Has Britain reached “peak car”?
More and more people are using public transport to get from one place to another.
By Andrew Pendleton Published 12 April 2011 13:26
"We will end the war on motorists," the Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond, declared when the coalition took office. "Motoring has got to get greener but the car is not going to go away."
In the literal sense, Hammond is correct. The car in one form or another is here to stay and his department currently bases all of its projections on the assumption that car use will grow for ever.
And yet the growth in the number of miles and trips each of us drives began to slow in the early to mid-1990s, during the dog days of the last Conservative government. This trend became even more pronounced in the early 2000s, and since 2005 – notably before the recession and recent fuel price spikes – car use started to decline. Britain has already seen what transport policy wonks call "peak car".

Source: IPPR, using data from the National Travel Survey
The transport guru Professor Phil Goodwin, of the University of the West of England, points out that other, once-dominant modes of transport, such as railways, have also enjoyed what at the time would have looked like unending growth and then suffered what in hindsight was an inevitable decline.
So why not the car?
The motoring lobby will argue that, even in the era of peak car, almost 80 per cent of journeys are taken using private rather than public transport. While this is true, and suggests that only a fool would wage war on the motorist, there has been a small but symbolic shift in favour of buses and trains.
But peak car is arguably less about us switching from the car to the bus or the train to get from A to B and more about changes in society and attitude.
Researchers have only a fragmented picture of why peak car is happening and it's our job to find out more. But one of its most interesting aspects is that young people are more responsible for the trend than other age groups.
Indeed, it seems fewer young people nowadays harbour the ambition to drive. Between 1992 and 2007, the proportion of 17-to-20-year-olds holding a driving licence fell from 48 per cent to 38 per cent and that of 21-to-29-year-olds from 75 per cent to 66 per cent (note this is a PDF – see page 27).
The costs of motoring are doubtless a factor. For instance, according to an AA study, the average annual cost of car insurance for a 17-to-22-year-old man is £2,457. But young people aren't simply swapping cars for buses or bikes; they are choosing to own and use other technology instead, such as smartphones and tablet computers.
Significantly, the use of these technologies while driving is not only against UK law, but also difficult. A recent survey of college students in Colorado (where sending messages from smartphones while driving is not illegal) found that while 75 per cent of users said they often used their phones while travelling by bus, train or as a passenger in a car, only 10 per cent of them said they did so while driving a car.
We need to know more about peak car. Cutting carbon emissions from transport will be easier to achieve if we're working with the grain of people's behaviour rather than against it. But more important still is the implied shift in the politics.
Even in the era of peak car, it seems like a stretch, but if driving were to go the way of trains and buses, then fighting or ending the war on motorists may in the end prove a lot less significant.
Andrew Pendleton is associate director at IPPR on climate change, transport and energy.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















9 comments
We mean it. We definitely need vehicles for transportation but it doesn't always mean we have to take of cars because of the skyrocketing price of gas in this generation. Of course once the law of supply and demand is concern, we can't do everything to complain. However, the good thing is that the automotive industry is now getting smart because there is no the engagement of electric vehicles which consumes less gas. One more thing is that, vehicle maintenance is not that difficult and costly compared to the past because there are now the presence of auto parts stores that deal with the basics including bumper covers, suspension, catalytic converter and even the basic accessories.
Correction, there is a motorists war, a motorists war on the rest of us!!
Whilst the car may be in decline, the concept of a vehicle that can transport the owner from A to B is surely as strong as ever.
As we become more urbanised, public transport becomes more cost-effective and in cities such as London there is usually a bus or train heading directly where you desire. If not, then there's usually a taxi available.
Outside of cities, the road network that has developed under the wheels of the car is vital for pedal and motor cycles to act as viable alternatives to the car.
I would expect that a graph showing the public expectation of convenience in preferred transportation choice over time would show a steady increase. Foot > Horse > Train > Car > Diversification...
Too many cars?Only if you live in a big city!
The automobile is now a liability - financially, environmentally, socially, morally.
The road of the future - until they crumble - will be occupied by walkers, skaters, skateboarders, cyclists and resurgent wild animal populations.
Oil is only going to get more expensive as its supply dries up. The automobile as mechanical dinosaur will become extinct just as surely as the biological dinosaur did.
Look, this is actually massive, and the comments so far miss the point. We might just as well assume that every society will reach "peak car", and build our climate change solutions around it. Let's use the data we have for countries like the UK that have reached it first to work out realistic energy use abatement plans for India and China. Let's do as much as we can to enourage, or at least allow to thrive, behaviours that people enjoy but prohibit or reduce car use, such as constantly updating social media. Let's not criticise how un-green facebook's or twitter's servers are unless we also take account of how many cars their sites are taking off the roads. I see great hope in this article - it's a retort to a calvinist approach to environmentalism that no one, however good their intentions, could really believe was going to have the necessary effects.
Yes. Regret to say that Hammond is right. I'm hanging onto mine.
Until public transport improves by leaps and bound, and travelling costs come tumbling down, that is. To corect you on one point: There is no 'war' on motorists.
We were reaching a healthy outlook on the concept of public transport, and then the torys, with their new friends, came in, in 2010.
Time to get people back in their cars so that the tax coffers are spilling over.
Pathetic!
I'm not sure there is a 'war on motorists' although I'm sure Jeremy Clarkson thinks there is.
From a purely environmental perspective there SHOULD be a war on motorists.