Search

Access, not mobility

We are an online community created around a smart and easy to access information hub which is focused on providing proven global and local insights about sustainability

13 Jul, 2020

This post was originally published on 15 Minutes City

It’s not about how fast you can go

Charlottesville, Virginia | UrbanizeHub

“Location, location, location.” It’s a real-estate mantra for very good reason. WHERE you are in a city is much more important than how fast you can move. Being at or close to the things you need is the first rule of real estate. And the second rule. And the third!

Mobility?

For most of the last century, transportation and urban planning discussions have focused not on location, but on speed. The planning keyword has been mobility: helping people get from point A to point B as quickly as possible. Live anywhere you want, and planners will build ways to quickly move you to where you need to be.

Here’s the fundamental flaw in mobility-focused planning: it is based on the fantastical idea that points A and B are forever fixed. But cities are not fixed. Cities evolve, people’s lives change, and travel patterns adjust. As travel speeds increase, people take jobs further away. Grocery stores relocate. A family’s circle of daily errands expands. Points A and B (not to mention C, D, and E) get ever farther apart. And as they get farther apart, “good” mobility (high speed) starts to look like this:

Singapore | Singapore Land Transport Authority

Singapore | Singapore Land Transport Authority

In the United States, the focus on mobility has funneled billions of dollars of investment into transportation infrastructure designed to get people moving further and further distances at higher and higher speeds. Predictably, rather than making things easier to get to, this investment has mostly pushed these destinations out over a wider area.

In evaluating proposals, U.S. transportation planners focus on “level of service” (LOS) traffic flow standards; in most places, this method is mandated by environmental review laws. LOS measures the amount of delay experienced by motor vehicles and therefore only grades streets based on their ability to process motor vehicles. LOS evaluation completely ignores those who are not in a motor vehicle or whose mobility is impaired. It does not measure the economic value of a street, nor does it bring destinations closer.

No, access

Mobility – speed – is merely a means to an end. The purpose of mobility is to get somewhere, to points B, C, D, and E, wherever they may be. It’s the “getting somewhere” — the access to services and jobs — that matters [1]. Strong Towns contributor Daniel Herriges defines the distinction like this: “Mobility is how far you can go in a given amount of time. Accessibility is how much you can get to in that time.” Good access comes from having a diversity of services intermingled within your own neighborhood, so you don’t have to go all the way across town — or outside of town — to get to what you need. Here’s what good access looks like:

Maastricht, The Netherlands | Gali Freund

Maastricht, The Netherlands | Gali Freund

Fortunately, the policy landscape is slowly beginning to acknowledge this. There is growing awareness among decision makers as well as advocates that access, not mobility, should guide planning. Signs of hope include the California Environmental Quality Act, which was updated in 2019 to shift the focus from LOS to “Vehicle Miles Traveled” (VMT). This still does not measure access or economic value, but it’s a step in the right direction. At the national level, the new Future of Transportation Caucus, a group of 12 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, has introduced legislation to refocus transportation planning on improving access to services and jobs, and to create service standards for planners reviewing and implementing transportation projects. Organizations such as Transportation for America have made connecting people to jobs and services a key plank of their advocacy platform.

Most promisingly, the full U.S. House of Representatives recently passed an overarching spending bill called the Moving Forward Act. The transportation section of this bill requires recipients of federal transportation funding to measure how well their system connects people to the things they need, regardless of how they travel. (Here is Transportation for America’s analysis of this bill. Smart Growth America lauds the bill for remaking transportation policy in a more equitable way.) The bill is considered “dead on arrival” in the U.S. Senate, but even if this particular bill doesn’t become law, the House’s passage of it confirms that access is on its way to becoming the new yardstick in measuring transportation investments. The Moving Forward Act will die — at least in its current form — but access is here to stay.

Access and the 15-minute city

This policy evolution is great news for the development of 15-minute cities. A focus on access puts people’s needs — not their speed of travel — at the forefront of planning decisions. This will result in a much more equitable planning decision, and over time it is likely to make transportation investments less costly, as pedestrians and cyclists are much cheaper to provide infrastructure for. As key services and jobs become closer and more accessible, the overall demand for travel will decline. And as urban land is used in a more efficient and compact way, municipal budgets will improve as tax receipts per acre go up [2].

That, ultimately, is mobility done right.


[1] Ideally the journey itself should be pleasurable, and at a minimum must feel safe. These both need much more consideration and are topics for future blog posts.

[2] The fiscal impacts of urban land use will also be the subject of deeper attention in a future blog post, but Joseph Minicozzi of Urban3 has written a great primer on this topic, and Charles Marohn’s Strong Towns book focuses on this.

Pass over the stars to rate this post. Your opinion is always welcome.
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

You may also like…

Embedding environmental stewardship into IT governance frameworks

Embedding environmental stewardship into IT governance frameworks

Integrating environmental stewardship into IT governance frameworks has become essential as businesses increasingly prioritise sustainability. IT operations contribute significantly to carbon emissions, energy consumption and electronic waste (e-waste). Organisations that embed environmental responsibility into their IT governance can reduce their ecological footprint, improve operational efficiency and strengthen their brand reputation.

Erica Smith, chief alliance officer and environmental, social and governance lead, Blue Connections IT, said, “Environmental stewardship supports financial performance, risk mitigation and brand differentiation. With rising energy costs, increased consumer demand for sustainable products and services, and growing pressure from investors and regulators, companies can no longer afford to overlook their environmental responsibilities.

“Poor sustainability practices in IT can lead to high operational costs, supply chain risks and reputational damage. Conversely, a proactive approach improves efficiency, attracts environmentally conscious customers and helps future-proof businesses against evolving policy and regulatory changes.

“Integrating environmental responsibility into IT governance integrates sustainability initiatives into decision-making systematically. Organisations can reduce waste, lower energy consumption and extend the lifecycle of technology assets while positioning themselves as responsible leaders in an increasingly climate-aware market.”

There are four key areas that present opportunities to embed environmental stewardship into IT governance frameworks.

1. Device lifecycle management

A structured approach to managing the lifecycle of IT assets ensures devices are deployed efficiently, maintained properly and retired responsibly at the end of their useful life. Embracing a circular economy model, where equipment is refurbished, reused or ethically recycled, can significantly reduce e-waste and resource use. Companies that adopt this approach lower their environmental impact and unlock financial value by extending the lifecycle of IT assets.

Smith said, “Effective asset recovery strategies further support sustainability efforts. Integrating secure data erasure and refurbishment into IT governance policies lets businesses repurpose functional devices within the organisation or resell them to external buyers. Responsible e-waste recycling also supports companies to process materials ethically in instances where resale is not viable, reducing landfill contributions and preventing environmental contamination. The adoption of industry-certified data sanitisation methods also safeguards compliance with security and privacy regulations.”

2. Sustainable procurement

IT governance frameworks should prioritise the selection of technology vendors and partners committed to sustainable manufacturing, responsible sourcing and energy-efficient product design. This includes favouring IT hardware with a high percentage of post-consumer recycled materials and using minimal packaging. Additionally, employing Device-as-a-Service (DaaS) models optimises IT asset utilisation while reducing upfront investment and unnecessary hardware purchases.

Partnerships with sustainability-driven IT service providers can further enhance an organisation’s environmental impact. Working with partners that offer end-to-end IT asset management solutions, encompassing secure device deployment, certified data sanitisation and ethical recycling, simplifies the process of aligning IT operations with sustainability goals. Companies that prioritise environmental stewardship in their IT governance framework gain a competitive advantage by demonstrating their commitment to responsible business practices.

3. Energy consumption

Data centres, cloud services and enterprise networks require substantial energy resources, making green IT practices essential. IT governance frameworks should include policies to reduce consumption by optimising server efficiency, reducing redundant infrastructure and using renewable energy sources. Cloud providers with strong sustainability credentials can support carbon reduction initiatives, while virtualisation strategies can consolidate workloads and improve overall energy efficiency.

4. Employee engagement

Educating staff on sustainable IT practices, such as energy-efficient device usage and responsible e-waste disposal, creates a culture of accountability. Organisations that implement green workplace initiatives, such as responsible end-of-life disposal programs, reinforce their commitment to sustainability at all levels.

“IT governance must also align with corporate environmental, social and governance commitments. Companies can contribute to broader sustainability objectives by embedding environmental stewardship into IT policies, such as net-zero emissions targets and responsible supply chain management. Clear reporting mechanisms and regular sustainability audits aid transparency, letting businesses track their progress and demonstrate accountability to stakeholders,” Smith said.

Government regulations and evolving industry standards are increasingly shaping the sustainability expectations for organisations. Aligning IT governance frameworks with best practices for environmental stewardship keeps companies ahead of regulatory requirements. Proactive adoption of sustainable IT practices positions businesses as industry leaders in environmental responsibility.

Smith said, “Integrating environmental stewardship into IT governance frameworks is not just about meeting compliance obligations; it’s about futureproofing company operations and prioritising the broader environment. Taking a proactive approach to sustainability lets organisations drive efficiency, reduce long-term costs and contribute to a healthier planet. Businesses that lead in sustainable IT governance will be well-positioned for long-term success as environmental concerns continue to shape consumer and corporate priorities.”

Image credit: iStock.com/Petmal

0 Comments