Advertisement

(Un)healthy Bodies and the Transport Planning Profession: The (Im)mobile Social Construction of Reality and Its Consequences

Chapter

Abstract

Transport planning became a techno-bureaucratic profession and this has important ramifications. The most important one for the argument developed here is that techno-bureaucratic transport planning is performed by physically inactive professionals. It presupposes that exclusively using technologies and processes that are disconnected from the subjective and bodily experience of the built environment in general and of mobility in particular is acceptable. It dismisses all forms of subjective and embodied knowledge and professional practices. As a result, it leads to transport projects and policies that promote physical inactivity and geographical mobility at the same time in a spiralling way—that is, immobile-mobility is expanding out of control. Techno-bureaucratic transport planning is, therefore, creating a world where people travel extensively but suffer from a serious lack of physical mobility and a resulting global health crisis.

This chapter proposes that a new way of performing transport planning is therefore needed. This new way would ask from transport planners a much more embodied and inner engagement with their work. If embodied engagement is critical to understand a given reality or problem and to find ways to solve complex issues, it becomes then clear that transport planners need to become physically active individuals as much as they can, if they are to effectively promote active modes of transport and healthy built environments. A number of theoretical and conceptual ideas are provided to strike the right balance between objective/technical and subjective/embodied approaches in transport planning theory and practice.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to show my gratitude to Haneen Khreis and Mark Nieuwenhuijsen for their dedicated help and constructive comments during the writing of this text. The picture of the Brain in the Jar was produced by Catarina França, and it was used with her permission (catarinafrancaillustrations.com).

References1

  1. Alexander, C. (1965a). A city is not a tree, Part 1. Architectural Forum, 122, 58–62.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, C. (1965b). A city is not a tree, Part 2. Architectural Forum, 122, 58–61.Google Scholar
  3. Alfonzo, M. A. (2005). To walk or not to walk? The hierarchy of walking needs. Environment and Behavior, 37, 808–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Badland, H., & Schofield, G. (2005). Transport, urban design, and physical activity: an evidence-based update. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10, 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baum, H. (1980). Sensitizing planner to organization. In P. Clavel, J. Forester, & W. Goldsmith (Eds.), Urban and regional planning in an age of austerity. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  6. Baum, H. (1983). Planners and public expectations. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. Baum, H. (1987). The invisible bureaucracy: The unconscious in organizational problem solving. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bauman, Z. (1995). Postmodern ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Beck, D., & Cowan, C. (2006). Spiral dynamics: Mastering values, leadership and change. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  11. Boissevain, J. (1974). Friends of friends: Networks, manipulators and coalitions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Bowman, K. (2014). Move your DNA. Washington: Propriometrics Press.Google Scholar
  13. Brömmelstroet, M. T., Nikolaeva, A., Glaser, M., Nicolaisen, M., & Chan, C. (2017). Travelling together alone and alone together: mobility and potential exposure to diversity. Applied Mobilities, 2, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cavill, N., Kahlmeier, S., Rutter, H., Racioppi, F., & Oja, P. (2008). Economic analyses of transport infrastructure and policies including health effects related to cycling and walking: A systematic review. Transport Policy, 15, 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Christiansen, L. B., Cerin, E., Badland, H., Kerr, J., Davey, R., Troelsen, J., Dyck, D. V., Mitáš, J., Schofield, G., Sugiyama, T., & Salvo, D. (2016). International comparisons of the associations between objective measures of the built environment and transport-related walking and cycling: IPEN adult study. Journal of Transport and Health, 3, 467–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davy, B. (2008). Plan it without a condom! Planning Theory, 7, 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delamater, J. (1968). On the nature of deviance. Social Forces, 46, 445–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Falconer, C., Leary, S., Page, A., & Cooper, A. (2015). The tracking of active travel and its relationship with body composition in UK adolescents. Journal of Transport and Health, 2, 483–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferreira, A. (2013). Emotions in planning practice: a critical review and a suggestion for future developments based on mindfulness. Town Planning Review, 84, 703–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ferreira, A., & Batey, P. (2010). University towns and the multi-layer transport model: Excavating the connections between academic ethos and transport problems. Planning Theory and Practice, 11, 573–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ferreira, A., Batey, P., te Brömmelstroet, M., & Bertolini, L. (2012). Beyond the dilemma of mobility: Exploring new ways of matching intellectual and physical mobility. Environment and Planning A, 44, 688–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferreira, A., Marsden, G., & Te Brommelstroet, M. (2013). What curriculum for mobility and transport studies? A critical exploration. Transport Reviews, 33, 501–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferreira, A., Sykes, O., & Batey, P. (2009). Planning theory or planning theories? The hydra model and its implications for planning education. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 4, 29–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Forencich, F. (2006). Exuberant animal: The power of health, play and joyful movement. Bloomington: Author House.Google Scholar
  25. Frank, L., Andresen, M., & Schmid, T. (2004). Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 27, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frank, L. D., Saelens, B., Powell, K., & Chapman, J. E. (2007). Stepping towards causation: Do built environments or neighborhood and travel preferences explain physical activity, driving, and obesity? Social Science and Medicine, 65, 1898–1914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Giles-Corti, B., Foster, S., Shilton, T., & Falconer, R. (2010). The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation. NSW Public Health Bulletin, 21, 122–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2004). Conforming to the expectations of the profession: A Lacanian perspective on planning practice, norms and values. Planning Theory and Practice, 5, 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hagerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science? Regional Science Association Papers, 24, 6–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ingold, T., & Vergunst, J. L. (2008). Introduction. In T. Ingold & J. L. Vergunst (Eds.), Ways of walking: Ethnography and practice on foot. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  31. Jacobs, J. (1970). The economy of cities. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  32. Kesselring, S. (2008). The mobile risk society. In W. Canzler, V. Kaufmann, & S. Kesselring (Eds.), Tracing mobilities: Towards a cosmopolitan perspective. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  33. Khreis, H., Warsow, K., Verlinghieri, E., Guzman, A., Pellecuer, L., Ferreira, A., Jones, I., Heinen, E., Rojas-Rueda, D., Mueller, N., Schepers, P., Lucas, K., & Nieuwenhuijsen, M. (2016). The health impacts of traffic-related exposures in urban areas: Understanding real effects, underlying driving forces and co-producing future directions. Journal of Transport & Health, 3, 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kronlid, D. (2008). Ecological approaches to mobile machines and environmental ethics. In S. Bergmann & T. Sager (Eds.), The ethics of mobilities: Rethinking place, exclusion, freedom and environment. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  35. Laloux, F. (2014). Reinventing organisations: A guide to creating organisations inspired by the next stage of human consciousness. Nelson Parker: Brussels.Google Scholar
  36. Laverty, A., Webb, E., Mindell, J., & Millett, C. (2012). Is being concerned about the environment good for your health? The Lancet, 380, S56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee, M., Shiroma, E., Lobelo, F., Puska, P., Blair, S., & Katzmarzyk, P. T. (2012). Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: An analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. The Lancet, 380, 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mcnally, D. (2012). Monsters of the market: Zombies, vampires and global capitalism. Chicago: Haymarket Books.Google Scholar
  39. Monk, J., & Hanson, S. (1982). On not excluding half of the human in human geography. Professional Geographer, 34, 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morozov, E. (2014). To save everything, click here: Technology, solutionism, and the urge to fix problems that don't exist. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  41. Naess, P. (2006). Cost-benefit analyses of transportation investments: Neither critical nor realistic. Journal of Critical Realism, 5, 32–60.Google Scholar
  42. Nieuwenhuijsen, M. (2016). Urban and transport planning, environmental exposures and health-new concepts, methods and tools to improve health in cities. Environmental Health, 15(suppl 1), 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Khreis, H., Triguero-Mas, M., Gascon, M., & Dadvand, P. (2017). Fifty shades of green: Pathway to healthy urban living. Epidemiology, 28, 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Panter, J., Jones, A., van Sluijs, E., & Griffin, S. (2011). The influence of distance to school on the associations between active commuting and physical activity. Pediatric Exercise Science, 23, 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pred, A. (1981a). Power, everyday practice and the discipline of human geography. In A. Pred (Ed.), Space and time in geography – Essays dedicated to Torsten Hagerstrand. CWK Gleerup: Lund.Google Scholar
  46. Pred, A. (1981b). Social reproduction and the time-geography of everyday life. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 63, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reis, R., Salvo, D., Ogilvie, D., Lambert, E., Goenka, S., & Brownson, R. C. (2016). Scaling up physical activity interventions worldwide: Stepping up to larger and smarter approaches to get people moving. The Lancet, 388, 1337–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saelens, B. E., & Handy, S. (2008). Built environment correlates of walking: A review. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 40, S550–S566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sallis, J., Cerin, E., Conway, T., Adams, M., Frank, L., Pratt, M., & Davey, R. (2016). Physical activity in relation to urban environments in 14 cities worldwide: A cross-sectional study. The Lancet, 387, 2207–2217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sheller, M. (2004). Automotive emotions: Feeling the car. Theory, Culture & Society, 21, 221–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Simmel, G. (1971). The metropolis and mental life. In D. N. Lievine (Ed.), Georg Simmel: On individuality and social forms. Glencoe: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Simon, R. I., & Dippo, D. (1986). On critical ethnographic work. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 17, 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Slaughter, R. (1998). Transcending flatland: Implications of Ken Wilber’s meta-narrative for futures studies. Futures, 30, 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Spender, D. (1981). Introduction. In D. Spender (Ed.), Men’s studies modified. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  55. Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2002). Personal dynamics, distinctive frames and communicative planning. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: New directions for planning theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Thrift, N. (1979). The limits to knowledge in social theory: Towards a theory of practice. Canberra: Department of Human Geography, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  57. Thrift, N., & Pred, A. (1981). Time-geography: A new beginning. Progress in Human Geography, 5, 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Timms, P., Tight, M., & Watling, D. (2014). Imagineering mobility: Constructing utopias for future urban transport. Environment and Planning A, 46, 78–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tofler, A. (1980). The third wave. New York: Bantan Books.Google Scholar
  60. Triguero-Mas, M., Dadvand, P., Cirach, M., Martínez, D., Medina, A., Mompart, A., Basagaña, X., Gražulevičienė, R., & Nieuwenhuijsen, M. (2015). Natural outdoor environments and mental and physical health: Relationships and mechanisms. Environment International, 77, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Urry, J. (2004). The ‘System’ of automobility. Theory, Culture & Society, 21, 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walks, R. A. (2008). Urban form, everyday life, and ideology: Support for privatization in three Toronto neighbourhoods. Environment and Planning A, 40, 258–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wilber, K. (1998). The essential Ken Wilber. Boston: Shambhala Publications.Google Scholar
  64. Wilber, K. (2000a). Integral psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy. Boston: Shambhala Publications.Google Scholar
  65. Wilber, K. (2000b). A theory of everything: An integral vision for business, politics, science and spirituality. Boston: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  66. Wilber, K. (2003). Kosmic consciousness. Sounds True: Boulder.Google Scholar
  67. Woodcock, J., Edwards, P., Tonne, C., Armstrong, B., Ashiru, O., Banister, D., Beevers, S., & Chalabi, Z. (2009). Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: urban land transport. The Lancet, 374, 1930–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CITTA–Research Centre for Territory, Transports and Environment, University of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations