Creative approaches to integrated transport outside cities

In its current form the Buses Bill does not address the issue of rural buses directly – but it does make provision for local socially necessary services to be supported and retained

High profile changes in bus services are underway as mayoral authorities bring buses back into public control. It’s easy to focus on the cities at the heart of these changes. However, increasingly evidence show that transport and travel patterns outside city centres have the potential to derail (or magnify) urban gains. People drive more often outside the urban core – but often those vehicles are being driven into cities – which undermines the reduction in car use among urban dwellers. With this in mind, suburban and rural bus should rise up the agenda.

Socially necessary services

In its current form the Buses Bill does not address the issue of rural buses directly – but it does make provision for local socially necessary services to be supported and retained. Campaign for Better Transport is asking government to ensure that local authorities map gaps in socially and economically necessary provision and that funding is better targeted at addressing these gaps - with the aim of delivering at least a ‘minimum service level’ for all communities to access education, employment and essential services by public transport.

---

Beate will chairing a free webinar on Integrated Transport in rural areas: Socially necessary services, franchising and DRT, on 3 June at 10.30 -12.00: register here

---

How bad is the loss of rural and suburban services?

Firstly, it has to be acknowledged that rural routes have been decimated. A quick look at the latest output from ITS Leeds’ Carbon.Place map charting bus changes between 2008 and 2023 shows the sharp decline. The map above shows the north of England.

Not only do buses serve rural areas very much less frequently now, but the journeys rural people can make are also often much more convoluted – whilst meandering routes through villages makes sense financially to operators (the bus will pass more homes and more people so have the potential to generate more revenue) the extended journey times mean that only those who have no alternative will use them.

The latest rounds of bus funding have gone some way to arrest the decline in rural buses – but we need to look at redrawing networks to serve the needs of current populations both within and without cities. When the Buses Bill takes effect, its final definition of socially necessary services shouldn’t be about atrophying the current (or even 2008) network but be about providing useful services for communities. Whether that is a regular fixed line network, on-demand buses or supported community transport (or an appropriate blend of all three).

Cross subsidy – is it fair?

Cash-strapped authorities may be concerned at statutory requirements to provide services, however, there is now more flexibility to think creatively about the design – and cost – of the network as a whole. The UK discussion of transport has become so used to the idea of services paying their own way and looking at routes on a case by case basis that sometimes we appear to have lost sight of this possibility. Deregulation has not helped this mindset where cross-subsidy has been ruled ‘anti-competitive’ for decades. 

Despite the deregulated landscape (slowly) changing, there’s still a suspicion over this. A recent example was when CPT Chief Executive Graham Vidler and Go-Ahead MD Martin Dean gave evidence at the 'buses connecting communities' session of the Transport Committee.

“You still have the same problem that you have had for a number of years: how do you subsidise the rural network? … talking about cross-subsidy, there is an equity point there. I am not saying it is not right, but it should be debated: is it right for people in urban areas to cross-subsidise people in rural areas? It is a debating point that should be talked about.”

Rural networks, franchising and cross subsidy

Better services with journey times more comparable with car travel would mean people can use the bus by choice - not as a last resort. This may not create the mass transit numbers found in city centres, but experience suggests it will help people access rapid transit and rail, improve options for people in rural areas and start bridging the rural-urban divide. This latter is no small matter. 

Whilst rural people need to access city services and employment, city dwellers travel to the countryside for leisure, sport and recreation. This is a huge equity issue for almost a quarter of the UK population over 17 who do not drive – whether they live in the city or outside it. Whilst city populations experience inflows from extra-urban car commuters, traffic and parking problems associated with leisure and tourism travel are often very visible in rural areas. Both are hard to tackle because they are generated outside the area.

By cross-subsidising rural transport to improve it, you can reduce car trips into the urban core. In the other direction, car free urbanites can access the benefits of the countryside by bus and rail.

Vision and creative planning (without costing the earth)

 In the next webinar on integrated transport in rural areas speakers will look at socially necessary services, franchising and DRT. They bring a wealth of examples of local authorities working creatively and with vision on bus networks in rural areas, from different models of procurement, including small and community operators within franchising schemes, and, integrating on-demand bus services into network plans. Designing integrated networks that ensure services work together can reduce costs and increase patronage, helping local communities in both cities and rural areas thrive.