The gap between intention and action is one of transport planning's oldest problems. Jo Bacon and Alexei Lee explain why asking "what would you do?" leads planners astray—and what to do instead.
“If we build it, they will come…”
This mantra, borrowed from the 1989 movie Field of Dreams, has historically guided transportation planning efforts. The implicit assumption is that if we simply build the proper infrastructure, people will abandon their cars and regularly take buses, trains, and bicycles for their commutes, errands, or leisure. Yet over time, we’ve learned through experience that this simply isn’t the case. While our transport planning models have become more sophisticated, we’ve found that the more complex, persistent challenge lies in changing human behavior. Even when people have available transit options (and positive intent), they often find it quite difficult to alter their routines.
In light of this challenge, some of the organizations responsible for planning our transport networks have adopted a more human-centered approach. This often involves engaging stakeholders (including local communities, interest groups, and others using the network) on planned changes. Even so, we still face many of the same challenges—and can fall into familiar traps—in our effort to understand and influence transport behavior.
For example, we often find ourselves asking people “what do you want?” or “what would you do?” if circumstances were changed (e.g., “If there was a regular bus line, would you take it?”). Although well intentioned, this form of direct questioning often leads us astray. It’s not that people deliberately mislead us, even if they are affected by social desirability bias. Instead, the problem is that they can’t accurately predict their future behavior and nearly always underestimate their own barriers to change. While people may genuinely want to change their habits, they fall victim to the intention-action gap, just as many of us do with our New Year’s resolutions.
Applying a behavioral lens
If we can’t rely on simply speaking with people, what can we do to improve transport outcomes? One answer lies in adopting the lens and tools of behavioral science. Here are five ways that this can manifest itself in practice and add value to transport planning.
1. Uncover the hidden frictions
Behavioral science teaches us that routine behavior like daily commuting is typically done at an automatic “system 1” level, with minimal conscious thought. So it’s not surprising that people often can’t recall or articulate the factors that guide these behaviors. By observing people, we can often uncover unspoken barriers or hassles (or frictions) that play a disproportionate role in influencing decisions and identify when a quick prompt could nudge them in the right direction. Understanding the wider context of people’s lives can also help reveal hidden frictions – particularly during moments of change, when routines are disrupted and barriers become more visible. For instance, observing new homeowners or renters can reveal practical frictions (such as uncertainty about routes, ticketing, or service reliability) that make public transport feel difficult to navigate. Addressing these barriers through targeted information (including short-term incentives such as prepaid bus passes) can help reduce hassle at a critical moment when travel routines are being established.
Understanding the wider context of people’s lives can also reveal moments of change when someone is more open to forming new habits (or breaking old ones). For instance, focusing public transport initiatives (including short-term incentives such as prepaid bus passes and information about public transport services) on new homeowners or renters can help to reach people as they establish a routine around their commute.
2. Form new habits
Changing travel behavior is often about helping people form new habits around their routines. Fortunately, behavioral science has much to offer on this topic, starting with the concept of the habit loop. Two critical components to forming new habits are the cue (which serves as a trigger and reminder) and the reward (which provides immediate positive reinforcement upon taking the action). While these points may appear quite basic, they are deceptively powerful—and sadly, they are often neglected in transport. Typically, we rely on financial disincentives (such as increased parking fees), fare reductions (which may still be seen as expensive), and/or abstract notions (e.g., “doing the right thing for the planet”) to motivate people, but we often forget to think about what makes people feel good each time they ride the bus, take the train, or even go for a walk. When we understand what people value, rewards don’t have to be monetary; for example, sustainability can be a badge of pride for some, which was the premise behind the green stripe on EV car registrations in the UK. Similarly, the way that staff communicate with customers on public transport (even a simple “thank you” or smile) can make all the difference in creating positive and memorable experiences that commuters will want to repeat.
3. Look beyond physical barriers to change
When people don’t behave as we’d like, we’re quite likely to jump to singular assumptions or explanations as to why. In the world of transport, we often assume that the problem is physical access or affordability. However, behavioral science reminds us that a plethora of “softer” barriers, such as social norms, or even just wanting to stay warm and dry, may actually be standing in the way. The COM-B model is a helpful tool, as it forces us to think systematically and thoroughly about potential barriers and motivations to action. It also reminds us that we may need to address a range of issues if we are to drive successful adoption of new travel habits. For instance, a common challenge when encouraging people to cycle more is that people don’t feel confident on a bicycle. This is especially the case among more vulnerable groups, who may also feel less safe when travelling in the dark and/or on busy roads or crowded buses. Understanding these softer decision factors can guide how we encourage people to use them but also improve the design of networks, like installing better lighting on cycle routes and increasing the presence of staff on public transport. Another approach that can help to build confidence is through making transport more social by, say, offering regular “bike and coffee” rides or cycling buddy programs to help provide a safe space for those who are apprehensive about cycling or walking. Social activities also help to offer social proof and thus establish behaviors (such as cycling) as a normal activity among “people like me.”
4. Make it easier!
One foundational insight from behavioral science is that humans naturally gravitate towards the path of least resistance, as in the mantra of Nobel Prize winner Richard Thaler: “If you want to encourage someone to do something, make it easy.” Often, this involves removing complexity or uncertainty. An extra step or a lingering question is often just enough to dissuade people from changing their behavior and lead them back to the comfort of familiar habits (such as their morning drive!). The EAST framework expands on this concept with four key behavior change principles. To be effective, behavior change needs to be easy, attractive, social, and timely. This simple and powerful framework can be used to generate ideas that ‘nudge’ people in positive directions and help them follow through on their positive intentions. For example, in transport, personal travel planning is often used to support people in establishing alternative ways to commute to work or school. This takes the uncertainty and complexity out of navigating multiple sources of information to understand public transport options, timetables and routes. Conversely, adding friction—such as placing car parking further away from houses when building new developments—can help deter unwanted behavior.
5. Focusing on outcomes (not outputs)
Traditionally, the focus for transport planners and engineers has been on providing safe transport networks that deliver on the current (and possible future) travel patterns of transport users. Generally speaking, our responsibility ended there, with limited concern as to whether those systems were used to their full capacity and potential. Yet, for the sector to meet its ambitious decarbonisation targets (and realise other key goals such as improving public health and reducing social exclusion), it’s vital to redefine our criteria for successful infrastructure projects. For this to happen, we need to collectively shift our mindset away from access/availability and cost efficiency as primary indications of success. Instead, we must focus on measuring behavioral outcomes (such as system use). By taking accountability for public transport use, we can help ensure that people-centric and outcome-led thinking is embedded throughout the planning and development process.
If we are to create more people-centered transport networks, our mantra needs to change from “If we build it…” to “If we design for use…”
For this transition to happen, we’ll need more coherent, interlinked thinking between those setting the policy goals and those delivering the change. Most importantly, we’ll need to begin with a deeper understanding of human behavior. Whether it’s tackling climate change or simply helping people to feel safer on the bus, this is the key to delivering better outcomes for individuals traveling on our networks and for society as a whole.
