ABSTRACT
However, some recent work shows that the defi nition of the ‘right’ urban design may not be so easy to determine. While one may expect that certain neighbourhood designs may encourage residents to travel more sustainably than the rest of the population, this may not actually be the case. A recent study by Williams et al. (2009) found that the residents of schemes designed with many sustainable design features in the UK did not seem to travel any more sustainably than the rest of the
population. In fact, they found that the residents of ‘sustainable’ schemes travelled less sustainably than the rest of the UK population in general (for some trips) and owned more cars. Presumably these results may relate to the residents’ attitude towards travel and their spatio-temporal constraints, which can be a refl ection of their socio-economic class. This is in line with recent studies, (e.g. Stead, 2001; Mokhtarian and Salomon, 2001; Boarnet and Crane, 2001; Schwanen et al., 2003; Susilo and Maat, 2007) that have shown that individual factors are more crucial in determining commuters’ travel behaviour than place accessibility and built environment factors. Lyons et al. (2008) noted that while individuals may consider travel distance, time and cost in making their journey, these variables are measured on a perceptual basis rather than an absolute basis. In addition, car drivers are often motivated by their desire for independence and freedom, provided by personal mobility directly under their control. This can sometimes have a negative effect by turning car use into a habit as individuals become more dependent on the car themselves. This can in turn limit the independence sought and thus potentially reduce the effectiveness of any sustainable development schemes that are promoted by the government (Susilo et al., 2009).
