions mandate so-called Commute Trip Reduction
(CTR) programs for certain types of employers. Many transportation planning
and transit agencies provided support for CTR programs, in a similar fashion
to UK local authorities. Where a business or developer implements a CTR
program it is possible that reduced parking requirements will be required.
According to Comsis Corporations (1993) & Winter and Rudge (1995), a
comprehensive CTR program can reduce peak-period vehicular trips by as
much as 10-30% at a work location. This can also be verified by work
undertaken in the UK by Cairns et al in 2010. In Cairns’ study, 20
organisations that had implemented Travel Plans found that various measures
used by employers to encourage employees out of their cars resulted in an
overall reduction in the number of cars being driven to work of 14 per 100 staff.
Compared with the UK approach, the USA requires Travel Plans from virtually
all employers in places where congestion and traffic pollution are a major
problem. However, it has been argued that this overarching regulation has not
resulted in Travel Plans being seen as a benefit; rather an additional cost
(Enoch et al, 2003). In many European countries, governments have been
working to reduce the financial burden of Travel Plans. In Norway, Germany
and Belgium the tax system has been used to incentivise more sustainable
modes relative to less sustainable modes of travel. In the UK, a similar system
has been introduced whereby no tax or National Insurance Contributions are
required, this includes (HMRC, 2012):
 Free or subsidised work buses;
 Subsidies to public bus services;
 Cycle and safety equipment made available for employees; and
 Workplace parking for cycles and motorcycles.
14

18. Although these changes to the UK tax system can be seen as a step in the
right direction, they do not currently go as far as other European countries
who have provided additional positive incentives to encourage staff to alter
their travel behaviour. In order to demonstrate the benefit of the above tax
‘incentives’ it has been proposed that companies could complete an audit of
their travel costs to demonstrate the financial benefit for adoption of a Travel
Plan. As it stands currently the UK government has failed to use its tax
system to provide any form of kick-start incentive to individuals or commercial
organisations (Enoch et al, 2003).
Public institutions have so far led the way, but for widespread success as a
policy tool, Travel Plans also need to be adopted by private sector employers.
Local Authorities have been working to build links and produce guidelines and
offering advice, however the vast majority of private sector employers do not
have a Travel Plan in place and the vast majority still probably do not even
understand the term or the implied concept (Coleman, 2000, p139-148). A
study by T. Rye et al (2011) found that the guidance available to firms looking
to implement a Travel Plan was excellent. However, the dissemination of
guidance and the subsequent development amongst Local Authority offices
has been piecemeal. T. Rye et al suggested that more active dissemination
and training strategies, to include proactive communication and workshops
led by planners who have successfully used the guidance are required if
Travel Plans are to be successfully introduced on a wider scale.
2.10. Corporate social responsibilities
Since the Labour Government’s White Paper on transport policy was
published in 1998, the aim has been to increase the widespread voluntary
take-up of Travel Plans. However, even though many public sector
organisations have now adopted Travel Plans, any policy mechanism to
encourage voluntary take-up in the private sector has so far been relatively
low-key (Enoch et al, 2003). The current half-hearted approach to travel
planning is sending contradictory signals to businesses. Where the existing
system does work, is getting Travel Plans onto a businesses’ agenda through
planning consent regulation, but in these situations it could be argued that this
is seen as a cost and not as something that businesses should undertake as
part of their normal practice. As a general consensus transport will never be
the core concern of the majority of employers, and so the current
informational instruments that dominate UK policies are unlikely to be
effective, unless they are supported by additional measures, such as a mix of
planning regulation and fiscal incentives or penalties for non-participation
(Enonch et al, 2003).
Although progress has been made in improving the travel planning process
following the introducing of NPPF, the number of private businesses
implementing and fore filling their obligations, either as part of a planning
application or on a voluntary basis is still small. A study by T. Rye (2002,
p287-298) concludes that the central reasons for non-implementation of
Travel Plans in private businesses can be put down to the following:
15

19.  Private sector businesses feel little need to lead by example, the main
role of a company is to make profit and as such there is perceived to
be no financial gain in implementing a Travel Plan;
 Employees travel to work does not specifically present an employer
with any problems in terms of the functioning of the business;
 Often a business does not perceive any issue with transport or parking
at or close to their site; and
 There is insufficient evidence to prove that a Travel Plan of a given
nature can generate a modal shift of a certain percentage and
therefore there is no evidence to prove that spending any money would
improve the situation locally.
In order to encourage the take up of Travel Plans and improve compliance,
Enoch, et al (2003) identified four mechanisms targeted at the commercial
sector to encourage their staff to commute in a ‘greener’ way:
1. Information and exhortation;
2. Regulation;
3. Subsidies; and
4. Fiscal incentives and/or penalties.
At the same time as considering the four mechanisms identified by Enoch et
al, a business also needs to become an active instigator in linking the long-
term benefits a Travel Plan can bring to the business, rather than planning for
the short-term factors (Roby, 2010). In order to introduce the sustainable
future concept, it is as much about changing policies to shift values as it is
about changing practices. (Palmer, 1990). In the last two decades we have
seen an increased awareness of ‘social responsibility’ within society, resulting
in many companies reviewing the way their businesses operate. Kolk (2008,
pp.1-15) in her study of multinational businesses sees a growing demand for
transparency surrounding corporate behaviour. This has seen a move
towards incorporating ethical and social issues within the traditionally financial
aspects of corporate reporting, and has become known as either ‘corporate
social responsibility’ or ‘triple bottom line reports’. Elkington (1999, p.24) talks
further about the triple bottom line and how its purpose is to challenge and
revolutionise how companies think and act. It is also about educating and
changing the views of stakeholders and ensuring businesses improve their
accountability. This is a move away from the traditional belief that businesses
sole responsibility is concerned with only maximising profit.
However Milton Friedmen (1970) argues that businesses are not human
beings and cannot assume true moral responsibility for their actions; his belief
is that society’s best interests for achieving change lies with governments, not
managers. Friedmen also argues that the current lack of legally binding
obligations for a business to tackle commuter trip reduction is a major issue,
which causes confusion and prolongs ignorance amongst businesses as to
where their responsibilities lie. Wood and Ivens (1997, pp. 101-113) have
studied these ideas further and in their research found that problems often
16

20. seen as social responsibilities will on inspection turn out to be political
responsibilities, which the politicians are blind to, or afraid to tackle.
The problem with Travel Plans is unfortunately not confined to the need to
increase the take-up of voluntary Travel Plans. In the UK, the issue of
‘greenwashing’ has developed. This is the process whereby a developer
produces an impressive list of ‘environmentally friendly’ proposals, but then
fails to implement them either effectively, or in the worst cases, at all. This is
exacerbated further as a local authority can only serve the developer with a
‘breach of conditions notice’ and hope they comply. If funding has been
secured through an obligation it is possible to enforce, but only through a
quasi-court. T. Rye et al (2011) highlighted that even when a developer has
not met one or more of their obligations, any challenge from a local authority
could be counter challenged by a developer on the basis that they have done
everything in their power to do so, and thus not acted unreasonably. Such an
argument could undermine the basis of planning obligations and the use of
monetary penalties for non-achievement of any associated targets. T. Rye’s
study of local authorities that have taken enforcement action against a breach
of Travel Plan conditions or obligations would appear to back-up this theory,
with only four local authorities admitting to having begun proceedings against
a developer. The survey also asked authorities how they would enforce
planning conditions. 32 said they were not sure, whilst 54 did not answer the
question.
Looking to the future, some progress has been made with businesses
developing their own reports due to demand from stakeholders, shareholders
and consumers, rather than in response to any direct government policy. In
order to further enhance these changes, businesses will need to increasingly
develop and implement zero emission activities linked to overarching
business change - this will help Travel Plans become embedded in the wider
business as a support measure of business planning - as opposed to a
separate business objective (Roby, 2010). Holbeche (2001) describes
business culture as something that results from a learning process of
interaction, actions and processes built up on commonly accepted behaviours.
Schein’s (1997) model of business culture places an emphasis on creating a
supportive culture for the development of social responsibility in a concordant
and non-contradictory way.
In a study conducted by Coleman (2000, p139-148), he identified that the
issue of understanding the term Travel Plan as an implied concept is still
holding back their widespread implementation. In a survey of businesses,
around 38% indicated that public transport alternatives were important factors
in enabling modal shift to be successful. 37% felt further central Government
legislation was required, whilst 35% indicated that tax incentives would be
needed before they took any action. Improved advice and information, along
with business rate discounts and financial support were also seen as
important (20%). As a result, Coleman suggested the following improvements
to increase participation in Travel Plans:
 Continued awareness raising of the term and concepts of Travel Plans
is needed;
17

21.  Widespread implementation of Travel Plans will be unlikely unless
national legislation required it;
 Targeting large businesses in urban/suburban location; and
 If smaller businesses are to be targeted they should be looked at on an
area basis rather than on an individual basis so that resources can be
pooled.
Where Travel Plans have been introduced as part of a wider change towards
corporate social responsibility, businesses will ultimately be the primary
beneficiaries of a healthier and more prosperous environment. Taking a
positive stance at this time can only improve the performance and position of
a company through increased transparency and greater accountability. A
successful business in Romme’s (1992, pp. 11-24) view will be the
enterprising one that develops a range of measures and implements wider
organisational change. This can then be used to deploy skills learned in the
past to capitalise on the opportunities of the future, whilst meeting obligations
to the environment. Corporate responsibilities are increasingly becoming a
selling point for a company’s image; with the labelling of ‘socially responsible
companies’ it is likely we will continue to see a shift where-by certain
businesses become an active instigator of sustainable development, meeting
Governments plans to increase the voluntary take-up of Travel Plans. On the
reverse of this positive change, many firms are however still failing to make
this adjustment. Without a move to a planning system, which is more
proactive, simple and legally binding, Travel Plans are unlikely to produce
more sustainable patterns of commuting in the foreseeable future.
2.11. Conclusion
From the literature that has been reviewed and researched, it is clear that
Travel Plans are continuing to evolve, with competing pressures from global,
national, and local policies still needing to be balanced to ensure the guidance
released to Travel Plan developers is both concise and workable. The UK has
continued to see the development of Travel Plans at a more local level, with
the introduction and use of travel management software (iTRACE), car-
pooling, offering on-site bicycles, and ecological driver training. However
further development is still needed to link the process of planning, regulation
and controlling of travel within a development, or business, including how a
Travel Plan can be interconnected with the internal organisational goals of a
business.
Helen Roby’s (LTT Issue 498 10 July, 2008) research demonstrated that
Travel Plans are evolving on the basis of more localised agendas. This has
seen some highway authorities, namely TfL (2012) demonstrating the need
for Travel Plans to be linked into internal organisational goals, as opposed to
just addressing an external regulatory agenda as per the national DfT
guidelines:
18

22. DfT (national)
“A package of measures aimed at promoting sustainable travel within an
organisation, with an emphasis on reducing reliance on single occupancy car
travel.”
TfL (local)
“Travel planning is an effective business management tool which can be used
to generate cost savings, lending companies a competitive advantage, and
which has additional benefits for the environment and the health of
employers.”
Unfortunately even after the introduction of the latest planning policy guidance
(NPPF), it could be argued that an even stronger central government guide is
required to steer developers and incentivise companies through fiscal means
to embrace the introduction of Travel Plans within a development or
organisation. The current situation surrounding the monitoring of Travel Plans
is arguably farcical, making it virtually impossible for local authorities to prove
in court that a site occupier has not fulfilled their obligations. This situation not
only undermines the real purpose of Travel Plans, but also hinders their future
development; not only at a planning level, but also at a voluntary level. The
need for further change and a more consistent approach by local authorities
across the UK has never been more important if we are to see any long-term
benefit from Travel Plans.
As a result of the literature review and what I see to be the associated ‘gaps’
that currently exists within the travel planning world, this study will look to
understand in greater detail how individual businesses and organisations
have been dealing with their existing Travel Plan and then asking what they
feel is required from both the national and local levels of government in order
to support the future of Travel Plans.
19

23. 3. Methodology
3.1. Introduction
In this chapter the chosen approach to this study’s methodology will be
described. It will look at the reasons behind the choice of topic, and how the
study has been designed to ensure the importance of looking at Travel Plans
across the different geographical scales is not lost. It will also detail how the
research will be undertaken and then analysed to understand how the data
collected can be best used to answer the aims of the study.
3.2. Choice of topic
The choice of topic has been based around my previous experience with
Travel Plans and my determination to understand why most Travel Plans in
existence today are seen as a ‘box-ticking’ exercise to obtain planning
permission, as opposed to a long-term solution designed to tackle increasing
levels of personal mobility. What makes this topic more interesting is the
global nature of the umbrella term ‘sustainability’, and the many different
areas it is now seen to encompass, including: social, economic, and
environmental factors. The focus on local and corporate social responsibility
in this study has come about through my undergraduate studies. During my
first degree I spent a great deal of time investigating the changing issues of
corporate social responsibility, for this reason I wanted to look again at how
things have continued to develop at the more local level and to see if more
recent changes in government policy have brought about an increase, or even
a potential decrease in the long-term success of travel planning.
3.3. Study design
The methods of research for this study were initially proposed in the Study
Plan, which was prepared in May 2012. This identified the need to address a
number of concerns relating to Travel Plans, for this reason the focus has
been on three different levels: national, local, and corporate. Particular
attention has been paid to the corporate level and contact has been made
with a number of businesses through Kent County Council’s iTRACE
database of Travel Plans. These contacts will be used to better understand
how businesses setup their Travel Plan and the day-to-day requirements it
places upon them. In order to answer the aims of this study, both qualitative
and quantitative data will be collected from businesses that have introduced a
Travel Plan. This will be supplemented with additional interviews conducted
with employees of Kent County Council’s Planning and Sustainable Transport
Team to better understand the local issues of implementing Travel Plans
using past and current national policies.
To bring the local studies into context, this study has also been supplemented
with information on planning policy and national guidance on Travel Plans. In
the study design, both national and local inputs have been broken down to
demonstrate how fragmented the current guidance is. The study has also
20

24. been designed to take account of all the different geographical scales needing
to be addressed, working from the national to the local level.
Figure 01 - The research process (Bryman 2008).
Figure 01 illustrates the key stages that will be followed when conducting
research. In this study both types of data will be collected, the qualitative data
will bring a greater depth of understanding in relation to Travel Plans already
in operation. The use of qualitative methods has become an increasingly
important element of research and together with secondary data can result in
valid pieces of research being produced (Marshall and Rossman 2010).
21

25. 3.4. Qualitative data
One of the aims of this study is to gain a better understanding of Travel Plans
at the local level. The use of qualitative data will support development of local
understanding. It is at this very local context that one is able to ascertain
feelings and attitudes towards Travel Plans and wider corporate social
responsibilities. It will also be possible to further examine the initial responses
provided through the online survey. Herbert (2000, p.550), describes the
benefits of using more qualitative methods to gain insight into people’s
anxieties and feelings, which are well suited to ethnographic enquiries:
“Humans create their social and spatial worlds through processes that are
symbolically encoded and thus made meaningful. Through enacting these
meaningful processes, human agents reproduce and challenge macro
ecological structures in the everyday of place-bound action. Because
ethnography provides singular insight into these processes and meaning, it
can most brightly illuminate the relationships between structure, agency and
geographical context.”
To provide a greater understanding of how Travel Plans operate at the local
level, telephone interviews will be conducted with respondents who had
indicated as part of the initial online survey that they would be happy to take
part in a follow-up interview. These will be designed to generate a greater
depth of understanding about respondents’ specific experiences and thoughts.
As such, a semi-structured approach will be used. The themes each
telephone interview will concentrate on are:
 Responsibility for the Travel Plan (at creation, implementation and
monitoring);
 Measures implemented;
 Overall success;
 Any difficulties encountered;
 Interaction with KCC; and
 What could be done to improve the Travel Plan process?
22

26. The organisations that have agreed to take part in the follow-up interviews
include:
Table 01 - Follow-up interview sites.
Site Business Type Type Location Respondent
One Highway engineering Private Business park Sustainable team
Two Property management Private Business park Park manager
Three Retail development Private Business park Consultant
Four Supermarket Private City Centre Consultant
Five Education Public Multiple locations Sustainability coordinator
Travel Plan coordinator
Six Higher education Public Multiple locations
and parking manager
Furthermore, the study focuses on Kent County Council and their Planning
and Sustainable Transport Teams. By conducting interviews with KCC
employees it will be possible to see the work being undertaken across
numerous departments, and with district and borough partners to promote
Travel Plans across Kent. This includes working to tighten up plans required
as part of planning permission, and also voluntary Travel Plans that require
further outreach to the wider business community. By conducting interviews at
this level of local government, it is also possible to gather feedback on current
national initiatives and any ideas or suggestions that might be employed by
Kent to enhance and extend Travel Plans to the widest possible audience.
Through the use of qualitative data, it is anticipated the research available to
draw a conclusion to the study will be much more detailed and bring a
personal understanding from a range of different perspectives and
geographical scales. The data has been collected from a wide range of
sources including: structured qualitative telephone interviews; and face-to-
face meetings. These findings will be used to back-up and challenge the more
statistical findings from the quantitative data.
3.5. Quantitative data
This study has sought to collect quantitative modes of data in order to enable
the use of mathematical modelling and statistical analysis techniques. These
have been set within the wider context of this study to ensure they are of
interest and come to life, adding authority to the argument, rather than
analysis for the sake of it.
The data collected will come from contacts stored by Kent County Council as
part of their iTRACE software, which manages Travel Plans within the County.
This includes the contact details for either the site coordinator or the manager
of the site who is creating the Travel Plan. A survey link will be sent to the list
of contacts held on the iTRACE software, requesting their response about
their experiences with their site Travel Plan. For the majority this will be sent
23

27. via email, with letters and phone calls to the remainder for whom no contact
email address is available.
In designing the online survey particular attention will be paid to five key areas,
including:
1. ‘Creation’ of the Travel Plan, comprising of the reasons why the Plan
was developed and the key features implemented.
2. ‘Implementation’. This included questions on the actions carried out, as
well as any problem, or parts that had not been implemented.
3. ‘Reviewing’. This is seen as important as initial research suggested
that very little updating of Plans was being undertaken, the purpose of
this questions was to ascertain if this was the case, and if so why.
4. ‘Engagement with other organisations’ was designed to see how much
involvement third parties had from inception through to completion.
5. ‘Success of the Travel Plan’, or the reasons why it might not have been
successful.
In addition to these main sections, questions will also be asked to gage
awareness of current marketing tools being used by KCC to promote New
Ways 2 Work and car sharing.
The use of quantitative data is an important aspect to this study. It will be
integrated with other data collected to examine the difference between the
online survey and telephone interviews. By having localised data, from a
range of different businesses, it will be possible to understand more about the
development and day-to-day operations of a Travel Plan.
3.6. Data analysis
In order to process and analyse the data collected in the most appropriate
way for this study, all of the findings will be presented in a simple format. The
idea is not to produce overly confusing statistics, but to use graphs that show
the results, and allow for a comparison between businesses. Where it is
possible to obtain a statistically significant result, this will be included within
the results & analysis chapter. By doing this it will be possible to answer the
main aims of the study, whilst allowing for a comparison to be made between
the different findings. By writing up the structured telephone interviews
undertaken with businesses and Kent County Council, it will be possible to
take the salient points from each to see if there is any link between the two.
The data and any findings can then be used to form the conclusion of the
study. By bringing together the qualitative and quantitative research the study
will have a range of crosscutting data to help answer the study aims.
3.7. Ethical considerations and data protection
Prior to conducting any form of primary research, the University of
Westminster’s Code of Practice Governing the Ethical Conduct of Research
2011/2012 was read to ensure that due consideration was given to the
potential ethical implications of any such research. It was decided that the
primary data collected for this piece of research fell under ‘class one’ of the
24

28. code of practice, due to it having minimal, or no ethical implications. As a
result no prior approval is required.
All respondents invited to take part in the survey will be invited to do so
anonymously.
3.8. Conclusion
To summarise, this study will focus on organisations who have already
introduced a Travel Plan in the county of Kent. This data will be supplemented
by further follow-up telephone interviews with those organisations who are
willing to provided further information. Interviews will also be conducted with
key employees at Kent County Council. The in-depth interviews will be used
to understand the current constraints surrounding Travel Plans, and what
changes need to be made at either, or both a national or local level to enable
organisations to comply with travel planning obligations.
25

29. 4. Results & analysis
This chapter will compile results that have been collected and attempt to
analyse them in order to answer the questions posed by the aims of this study.
The three main areas covered by the results include:
1. Online survey;
2. In-depth telephone interviews; and
3. Kent County Council interviews.
4.1. Online survey responses
The online survey was devised to assist with answering the following aims:
 To research how organisations are managing their Travel Plans;
 To identify constraints within the travel planning process; and
 To establish how Travel Plans can be improved.
Through accessing the Kent County Council iTRACE database, it was
possible to attempt to make contact with a total of 253 organisations recorded
as having implemented Travel Plans.
Table 02 demonstrates the district breakdown, and the public / private sector
split. In total, 129 recorded Travel Plans were found to be un-contactable,
due mainly to out-of-date information, or a lack of any contact detail provided
from the outset. It has been assumed that the remaining 124 contacts were
successfully contacted, however 31 responses to the online survey in total
were received (Table 03); although only 24 of these were fully complete. This
gave the online survey a response rate of 25%. This chapter will therefore
present and analyse responses to the main questions asked within the survey
whilst full results are available to view in Appendix A, along with the original
responses.
Table 02 - KCC iTRACE database breakdown.
District Public Private Total
Ashford 3 56 59
Canterbury 7 8 15
Dartford 4 4 8
Dover 3 6 9
Gravesend 1 1 2
Maidstone 8 22 30
Sevenoaks 1 11 12
Shepway 1 7 8
Swale 1 13 14
Thanet 2 13 15
Tonbridge & Malling 5 53 58
Tunbridge Wells 5 18 23
Total 41 212 253
26

30. Table 03 - Online survey response breakdown.
Public Private Unknown Total
7 14 10 31
4.2. Creation
“Does anyone in your organisation have Travel Plan responsibilities as part of
their job role?”
Figure 02 - Online survey responsibility responses.
In response to this question, 7 out of 13 organisations acknowledged that they
did have a lead member of staff who managed their Travel Plan as part of
their job role (Figure 02). Generally this was someone who was a
sustainability manager, or coordinator, but responses also indicated that
senior managers had been selected to ensure someone within a more
strategic role managed their Travel Plan. Responses were also received from
individuals who had taken on the role as a result of a personal interest. Whilst
this result indicates a more positive perspective of Travel Plan management, it
is important to acknowledge the study by Rye and MacLeod (1998) which
recognised that employers must believe that there is a transport problem,
which impacts upon their site and in addition to this, that they have a
responsibility to solve it before they are likely to develop a greater form of
ownership and accountability. The 42% that had no one responsible for their
Travel Plan arguably still require further education to reinforce the important
role a Travel Plan coordinate has to play, despite having been through the
process. From the data collected it would seem that some organisations have
recognised the potential a properly managed Travel Plan can bring. Where an
external consultant is included within the mix the role of the Travel Plan
coordinator seems to be much less focused, with less understanding and
drive to ensure the Travel Plan meets its commitments.
27

31. Figure 03 - Online survey ‘why’ responses.
It was deemed important to drill down into the background and understand
why an organisation originally created their Travel Plan. Question 4 (“Why did
your organisation develop a Travel Plan?”) of the survey provided a range of
options, including: planning condition, corporate agenda, cost savings and
others (Figure 03). As anticipated the majority of the responses received were
from those who had a planning condition, or agreement that required a Travel
Plan as part of a planning application. Those who responded with ‘others’
provided a surprisingly clear understanding of a number of other important
areas linked to Travel Plans. This contradicts Coleman’s observation in his
study (2000), which found a lack of understanding of the term was one of the
main reasons for holding back the wider introduction of Travel Plans.
The responses received showed a higher level of understanding, even
beyond what a ‘standard’ Travel Plan might look to achieve. This included
organisations trying to develop, or enhance their own green corporate agenda.
Other responses identified the issues of parking, traffic congestion and even
the need to reduce travel costs. One response went as far as to highlight that
they had developed a Travel Plan to “aid occupiers of their site” (Appendix A -
Online survey responses).
Whilst the results of this question are interesting and relevant, for those
respondents who created a Travel Plan for reasons other than simply to
comply with planning, in hindsight it would have been interesting to ask a
follow on question related to the relative level of success a Travel Plan had in
assisting the organisation to achieve their primary objective. For those simply
fulfilling planning requirements, it would also have been interesting to discover
if they have received any unexpected operational or other benefit from the
Travel Plan.
28

32. Figure 04 - Online survey key features responses.
To understand more about the level of commitment each organisation had
made to travel planning, respondents were also asked to identify the key
features that had been implemented (Figure 04). The suggestions list included
everything from a ‘do minimum approach’ e.g. providing public transport
information, through to a more proactive organsiation who may have chosen
to subsidise staff travel, or enhance their office facilities to help facilitate
cycling to work.
The results demonstrate that the vast majority of organisations introduced four
main features, these included: information boards showing sustainable
transport options; car sharing; restricted, or priority parking; and enhanced
facilities (e.g. showers, changing facilities, lockers). Information boards are
generally seen as a ‘do-minimum’ approach, whilst the creation of enhanced
facilities could generate increased modal shift. As a general rule none of the
above options can be seen to have a greater positive impact over one or other.
Organsiations can provide enhanced facilities, but without successful
marketing and a pro-active approach the ‘do-minimum’ option could have a
bigger impact than a poorly marketed priority-parking scheme. A large number
of respondents also selected ‘other’, these responses further highlighted a
number of increasingly pro-active responses to travel planning, including
Cycle to Work schemes, eco-driver training, discussion and forum groups and
incentivising staff through competitions. Given Kent County Council’s strong
promotion of websites like kentjourneyshare and the Cycle to Work scheme, it
is not surprising that such a high number of responses singled out these
29

33. options as one of their key features. This response could in someway suggest
that the education methods adopted by KCC have resulted in some examples
of success.
4.3. Implementation
In addition to trying to understand more about the creation process, the online
survey also focused on the implementation phase. This can often be a
stumbling block for an organisation, especially when the Travel Plan has been
written on the basis of a wish list, rather than something that is affordable and
viable. This was addressed in the subsequent question, “What actions from
your Travel Plan have been carried out?”. The responses received generally
mirrored the answers recorded in Figure 04, suggesting the key features
identified within each organisations’ Travel Plan had been implemented.
Figure 05 - Online survey problems responses.
To gain additional insight into the implementation phase and to assist in
answering the aims of this study, the online survey was also developed with
the intention of understanding more about the problems faced when trying to
implement a Travel Plan (Figure 05). This question received a response from
31 respondents, however only 7 identified having a problem during the
implementation stage. This was a significantly lower proportion than had been
anticipated given the results of studies by T. Rye (2002) and Coleman (2000),
which clearly indicated a higher percentage of organisations struggling to
successfully implement their original Travel Plan commitments.
Where an organisation identified a problem or problems they were asked to
clarify what they saw as the main obstacles. The four key areas identified
included:
 Funding constraints;
 Lack of interest;
30

34.  Time limitations; and
 Poor existing public transport links.
The above areas identified were seen to ultimately hamper trying to change
employee attitudes.
After trying to establish what actions had been carried out, the survey set out
to understand the actions, or key features that had not been implemented.
Given the sensitivity of such a question and the potential implications for an
organisation contravening a planning obligation, the question was designed to
understand ‘why’, as opposed to ‘what’ had not been implemented (Figure 06).
Figure 06 - Online survey implementation problem responses.
Many of the constraining factors identified where more ‘typical’ of what might
have been expected, for instance: time; and director sign-off. Unfortunately
‘N/A’ received the largest number of responses, which is potentially significant
given the sensitive nature of the question, and an organisation potentially not
wanting to make light of the fact they are yet to implement certain
requirements.
4.4. Reviewing
A significant amount of any Travel Plan should be about monitoring and
reviewing its performance. For this reason the survey included a section on
‘reviewing’. The key purpose behind this was to understand how many
31

35. organisations continued to monitor their Travel Plan once it has been created
and implemented.
Figure 07 - Online survey updating responses.
The findings from this question demonstrated an even split between those
that never updated their Travel Plan, verses those that updated their Travel
Plan every 1-2 years (Figure 07). A much smaller number (5) responded with
every 2+ years, whilst only 2 organisations stated they updated their Travel
Plan more than once a year.
When asked what they did to update their Travel Plan, 2 organisations
claimed to update their Travel Plan more than once a year, whilst 3
organisations stated they carried out on going monitoring. Two organisations
did make mention of linking their Travel Plan with their wider corporate
strategy. Where such organisations are linking a Travel Plan with their
corporate agenda, it is possible to create a powerful document capable of
delivering real organisational change, especially if the Plan is correctly
implemented and all aspects are followed through from start to end. The
single document can also be used to deploy skills learned in the past to
capitalise on the opportunities presented in the future, whilst in addition
meeting obligations to the environment (Romme, 1992).
32

36. Figure 08 - Online survey behavioural changes.
As well as asking about how often an organisation updated their Travel Plan,
the survey focused on the uptake of monitoring surveys following the initial
implementation. Interestingly, 55% of respondents reported that their
organisation had undertaken follow-up reviews. As a consequence, a number
of travel behaviour changes had been identified (Figure 08). However, next to
car sharing the second most common answer was that there had been no
change to travel behaviour, with one respondent saying, “people are selfish as
ever” (Appendix A - Online survey results).
4.5. Engagement
Figure 09 - Online survey engagement responses.
33

37. To identify how improvements might be made, the survey asked questions
around ‘engagement with other organisations’. This identified that an alarming
67% of respondents did not make any contact with another organisation as
part of setting up their Travel Plan (Figure 09).
Where respondents identified that contact had been made, it was
overwhelmingly with either Kent County Council, or the district and borough
councils (58%). Other points of contact identified included consultancy firms
and other local businesses.
4.6. Success
Figure 10 - Online survey satisfaction responses.
The most important part of this survey was to identify the perception of how
successful, or unsuccessful an organisation perceived their Travel Plan. 27
organisations responded to this question, with the majority of respondents
(37%) providing a neutral answer (Figure 10).
34

38. Figure 11 - Online survey successful / unsuccessful key points.
To identify why a particular response was given, respondents were presented
with either a ‘how has it been successful?’, or ‘why do you think it has not
been successful?’ box.
Overall respondents who deemed their Travel Plan a success described it as
being most effective at implementing car sharing (73%) and improving their
sustainable image (65%). A further 27% of respondents also said that the
Travel Plan had helped meet shareholder demand for corporate social
responsibility. No one commented that it had reduced mileage claims,
suggesting that the focus is on commuter journeys rather than business
mileage.
A wide range of reasons were given for the ‘success’ of a respondent’s Travel
Plan, with the most popular answer being “support from management”. An
encouraging 38% of respondents said that support from Kent County Council
was a reason for their success. 27% of respondents felt employee motivation
was crucial. Other reasons given included the support of a consultant and
crossover with other corporate plans and their companies’ sustainability
agenda.
Those who felt their Travel Plan had not been a success provided a range of
responses, with no one response giving a clear indication of a particular
problem. It did however highlight a series of on-going issues (Figure 11),
including:
 Time constraints;
 Lack of staff;
 Public transport cost; and
 Availability of public transport.
35

39. Figure 12 - Online survey improvement responses.
Finally, respondents were asked how they felt the travel planning process
could be improved. This received a number of suggestions (Figure 12),
however it was clear that the general theme of the responses provided were
focused on the need for greater district and council input, along with greater
central government policy - linked to enforcement and legislation. 2 responses
also remarked on the importance of incorporating Travel Plans within a
corporate strategy, as opposed to a stand-alone document.
4.7. In-depth telephone interviews
After the survey responses were collated, the respondents who had indicated
that they would be happy to take part in a follow-up telephone interview were
contacted. In-depth interviews were conducted to generate a greater depth of
understanding about their specific experiences and thoughts about their
Travel Plan. Before the interview, their questionnaire responses were studied
in greater detail, so as to tailor the questions appropriately. As such, a semi-
structured approach was taken. The themes each telephone interview
concentrated on were:
1. Responsibility for the Travel Plan (at creation, implementation and
monitoring);
36

40. 2. Measures implemented;
3. Overall success;
4. Any difficulties encountered;
5. Interaction with KCC; and
6. What could be done to improve the Travel Plan process.
In all, six follow-up telephone interviews were completed. Companies were
carefully chosen to ensure a cross-section of the initial online-survey was
followed-up. As a result, the following organisations in Table 04 were
interviewed. (For the purposes of this study the company name and
interviewee’s details have been removed).
Table 04 - Follow-up interview sites.
Site Business Type Type Location Respondent
One Highway engineering Private Business park Sustainable team
Two Property management Private Business park Park manager
Three Retail development Private Business park Consultant
Four Supermarket Private City Centre Consultant
Five Education Public Multiple locations Sustainability coordinator
Travel Plan coordinator
Six Higher education Public Multiple locations
and parking manager
Given the nature of semi-structured interviews, key points have been picked
out from each response and categorised within the themes listed above. Full
copies of the interview transcripts can be found in Appendix B.
37

41. 4.8. Response summary
1. Responsibility for the Travel Plan (at creation, implementation and
monitoring)
Site One
Travel Plan responsibilities are linked to my job role as ‘Sustainability
Manager’. I also manage the companies EMS (Energy Monitoring System).
On taking over the role, no handover was conducted with my predecessor.
Site Two
My role as Park Manager includes, Travel Plan management, creation and
implementation. I Coordinate an overarching site Travel Plan for every
company on the business park. It was originally created as a way for dealing
with heavy congestion.
Site Three
I was chosen as the coordinator because of my personal interest and position
within the organisation as a senior manager.
Site Four
The Travel Plan was created by a consultancy firm for the purpose of a new
store planning application.
Site Five
Our plan was created by a coordinator for the purpose of managing rising fuel
prices and for understanding more about how people travel to the site.
2. Measures implemented
Site One
We have introduced a Sustainability Action Plan with targets for the site and a
plan to monitor progress. This is updated every January. In addition to this,
an annual Business Travel Survey is undertaken to monitor how people travel
to work and has been used to encourage more staff to car share. Training has
also been provided to staff on how to use video conferencing facilities, whilst
driving styles are being monitored to look at fuel efficiency. Car share
schemes have also been employed, with an internal database for colleagues
to find people living near them to share with.
Site Two
Nothing at this stage, but the use of a parking management company to issue
enforcement notices is being considered. Promotion of kentjourneyshare has
been undertaken, whilst Arriva had been contacted about subsidised bus
services. It had originally been envisaged that a new bridge could be
constructed over the M25, avoiding the need for traffic to access jct 1A.
Site Three
Information boards detailing travel options.
38

42. Site Four
Post occupation survey and the installation of information boards.
Site Five
Undertaken monitoring as part of the Carbon Trust scheme to reduce CO2.
Site Six
Introduced restricted parking and exclusion zones for students. Subsidised
transport use, with discounts available to staff and students. Additional bus
services are also provided during the exam period. An online survey is
regularly emailed out to staff and students to enable the monitoring of
progress.
3. Overall success
Site Three
Neutral - the car is key to our business, people do not share as they are often
out of the office at certain points of the day. Some staff have other
commitments, such as children who require collecting, which makes car
sharing impractical.
Site Four
We intend to re-survey the site annually if it is agreed. I am unsure what
happens if the Travel Plan misses its targets, as I’ve never encountered this
problem before.
Site Six
Our Travel Plan has achieved a 50% reduction in traffic travelling through the
site (difficult to enforce certain restrictions due to a public highway running
through the site).
4. Any difficulties encountered
Site One
Public transport is not a viable option for most due to the office location. It
would also involve making multiple changes between buses and trains.
Site Two
Initially everyone was keen to start up a focus group to tackle the issues.
However, this was disbanded when it became clear that infrastructure
improvements were not being considered by KCC. The Highways Agency
also failed to support our plans for improved signage on the M25 junction that
provides access to the site. Bus services have also been cut following a
review of passenger numbers.
The biggest problem was a lack of support from companies to implement
sustainable improvements. The original focus group stakeholders were only
interested in improvements designed to enhance access to the site by private
car. It became clear to me that people do not understand what a green Travel
Plan is about. More work is required to educate people on the alternatives to
39

43. the private car.
An initial survey was conducted using KCC’s iTRACE system. The response
rate was very low. No follow up has ever been undertaken.
Site Three
We found iTRACE to be very clunky. Currently we use our Fire Book to log
how people got to work. We do not use the data we record to monitor
anything.
Site Four
We have no regular contact with the site coordinator to know how things are
progressing.
Site Five
The decision was taken that we could no longer afford to subsidise a free bus
service from the town to the site. We choose not to encourage cycling due to
the lack of off-road facilities. We have issues with the functionality of iTRACE
to monitor our Travel Plan. I have no long-term budget to support further work.
My intention to introduce a working group to look at the long-term survival of
the Travel Plan was halted by the University.
Site Six
Online survey response rates have been very poor. Out of 18,000 emails,
only 2 students responded. It was suggested at the time that this was due to
the timing of the email being sent.
5. Interaction with KCC
Site Two
KCC were proactive, but occupiers could not see a resolution to the problem
of avoiding gridlock so lacked motivation.
Site Three
Not every local authority is proactive. From a consultancy perspective some
authorities have lost the plot and are abusive and obstructive. People need to
be encouraging and willing to make small changes. The main point of contact
at Kent County Council is very good, but others in Kent have not been as
positive. Communication is key.
Site Four
I have had some involvement with KCC and the site coordinator (HR
Manager) in the store, but nothing further.
Site Five
I approached KCC following a recommendation by someone else.
40

44. 6. What could be done to improve the Travel Plan process?
Site Two
It would be easier if legislation required individual companies to manage their
own Travel Plan. This should have specific requirements, e.g. “you must…..”,
without this, people will not be put off from driving.
Site Three
To improve the process the cost of fuel should be doubled so Travel Plans
would not be needed. The car sharing website is ok, but there is a need to
overcome concerns of sharing with a stranger. Travel Plans are overly
restrictive on new developments in the current economic climate.
One Travel Plan model will not fit all organisations. There should be less spin
and more honesty. Educating people on alternative travel choices at a young
age could be one way to reduce the future reliance on the private car.
Site Six
Need for greater awareness. E.g. road show services, eco- driving simulators
etc. Companies promoting ‘Walk to Work Week’ and ‘Cycling Week’.
It would be useful to have a catalogue / directory of useful contacts /
companies that provide services for potential Travel Plan / Eco activities.
4.9. In-depth telephone interview analysis
Overall, it would seem that from the follow-up telephone interviews conducted,
the main contact was either someone who had been allocated the job as part
of their job role, or in the case of site three an individual identified as having a
personal interest in Travel Plans. It was disappointing to see that at site one
no formal handover was ever undertaken to ensure previous work could be
continued. In answering this question most only spoke about his or her own
involvement, whilst no one raised the issue of on-going monitoring.
The types of measures implemented varied greatly between responses. Some
sites, such as one and six, had gone a long way to implementing a wide-
range of measures. However, sites three, four and five introduced the very
minimum. Sites three and four in particular have a Travel Plan as a result of a
planning application, it is therefore disappointing to see that such a ‘do-
minimum’ approach seems to have been required as part of their planning
permission - although this cannot be confirmed.
When asked about the overall success of their Travel Plan, most were
hesitant with their response. Those who did respond indicated that it had had
a neutral impact, whilst one site was considering re-surveying; but was unsure
of the impacts if they did not meet their targets. Site six did however
demonstrate that they had achieved a 50% drop in through traffic following the
implementation of their Travel Plan.
Key to this study were the responses received relating to ‘problems
encountered’. In some instances the information provided related to local
41

45. issues, for instance the limitations of the public transport network to provide
coverage to all areas of employment. However, site two in particular identified
a clear lack of understanding among the business residents about what a
Travel Plan constitutes. For example a Travel Plan can involve some
infrastructure improvements, but these would not normally be related to
improving access for private motor vehicles. Another feedback point related to
the software provided by KCC for organisations to carry out travel surveys.
The feedback received indicated that it was “clunky” and lacked the ability to
meet some requirements. Response rates to on-going monitoring surveys
were also highlighted as an issue, with site six identifying one survey that only
received 2 responses from 18,000 emails. Contact between consultants who
provided the original Travel Plan and the organisation that then operates the
plan was also singled out as being poorly managed. In effect, the consultant is
not going to continue to manage and monitor a Travel Plan free of charge, this
then relies on the site Travel Plan coordinator being proactive in their
approach to update and monitor on going progress.
Contact with Kent County Council has generally been positive, though it was
identified by one site that they had been in contact with multiple contacts
within the authority, and that their experience had not necessary been as
positive. Overall it seemed clear to the respondents’ that Kent County Council
is able to assist them with their Travel Plan questions.
In relation to Travel Plan improvements, the different sites provided a range of
feedback. One site identified the need for legally binding legislation from
central Government to enforce Travel Plans. Others felt that Travel Plans
were ineffective without further ‘stick’ type disincentives for driving; for
example increased fuel charges. What was clear across all responses was
the need to personalise each Plan to meet the individual requirements of an
organisation. One Plan should not be designed to meet the requirements of
many. Finally increased marketing of events was identified as a way to
increase participation and generate future interest from other individuals and
organisations.
4.10. Kent County Council interviews
Interviews were undertaken with Kent County Council’s Sustainable Transport
Manager and a Senior Development Planner. The interviews were structured
around subjective, opinion based questions and for the purpose of openness,
the format was semi-structured, providing interviewees and the interviewer
with the opportunity to expand on certain questions.
The main themes of the interviews included:
 Legislation;
 Increasing participation;
 Linking Travel Plans to other internal organisation goals; and
 Examples of Travel Plans in breach.
42

46. 4.11. Sustainable Transport Manager interview
Do you feel current legislation regarding Travel Plans, developed as
part of a planning application is sufficient to generate long term
modal shift?
Currently some plans have no connection with the end user and have
simply been treated as a box-ticking exercise.
Full Transport Assessments need to be undertaken to understand the
impact on the highway. This could be achieved through further traffic
counts to more accurately understand the impact a development could
have on the local highway.
What could promote longer-term change?
Getting the infrastructure in place first e.g. cycle routes, electric charging
points and correct development location. Monitoring needs to be
minimised with larger sites being targeted. Automated monitoring could be
introduced at larger sites.
In addition to this, events such as New Ways 2 Work could be used to
facilitate Travel Plans.
Concerns have been raised about the level of training and proactive
communication coming from local authorities. Are you aware of
these issues or others causing problems with the development of
Travel Plans?
Time and resources are definitely a challenge. At the moment I do not
have enough staff to be able to support all districts. Travel Plans require a
top-down ‘champion’ to promote them.
Communication issues have been around since the change within
Highways, when the function was taken from districts and placed at
county level. Districts and county often have different policies and
objectives.
Should any future legislation to enforce s.106s, or similar be more
focused at the local level, or national?
Bonds could be used to secure developments. It is important to remember
that the viability of a site to a developer is going to decrease the more
onerous a Travel Plan becomes.
Important that as much red tape is removed.
43