New digital technology puts London transport at a tipping point, says think tank

In a new report, UK policy think tank The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) argues that London is at a crossroads between two futures. One where the transport network is increasingly gridlocked, the air grows ever dirtier and the cost of accessing good transport increases. Or one where all can harness the best of digital technology, reducing journeys and air pollution, and opening up new opportunities to make London a more attractive place to live. The report investigates how new technology co
March 24, 2017 Read time: 2 mins
In a new report, UK policy think tank The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) argues that London is at a crossroads between two futures. One where the transport network is increasingly gridlocked, the air grows ever dirtier and the cost of accessing good transport increases. Or one where all can harness the best of digital technology, reducing journeys and air pollution, and opening up new opportunities to make London a more attractive place to live.

The report investigates how new technology could help or hinder efforts to effect more sustainable forms of travel behaviour and are already having a tangible impact on the way that Londoner’s move around the city. New private hire technology like 8336 Uber and new delivery patterns driven by companies like Amazon are just a first glimpse of the size of the revolution that digital technologies will unleash on London’s transport system. Future technologies, like autonomous vehicles and Mobility as Service platforms, promise even bigger and more rapid change.

There are potentially many positive effects of including these services into London’s integrated transport network; IPPR argues that Mayor of London Sadiq Khan needs to seize the opportunity, saying that car clubs such as 6452 DriveNow and 3874 ZipCar should be a key part of his vision for London’s transport system. It also recommends developing a framework for new travel markets, setting out a set of positive outcomes for the transport system and appointing a chief digital officer for the capital, as well as making 1466 Transport for London the central hub for travel data.

Related Content

  • October 27, 2016
    The downside of driverless vehicles
    Driverless cars will have a detrimental effect on congestion and security while the road safety benefits can be achieved sooner and cheaper using ADAS, argues Colin Sowman. Many Governments are consulting about the introduction of driverless vehicles and even running trials. As 70% or 80% of crashes are caused by human error, the promise of a crash-free future of driverless, self-driving or autonomous vehicles (call them what you will) is alluring, as are the claims of reduced congestion and lower emissions
    Read More
  • May 31, 2013
    Driverless vehicles will cause changes in society
    Paul Godsmark gives his views on what the advent of autonomous vehicles would mean for the wider society. Further to your article ‘Driver not required…’ in the Jan/Feb edition of ITS International which gave some great background to autonomous road vehicle (ARVs), I feel that the bigger picture is needed to aid understanding. There is a ‘technology freight train’ heading our way that is going to transform our roadways but we don’t seem to be aware of it and, therefore, are in no hurry to react.
    Read More
  • December 4, 2023
    Sustainable mobility is a vote-winner, insists Polis
    Organisation's annual conference gave its top award to Groningen in the Netherlands
    Read More
  • September 2, 2016
    Uber wins right to challenge TfL’s English language requirement
    Uber has won the right to challenge a Transport for London (TfL) rule which would require some of its drivers to pass an English language test. Announced by TfL last year and due to take effect from 1 October, the rule would mean that drivers who are not from English-speaking countries would have to take an English reading, writing and listening test, which TfL said was ‘in the interests of public safety’. Uber had previously supported the test, but now argues it is too rigorous and costly.
    Read More

Highlighted Content