When it comes to transport infrastructure, much of the UK’s policy and spending has been based on a simple but flawed idea: more roads mean more economic opportunity. Yet growing evidence shows that investing in active travel — cycling and walking — delivers far greater returns (1).
In the early years of car use, it was clear to see the economic benefits of more roads. More distance can be covered, opportunities widen, and the economy expands. But is that still the case, and do they lead to a better quality of life?
Today, we examine how active travel outperforms traditional road investment in economic outputs like retail spending, employment, health savings, and productivity and why it’s time to rethink how we measure success. Traditionally, any budget for Active Travel has been measured via non-economic outputs (environment, quality of life), whereas roads have been measured purely by economic output.
Recently, governments’ research studies have started to measure active travel measures via their economic output. The data is compelling, yet budgets are tiny vs road budgets. Why is this? Is it purely because change is difficult? Let’s examine the economic potential of active travel.
