Empowering people to interpret corporate ED&I strategies within their own workplace context is critical for successful implementation, says AECOM’s Head of ED&I, Europe & India, Rachel Billington.
At this year’s Highways UK conference, I asked panellists why inclusion is important to them. It’s a question that is important to me because I believe it doesn’t just draw out a personal response, I believe the question is an important step as organisations move from ED&I strategy to implementation.
For many firms in the Highways sector, the business case for ED&I is clear: simply put the talent pool is bigger, the skills and solutions people bring to the job are more diverse, and ultimately a better solution is delivered for the client.
This business case has resulted in the industry successfully developing ED&I strategies and at AECOM we’ve made significant headway on our strategy over the past year. This includes our pride in gaining our first Clear Assured accreditation and our new network of employee resource groups is already making a positive impact throughout the business. We’ve been shortlisted at the European Diversity Awards for Company of the Year and Outstanding Employee Network of the Year for our Ethnic Diversity Network ERG. But now the challenge for us, and for the highways industry more widely, is to ensure that strategies don’t just sit on a file on a website, but that they are implemented across the sector in a meaningful way.
From the 18 months I’ve been at AECOM one learning point is clear: implementation in any company is a task that requires thought and effort day in and day out. It is a significant change for any company as ED&I becomes a part of business operations, in the same way that health and safety or finance are. Our implementation plan has included engaging and developing the top 250 leaders so that implementation starts at the top and is cascaded down.
Importantly, we encourage people to translate the ED&I into something that’s meaningful for them so that the implementation of ED&I works in a variety of workplaces, whether that’s in an office or on site. For us, implementation is inclusion led not initiative led. We continue to celebrate diversity through the different days, weeks and months which support our communities, but what happens on a day-to-day basis and the lived experiences of our employees really matters.
As an industry, I believe it is so important that the highways sector is honest about its people when driving ED&I, so it is critical that we engage everyone – including white men whose allyship can help people’s voices be heard and tackle the causes of discrimination. Being an active listener and thinking about every day actions can have a hugely positive impact. And it’s here we come full circle to my original point: to successfully implement ED&I strategies, we must empower people to reflect on what the strategy means to them and enable them to interpret it in their own context.
Part of broadening ED&I out from the passionate few to everyone is to make it meaningful. ED&I has a robust legal foundation, but it isn’t about forcing people to act in a certain way or making people scared about doing or saying the wrong thing. It is about embedding a fundamental understanding of what it means to be inclusive throughout the company, underpinned by a strategy at a corporate which facilitates this change. Once that understanding is in place, you’ll be surprised at how quickly the behaviours follow.
Of course, change doesn’t happen in isolation, for there to be meaningful change the sector needs to collaborate, to learn from each other and share best practice. So, what will you be doing to empower your people and organisation?
Michael Whelan, General Manager at M6Toll looks at RUC trials in California, Utah and Washington state, and explains how lessons learnt could be applied in the UK
The arrival of the Covid19 pandemic in the UK changed everything overnight, not least on our roads. The near-total disappearance of road traffic during multiple lockdowns led many globally – like the Brookings Institute in the US – to ask how the carbon and congestion benefits of reduced road traffic could be preserved as lockdowns ended.
The impact had certainly been significant. In March 2020 the first of three national lockdowns came into force and within just 6 days, three quarters of all motor vehicle journeys had vanished from the UK’s road network.
But this dramatic shift hasn’t had the enduring legacy that many anticipated – and the emissions and congestion challenges have come roaring back. As society and the economy returns to other critical more ‘traditional’ challenges – such as inflation and the cost of living – traffic levels also returned to a pre-Covid state. In the first week of July 2022, over two years since the first lockdown began, car usage on Britain’s roads stood between 92% and 105% of pre-Covid levels. Even by March 2022, car usage on motorways in the West Midlands in particular had returned to 97% of pre-Covid levels
However, whilst overall traffic levels have returned to pre-Covid numbers, traffic patterns have changed – at least temporarily. At the M6toll we have observed this shift in two ways:
Most apparently, weekday traffic on the M6toll is now 14% below 2019 levels. It’s probable this is due to commuter patterns adjusting to the widespread emergence of hybrid working. Speaking to our customers about their changing work and leisure patterns has enabled us to create flexible new products to respond to the shift in consumer behaviours.
Conversely, weekend traffic on the M6toll is now almost 5% above 2019 levels. A combination of factors – including a rise in UK holidays – could be behind this, but longer-term it remains to be seen whether this change endures or returns to pre-Covid levels as global travel returns.
But even with these changes to driver behaviour, overall traffic levels over the course of the week are back now at similar levels to pre-pandemic, meaning the roads policy challenges facing the country have not gone away. These challenges are three-fold – how to decarbonise road traffic, how to continue to support economic growth through improved connectivity, and how to protect the very significant levels of Exchequer funding raised through VAT and fuel duty. It is this road policy trilemma that has resulted in the increasing focus on Road User Pricing (RUP) as the solution.
In fact, far from ‘not going away’, these three road policy challenges have actually intensified in recent months. As the economic turbulence of inflation continues to bite – spread and encouraged by the cost of petrol, diesel and energy prices – this trilemma has become more urgent. Electric Vehicles sales are soaring as consumers look for cheaper modes of travel and the Exchequer is again under pressure to examine its fuel duty and VAT receipts. In other words, it’s not just Covid that has underscored the virtues of RUP but also the environment of today’s post-Pandemic and inflationary economy.
Indeed, with organisations as diverse as bus companies, councils and the AA supporting road user charging, its stock is certainly rising. Yet one major roadblock stands in the way – public acceptability. As some reporting has already made clear, any Government introducing road user charging would face stiff opposition from some quarters, making its introduction difficult without public acceptability.
At M6toll, the UK’s only tolled road, operating at no cost to the tax payer, we have a unique insight into what the Government can do to make road user charging acceptable to the public. From our experience, and research we conducted with Stantec, we’ve identified three ways to make road user charging more palatable to the public:
Let them try it out first
The Washington State of Transportation Commission (WSTC) trialled road user charging in 2018 and found that the biggest influence on increased public acceptability was having participated in or been familiar with the trial. After a year of participating in the pilot programme, studies showed that motorists became more favourable towards RUC, with 68% of the respondents preferring RUC over or equally to the gas tax – a marked increase.
This suggests that the Government would be wise to phase any scheme in over time, allowing the public to gradually get used to road user charging in increments, rather than in one big bang. Whilst this might introduce other policy challenges – delaying the revenue take for example – it may be more likely to build public acceptability.
The Utah Department of Transport launched a voluntary RUC pilot programme for electric and hybrid vehicles, giving owners the choice of either paying a flat fee or paying by the mile. This element of choice appears to have reduced opposition by giving drivers some power in how they pay, at least at the beginning of the scheme.
In the UK, this could be in the options to pay offered – as in Utah – or it could be in ensuring that there are alternative non-chargeable routes available for those wishing to use them.
Focus on fairness
The California Transportation Committee launched a pilot programme in 2016 that found that rural drivers, lower-income drivers and drivers of certain ethnicities were the most difficult targets to convert from volunteer to participants, whilst in Colorado, 54% of the participants perceived road user charging would unfairly penalise rural drivers who often need to travel longer distances.
In the UK, AA President Edmund King has developed proposals that would see rural residents given a larger allocation of ‘free miles’ to use before road user charges applied and the Government would do well to consider this and other fairness elements seriously.
These findings point to the Government resisting calls for a simple, one-size-fits-all approach that, whilst easy to understand, might actually undermine road user pricing. This would be a major strategic error. The government’s latest OBR report identifies the “loss of existing motoring taxes in a decarbonising economy” as a critical challenge to the UK’s national debt and fiscal outlook. Particularly at a time of inflation, increased spending and post-Pandemic changes to domestic travel, this is not something we can afford to get wrong.
With the roads policy trilemma not going away any time soon, it’s worth taking the time to get this right.
If we want our road infrastructure to be fit for the long term, we must keep pace with the key drivers affecting the highways industry, says Andy Theobald.
Providing our clients with long-term solutions means looking ahead, taking a 10 to 20-year time horizon to understand how to design and deliver projects that will serve society decades into the future.
It’s common to look at new technologies and processes that are making an impact now – artificial intelligence and machine learning, for example – and try to imagine a world where they are even more embedded in our solutions than today.
Technologies come and go, however, and the speed of innovation means many of the tools we’ll be using in the coming years have yet to make an impact currently. Instead, it’s more useful to look at the main drivers affecting demand to get a better sense of the long-term solutions we need to deliver:
Roads for levelling up
The United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals are steering economic development, and good road infrastructure directly or indirectly supports all of them in some way. Highways link people to jobs, to markets to sell their goods, to educational opportunities and healthcare facilities. Roads can be a key investment to change people’s economic prospects and to support equality, as good connectivity can reduce time spent on menial tasks and widen access to jobs and opportunity.
The World Bank estimates that nearly 1bn people worldwide live more than 2km from an all-weather road. It also estimates that one in six women globally are not actively seeking work out of fear of harassment in transit. While road infrastructure in the UK is significantly more developed, there is still scope to improve the network to help spread prosperity. The focus should be on the factors driving the community’s need for the road. Improving neighbourhoods, addressing the needs of local communities, and enhancing the natural environment through nature-based solutions and regenerative design, will all help to maximise the long-term benefits.
The International Transport Forum’s 2021 transport outlook estimates that to 2050 there will be a 2.3-fold increase in demand for passenger transport and a 2.6-fold increase in demand for freight transport. In the UK, the Department for Transport predicts road traffic will increase by between 17% and 51% by 2050 (depending on the development trajectory taken). Digital systems and smart motorways will be crucial in helping us to use existing roads more efficiently. Where new road infrastructure is needed, this must be balanced with the need to drive down emissions. Roads which support and encourage active transport and electrified vehicles will be key to cutting emissions, while working with suppliers to enhance the materials used will help reduce embodied carbon.
Designing for safety
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 1.35M people are killed on the world’s roads each year. Road accidents are already the leading cause of death for people between the ages of five and 29, and by 2030, WHO predicts that more people will die as a result of road accidents than die of cancer, HIV/AIDS, diabetes or violence. Besides the tragic human cost, there is also an economic cost to countries – estimated as an average of 3% of GDP each year – which impacts the resources that can be put into social development.
We need to work with users, operators and vehicle manufacturers to design in safety, using technology where appropriate. Our efforts should include helping to promote a cultural change in attitudes to the remote control of vehicles on roads by convincing the public they can carry more traffic, more safely.
Alternatives to fossil fuels
We know electric vehicles are a crucial and growing element of our transport system to tackle emissions, and these need to be supported with the necessary charging infrastructure. Heavy trucks, though, challenge what is capable via current battery technology and charging times would impact logistics. Sweden and Germany have trialled electric road systems which power heavy trucks via overhead lines, rails or an induction loop. This is a technically feasible solution to electrifying heavy vehicles but the business case is still to be proven.
The probable long-term solution could be green hydrogen, either through combustion or fuel cells, which requires development of specialised infrastructure to support it. As for active transport modes, inner city commuters increasingly expect dedicated cycle lanes and greater separation between pedestrians and car users, with better, greener public spaces that support health and wellbeing.
Technology will change the way we use roads. Connected, driver-assisted and electric vehicles are delivering better informed and more comfortable journeys. As we look into the future, mobility as a service and other shared ownership models are likely to make road journeys more affordable and accessible for everyone. Data-driven operations and management solutions will boost the capacity of our network and lead to more efficient maintenance. A digital-first approach will help deliver enhanced journeys for all.
If we want to unlock the significant social benefits of point-to-point road journeys, the highways industry must continue to invest and keep up with technological advances to create a road transport network that is accessible, affordable and inclusive. While the outlook is uncertain, keeping mindful of these five key trends will help ensure highways infrastructure supports all parts of society for the long term and common good.
Andrew Theobald, group practice leader for highways, Mott MacDonald
Jillian Kowalchuk, Founder of Safe and the City explains how software and AI can help people feel safer when using the transport network
Most people think of Safe & the City as just an app, but that isn’t the full picture. There’s more behind our technologies, what drives our team and mission to change the world for the better. When you think of a better future, be it one year, 5-years or-10 years from now, does it feel safer? Of course, it does. It must be, otherwise, we wouldn’t say it’s an improvement from today. Safety is implied, a given. But this way of thinking is problematic. We can only create that type of future if we actively understand, learn and work towards that vision.
Safe & the City is led by our mission and vision for a better and safer future. We started with Safe & the City’s navigation app that reflects the areas of safety during travel that are mainly preventative and have been missed. Whether it is sexual harassment, misogyny or LGBTQ+ hate crimes, these gaps in knowledge we don’t collect insights on, measure and improve, won’t ever change.
“What gets measured gets managed.” – Peter Drucker
Our freedom of movement is predicated on our beliefs to feel and be safe in this country. For example, when we leave home to catch our bus to the tube station to work, we expect it will be safe. We know there has been a lot of thought, development, and learnings to reflect the current safety standards, such as how we created the rules of the road, vehicle manufacturing requirements, the bus drivers’ training, and installed CCTV to reduce crimes, to name a few. When departing from a tube station, we can appreciate the array of public safety considerations to move millions of people – the engineering of a train, the wider network operations, staff training and even a dedicated transport police force (BTP). While each of these physical components is different, all aspects need to work together in unison to get people safely to where they need to be.
But what about the software that helps us move through each of these transport systems, even when on our own two feet? That is a completely different story. Software technologies and apps move more people than any-one transport system. And at large have zero consideration of people’s safety, no regulations to set a higher bar and little market incentive to change. However, individuals are waking up that technologies need to do more. Consider how much we relied on technology to support us during the COVID-19 pandemic. Software technologies that helped keep our distance, know congestion periods on transport and anonymously get notified if we came into contact with an infected person. We have limitless opportunities if we can leverage technology to innovate around problems, set higher expectations of user privacy, and physical and psychological safety and strive toward making the overall experience positive. Not to exploit people, but to lift, better understand and learn how mobility products can make every journey better for everyone.
Safe & the City’s i3 Intelligence AI provide ‘just in time information’ to contextualise what’s ahead, giving people moving through the risks of the real world, the advantage of the time to respond and seek help when necessary. We all need safety, no matter who we are and where we want to go.
Times are changing fast. We’re accelerating into new challenges of the 2020s- the cost of living crisis, economic downturns, civil unrest, strikes and protests, crimes and fear. We can watch as the existing systems to move people fail without meeting the realities of the digital age, or embrace technology as one of uniting forces, that helps move us into a new way of thinking, designing and putting people’s right to be safe first.
This is the future we’re building. Starting with Safe & the City navigation app, evolving into i3 Intelligence AI and working with partners to think differently and have safety be a part of their competitive edge now and in the future.
Software technologies can help save lives, shape a better tomorrow and unlock endless possibilities when people’s right to move safely is top of mind. We look forward to being a part of the journey at Highways UK conference for those that see that future too.
Adam Crossley, Director of Environment at Skanska UK, explains how we need to get back to basics when tackling net-zero challenges in the highways sector.
Don’t over-complicate the journey to achieving net-zero carbon emissions.
We’re living through a period of significant change for society driven by the impacts of climate change. And we need look no further than the building and construction sector to find one of the world’s biggest emitters of carbon. Buildings equivalent to a city the size of Paris are being built every week, but less than one per cent of them are assessed to determine their carbon footprint. The good news is we’ve started the journey, but we have a long way to go. It means we have a huge opportunity, now, to do something about it.
Focusing on the basics
One of our biggest opportunities lies in focusing on the basics, through targeting the highest emitting sources of carbon emissions first. Approximately 70% of emissions in our sector arise from steel, concrete, asphalt and plant. We have to significantly reduce and then effectively eliminate carbon in these areas in order to get to net-zero emissions across our industry.
It starts with a clear vision that sets targets, milestones and clarity on expectations. We’ve seen this over recent years with organisations including National Highways, HS2 and Network Rail all publishing their net-zero carbon plans. In its roadmap to net-zero, National Highways has set its expectation to achieve net zero road maintenance and construction by 2040. The plan is backed by evidence and has impressive sub-targets to bring it to life. Unsurprisingly, high on the priority list is tackling carbon emissions caused by asphalt, cement and steel.
Being better together
So how do we go about it? We have the best chance of success through joining forces, sharing knowledge and working collaboratively – across different market sectors and countries. The good news is it’s happening. On our M42 Junction 6 scheme, for example, we’ve received funding from National Highways to work alongside the National Composites Centre, Basalt Technologies and Tarmac to compare traditional steel reinforced concrete with a low carbon concrete, reinforced with basalt fibre. The trial, on a haul road, is proving a success and we’re now looking at the next stage of the project.
But it also poses a challenge, which is common across the industry. In order to rollout innovations at scale they need to be proven to ensure compliance with the relevant standards and accreditations. That’s absolutely the right thing to do. But we all know that this takes time, often years. Maybe there is an alternative option. If the current standard specifies a 120-year design-life, but a carbon-friendly material may have a reduced design-life, could the standard be adapted instead? It’s important issues like this that we need to focus on as an industry so we can find ways to safely introduce new innovations and ways of working, while supporting delivery of our net-zero carbon ambitions.
Achieving common understanding
We also need to work alongside materials specialists and related industry bodies. For example, Skanska are founding signatories to both the ConcreteZero and SteelZero pledges, committing us to procuring, specifying and stocking 100% net zero steel and working with net-zero concrete by 2050, with interim commitments on the way. It’s industry leading, but we also know that the 2050 target is 10 years behind where National Highways needs us to be. Cutting that gap, such as through designing steel out or using replacements, requires significant investment and collaborative working.
It’s essential therefore that we involve and bring our supply chain with us. We need the expertise of our partners and we need to ensure there is a common level of understanding, including in industry specifications such as PAS2080. We need to prioritise and focus on what is important in delivering the biggest carbon reduction impacts.
Although collaboration is important, let’s not over-complicate the challenge. We need to remember that the majority of our emissions result from just a handful of key emitters, so if we can tackle these directly we’ll solve most of the challenge. To do that we need confidence and clarity in the pipeline of projects at national level, which is so important for industry investment and can super-charge innovation. For example, if we know what our plant and fleet needs will be for years to come, we can demonstrate that demand to manufacturers, including Tier 2 and Tier 3 contractors, stimulating investment in electric, hydrogen and other clean fuel alternatives.
It’s just one example of how we can achieve transformation – where the collective strength of Government, industry bodies, customers, contractors and supply chain all come together. Let’s keep it simple and work together to make net-zero carbon a reality.
Andy Fish, technical specialist for 3M’s Transportation Safety Division, looks at how to encourage innovation in a regulated market.
As someone who has sat on many standard setting committees and industry bodies, across several industries, I have often pondered why things are the way they are.
Standards play an important role in many industries; and in a market that is primarily focused on safety, they are critical. As such, standards set out to do many things, including providing a common description of product types, set minimum levels of performance, describe classes of useful performance, identify testing methods, and provide tools for the certification of products.
All the above are intended to ensure that the supplied product is suitable for purpose and enable the purchaser to make an informed decision based on a true comparison.
However, like all things, there are negative aspects to standards. While some of these are easily solved, others are not so straightforward.
Arguably the most challenging aspect is time. Standards take a long time to come to fruition, they are often many years in the making – and even small amendments can take an extraordinary length of time to be published. Meanwhile, many product manufacturers are improving their designs and finding new ways to improve performance with technology that did not exist when the underlying standard was first drafted. This lag ultimately means that the end user does not benefit for years, sometimes decades.
Sometimes standards are worded in such a way that they actively exclude new innovations by calling out a specific technology rather than a performance characteristic. As an example, the current standard for permanent traffic signs contains tables for the performance of retroreflective sheeting, one of which specifically refers to materials constructed with glass beaded reflectors. Specifying a technology in this way prevents new technologies being used. After all it should not matter how the material is constructed the end user probably does not care if it is made with glass beads or fairy dust. What matters is how it performs. Does it do the job it is supposed to do?
These things happen because people tend to think about what they know, the current state-of-the-art solution. To paraphrase Henry Ford, if you asked people what they wanted 100 or so years ago they would not have said “a car” they would have said “a faster horse that eats less hay” as this is what they knew at the time. The underlying need was to get from A to B, cheaply and quickly.
When authoring standards, we need to be focused on the purpose of the product and, most importantly, what that means to the end user, NOT what is currently possible with today’s technology, and NOT what the majority of manufacturers can make.
Of course, there are ways to accelerate the implementation of new technologies by conducting trials and creating test beds, for example, but this requires more cooperation from all parties.
Manufacturers need to clearly identify the benefits of their nascent technology and purchasers need to be clear on their needs alongside being more open to try something different that might just be more effective.
While we cannot predict the future, we can do much more to ensure that the consumer gets the best possible product by focusing on what the customer needs, not the industry’s current capability.
Councillor Duncan Enright, Oxfordshire County Council’s Cabinet Member for Travel and Development Strategy, looks at the future of transport in the county
Cllr Duncan Enright, Oxfordshire County council’s Cabinet Member for Travel and Development Strategy
Oxford and Oxfordshire weren’t built for motorised transport. Our historic county deserves an excellent travel network that connects us, helps businesses and jobs, gives access to opportunity, while tackling the climate and cost of living crises. That is what we are working to deliver, and we need your help and insight.
Since coming to power in May 2021, we’ve proposed steps to address the climate emergency and create a transport network that works for everyone.
We want residents and visitors to get around easily for work, education, daily living, and to connect families and friends. Our priority is to invest in an inclusive, integrated, and sustainable transport network while moving to zero carbon.
Most of us already contend with congestion and pollution. Cyclists and pedestrians are put at risk by sharing space with vehicles. If we carry on as we are while our population grows, we face gridlock. We must find ways for those who can to choose to travel on foot and bike, and use buses, taxis and trains (and share cars), to help free up our roads while we address the climate emergency and health issues by reducing emissions.
We are also committed to dealing with inequality. Cycling and walking are good ways to live healthily. But parts of the county and city are poorly served by public transport or lack safe connected cycle paths. Alternatives to cars must be affordable and work for everyone. Some people, and not just those with blue badges, need more help getting around, and we must plan for that too.
The County Council can’t do this alone. The city of Oxford, other local authorities and the county need to work together: the county needs access to its beloved city, and the city needs the county not to clog up its roads.
Our approach is to invest and encourage people to change the way they travel with a series of bold measures.
We are putting the interests of people with disabilities and those travelling on foot and bicycle first, providing better bus services, supporting taxis, and working to expand railways. We will amend existing policies, and with public help we are writing a radical Local Transport and Connectivity Plan to support this change.
Our planning strategy will evolve so new housing developments offer alternatives to the car – meaning residents need fewer parking spaces, have more green areas, and many can live on estates where car ownership isn’t necessary.
We must use data to understand where and when people want to travel so we make smarter choices about how to avoid traffic jams and offer smart ticketing on public transport. It will also allow us to provide dashboards on air pollution and local effects of the climate emergency.
We are determined not to build roads which will simply encourage more vehicle movements and reduce the space for living healthy. However, we have inherited some schemes bound up with new housing which need careful and thoughtful design and construction, not least to support new bus routes and cycle lanes. We also need to adapt existing roads to be better, faster routes for buses and bikes.
We want to gradually reduce parking spaces in Oxford and encourage others to do so, for instance through a workplace parking levy (which will be invested to provide quick and easy alternatives for commuters). Large employers like the universities are already working on this basis.
E-scooters, e-bikes and community buses can be used for the last few miles of journeys from out-of-town car parks. Motorcycles also offer an efficient alternative to cars and are part of our planning.
We’ve created a zero emission zone in Oxford, with plans to expand to the whole city centre and beyond, charging polluting vehicles as we move to all-electric transport.
There will be a focus on public transport, including replacing diesel buses with electric ones in Oxford from 2023, and introducing new lanes and bus priority measures to give peak priority in Oxford. There is one of these measures on Oxford High Street already, and another slightly different one on Botley Road. We will support community buses to connect people in our rural towns and villages. To achieve this, we will work in close partnership with the bus companies.
Our roads and urban environment also need to become safer and cleaner for people on foot, bikes, and mobility scooters. We have conducted experiments to cut through-traffic in our residential streets to improve air quality and quality of life and will review what we have learned. Reducing through-traffic in town centre streets can also help businesses operate outdoors and increase the attractiveness of our high streets for shoppers.
‘School Streets’ trials have also worked well in some places. More are planned to encourage children and families to walk or cycle to school.
We want to build dedicated and segregated cycle lanes, connect existing ones into a safer network along longer routes, and plug gaps in our towns and city. We also aim to modify existing and new road layouts to make them safe for cyclists and will look at establishing new links between home and workplaces – particularly for buses and bikes where the science jobs of the future are being created.
Bold changes aren’t easy but doing nothing isn’t an option. The prize is a city and county where we can all get around easily and affordably, in a way that is healthy and clean and does not damage our planet. Please share your ideas as we all travel on this journey to a cleaner, healthier, fairer Oxfordshire.
Cllr Enright is a member of the Fair Deal Alliance. It is made up of Labour & Cooperative, Liberal Democrat and Green councillors, and is the first administration without Conservatives since inception in 1889
Sonya Byers, CEO of Women in Transport, outlines the gender bias and stereotyping still present in the transport sector which limits women’s progression
Sonya Byers, CEO, Women in Transport
Transport is a wonderful sector to be a part of – full of opportunity, innovation and great people.
Our research into gender perceptions of working in transport found that over 80% of women felt proud to work in the transport industry.
So why do we need a network like Women in Transport that supports women working in the sector?
Perception is an issue – particularly when we look at where we are with gender balance.
In 2016, the Transport Infrastructure Skills Strategy set an ambition to reach gender parity in the transport workforce with the UK population by 2030.
Women make up 51% of the UK population but account for just 20% of the transport workforce. Transport is about connecting people and places, but this unequal representation means we are missing out on the valuable experiences, views and knowledge of women. Considering these in our decision-making as standard would help us shape our systems and places so that they are designed to serve the different people that use them.
Our 2021 research for the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Women in Transport found that women still experience significant barriers to progression and their perception of their experience in work is different to that of men:
75% of women felt it was easier for men to progress than women
82% of women felt unconscious bias is an issue
70% of women had experienced discriminatory behaviour or language
Surely what we want as a sector is for people to feel welcome and included and to be our biggest advocates to attract new talent.
The DfT’s ‘Enhancing equality, diversity and inclusion for transport infrastructure skills’ report also published in 2021 reinforces how bias and stereotyping limit women’s progression.
A recent whitepaper from the Diamond EU project made recommendations for attracting more women into transport including embedding flexible working practices for men and women, more women in senior roles and school engagement. There was a commonly reported theme that ‘you can’t be what you can’t see’ and specific women in transport groups and educational events were cited as examples of support received that positively impact women employees and a more equal gender balance in the industry.
So in 2022, the reason why Women in Transport and other similar organisations still exist is to provide a safe space for our members to thrive. A space where they can find common ground, network with peers, and support and progress their careers in a sector full of opportunity.
We welcomed the new government consultation to help better understand the future skills needed to boost diversity, plug the skills gap and promote careers across the industry. We are also excited to see the launch of the DfT’s Transport Employment and Skills Taskforce (TEST), announced during National Apprentice Week 2022, led by our Patron Rachel Skinner CBE, and we look forward to supporting the taskforce.
As Women in Transport, we continue to support our women members with professional development, networking opportunities and mentoring. We work collaboratively with partners to promote equality, diversity and inclusion through the APPG for Women in Transport and our Diversity and Inclusion Bus Group
Our Lead development programme launched last April and has supported more than 45 women from almost 20 different transport organisations to date. Together, these women are building a legacy, alumnae network to support each other’s careers – they will empower future generations of women leaders in transport just by being seen and we’re incredibly proud to be a small part of their journey.
And as long as we’re needed, we will be here to support them! Our network is open to anyone working in transport – men and women – and we will be at Highways UK in November so do come along and have a chat in person.
Women in Transport are an official partner of Highways UK, visit them on their stand C24 on 2-3 November at NEC in Birmingham.
Steve Perkins, Managing Director at Steve Perkins Associates, unpacks the big picture of workplace health and argues the ‘system’ for protecting worker health is flawed, particularly in the world of construction.
“What gets measured gets managed”
So said Peter Drucker, the well-known management thinker. And it’s generally true. Unfortunately when it comes to protecting the physical health of our workers from exposures that cause disease and death, we tend to count the corpses rather than focus on controlling the exposures that produce them.
And even then, that counting only goes on at national level in the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) annual statistics. Did you know that the construction sector in Great Britain is responsible for 3,500 occupational cancer deaths, plus 5,500 new cases of occupational cancer each year? And at any one time there are some 81,000 construction workers with work-related ill-health . When you think that the Highways sector accounts for about 30% of all construction activity that’s potentially a lot of occupational cancer caused by highways work.
So what are we measuring when it comes to health protection?
Or maybe a more pertinent question is how do our current health, safety and wellbeing metrics impact on health protection?
Well, numbers of mental health first aiders or champions is certainly important, but wellbeing-related measures like that won’t have any impact on reducing the physical, chemical or biological workplace exposures that cause the occupational diseases we’re discussing. To put it bluntly, no amount of mindfulness will stop you get silicosis or noise induced hearing loss! (We’ll come to how wellbeing, occupational health and occupational hygiene work in relation to one another in a moment.)
And then there’s LTI, LTA, AFR… (otherwise known as ‘Looking Good Indices’.) All of which focus on accidents, not ill-health. It could be argued that even in terms of preventing accidents these metrics are not a lot of help due to their lagging nature. They don’t reveal anything about what is being done now to reduce workplace risk and so decrease the likelihood of future accidents. But I digress; that’s a different article.
Well surely then, RIDDOR is the answer when it comes to health metrics and we all count RIDDOR reportable diseases. Unfortunately RIDDOR is to health protection what AFR’s are to accident prevention – seriously lagging! The key thing about the most serious occupational diseases is that they are ‘long latency’ i.e. it can take years if not decades for many of them to develop. So, by the time the disease manifests, the damage is done and, because there are no cures for these diseases, it’s too late to stop them progressing.
The BIG picture of workplace health
I mentioned earlier that we’d look at how wellbeing, occupational health and occupational hygiene work in relation to one another. There are 3 broad, but overlapping dimensions to workplace health.
The classic understanding of health at work comes under the banner of Occupational Health. This is the clinical arena that’s all about managing the health of workers as it is today. It covers the work of doctors and nurses on things like fitness for work, medicals and health surveillance.
Wellbeing is the second dimension of health at work. This is primarily about encouraging individuals to make healthy lifestyle choices and has benefits for both employees and employers.
The third dimension of health at work is Occupational Hygiene. This is all about protecting people from workplace health risks. These are the entirely preventable risks the workplace itself creates, which are regulated by the HASAWA 1974. Preventing ill-health is all about controlling exposures; it’s not about clinical treatment or health promotion. It’s about protection. Occupational Hygienists are highly qualified applied scientists who deal with the anticipation, recognition, evaluation and control of workplace health risks. Theirs is a cross-cutting discipline encompassing aspects of physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, ergonomics, toxicology and engineering.
Is health, safety and wellbeing really protecting our worker’s health?
Let’s return to our original question. Someone once said, “the system you have is perfectly designed to give you the results you’re getting”. If the HSE’s statistics are anything to go by the ‘system’ for protecting worker health is pretty dysfunctional, particularly in our world of construction.
Unfortunately these levels of serious occupational disease and death reported by HSE have been going on for decades and they’re generally not reducing. It seems to me that it’s hard to conclude anything other than the answer to our original questions is a resounding ‘NO’. By any outcome measure, at an industry level, health, safety and wellbeing is not really protecting our worker’s health.
Good practice in highways worker health protection
That’s that not to say there aren’t pockets of good practice, and at the Highways UK show in November I’ll be unpacking some great examples from Connect Plus’s award-winning Healthier Highways initiative on the M25. You may be wondering by now what should we be measuring if we want to really protect our worker’s health? Remember – it’s all about reducing exposures. Come along in November to find out more!
Andy Peart outlines how local authorities can utilise tech and data to inform their highways asset management decisions and bring in a new environmental dimension.
The science of strategic highways asset management is going through seismic change. Historically, the approach focused on gauging the financial impact of different road repair and maintenance decisions. Local authorities had to weigh up whether it made sense to save money at the outset by using a less expensive surface treatment, only to have to spend more down the line on road repairs or additional surface dressings. On the other hand, they had to assess whether using more durable but expensive materials from the word go would ultimately prove an economically-sounder decision.
This model is now rapidly evolving. There are a range of drivers. Residents are much more attuned to the importance of sustainable construction. They care about the highways development and maintenance process being environmentally efficient. They want the carbon footprint generated across the highways lifecycle to be kept to a minimum. But they also want councils to take a broader perspective and think about how decisions made about highways management and maintenance might impact the wider community.
Government is also becoming more cogniscent of environmental factors in the way it allocates funding to local authority highways departments. Questions relating to sustainability have recently been included for the first time in the Local Highways Maintenance Incentive Fund.
The impact of technological advances
To meet these kinds of drivers, new predictive analytics technology is now coming on stream, allowing local authorities to base highways management and maintenance decisions on their impact on the wellbeing of residents and the local economy and environment, as well as financial cost and road condition. Thanks to these advances, the authorities can move beyond a pure focus on road conditions to thinking much more about where roads are located, who is using them and what the overall environmental impact of their construction and maintenance will be.
Part of this may be around the ability to analyse where pinch points on the network are causing cars to idle at junctions for long periods of time. Part of it may be around better understanding how infrastructure decisions impact the quality of life in specific neighbourhoods: including projected job creation, support for economic growth, environmental impact, and changes in levels of access to important public resources such as hospitals and schools.
However, a key element of the equation will inevitably be around the treatment used on the surface of the road. Many local authorities are working with larger contractors. The local authority effectively manages the highway while the contractors go out and lay the tarmac, and, increasingly today as they are doing that, collect information about temperature and CO2 emissions from the scheme. Typically, they will have specifications around different treatments.
These might include assigning a carbon or NOx output to a treatment that can then get added to the overall lifecycle model. It is another example that demonstrates how highways lifecycle planning is becoming ever greener today.
Many councils are still in the early stages of trying to roll put this kind of approach and currently, they are still trying to understand what their baseline is. They need the ability to model these kinds of factors quickly in order to be able to support the decision-making process on new road builds. It may be a nuanced final decision if, for example, one choice may be more expensive financially but also likely to deliver lower carbon output over time compared to the alternatives.
Flexibility of choice
The aim of any asset management solution in this space is not to drive the council’s end decision in any specific direction, it is more around giving local authorities the ability to run different scenarios and then put those options in front of their senior decision-makers. This need to be done as part of an approach which effectively says – ultimately it your decision but we are giving you the best available information to make it.’
These are complex judgements, after all. Low carbon treatments for highways assets are often cheap to invest in. They are therefore attractive to local authorities who want to go ahead quickly with an environmentally-friendly approach. However, if the council is going to have to re-apply the treatment every year, it is going to end up costing more and it is going to output more carbon. So authorities really need to look beyond short-term gains. In this case, for example, they need to consider whether it might be better to stick to the original road surface, which may be higher carbon at the outset but require much less carbon to maintain over a 30-year lifecycle.
To properly assess that decision, local authorities will need to have the right data available to them, together with the relevant skills to assess that data and the ability to spend time on it and deliver it. Most importantly they will need the right asset management software solution delivered by a vendor they can trust and that can also deliver expert consultancy on top. If they get that formula right, to broaden the overall picture that informs their highways asset management decisions, including bringing a new environmental dimension into it.
Andy is a marketing leader and business strategist with 30+ years’ experience in the AI and B2B software sector. Working with connected asset management leader, Yotta, Andy heads their marketing function and helps ensure the company’s innovative software drives business benefit for its 200+ public and private sector customers. www.weareyotta.com
Yotta are exhibiting once again at Highways UK this year on 2-3 November at the NEC in Birmingham on stand I4
David Metz, honorary professor at the UCL Centre for Transport Studies, outlines his suggested actions to inform future investment decisions when looking ahead to Road Investment Strategy (RIS3)
The Department for Transport has begun to plan its third Road Investment Strategy (RIS3), the investment programme for the Strategic Road Network (SRN) for 2025-2030. There are a number of headwinds for road investment, in particular safety concerns from the loss of the hard shoulder of smart motorways, and the Net Zero decarbonisation objective.
There is also a question about the economic benefits of adding capacity to major roads. Recent cases of post-opening evaluation of smart motorway schemes showed gross discrepancies between traffic forecasts and projected economic benefits. The M25 Junctions 23-27 all-lane running scheme yielded reduced travel times one year after opening compared with before, but this time saving was negated by year two on account of unanticipated growth in traffic volumes. The M1 J10-13 dynamic hard shoulder running scheme generated lower speeds five years after opening compared with before, resulting in a negative benefit-cost ratio. These findings are consistent with the maxim that we can’t build our way out of congestion, which we know from experience to be generally true.
Inspection of the reports of the traffic and economic modelling of these and other road investments shows substantial projected economic benefits from travel time savings to business users. There are also time savings to local users, commuters and others, but these are entirely offset by increased vehicle operating costs – as motorists reroute to the motorway to save a few minutes travel time at the expense of increased fuel costs.
I suspect that this local rerouting is under-estimated in the traffic modelling generally. While long distance users of a motorway would be unlikely to change their route on account of local congestion, local users have the flexibility to do so. The wide adoption of ‘digital navigation’ (satnav location + digital maps + routing algorithms) that recommends shortest journey time routes increases the opportunities for local users to take advantage of increased motorway capacity. The screenshot from Google Maps illustrates the scope for rerouting of local traffic in the vicinity of the M25 J-23-27 smart motorway scheme.
Our understanding is limited because the evaluation of the outcome of a road scheme is based on monitoring total traffic volumes and speeds, whereas the modelling estimates the benefits to different classes of road user – cars, LGVs, HGVs, business users, non-business commuters and other local users. We could well have outcomes for which total traffic was exactly as forecast but where the composition was quite different from that projected, with more local trips at nil economic benefit displacing the intended longer distance business users, resulting in poor value for money.
Because we do not understand how the composition of traffic changes after a scheme is opened, we are not able to better calibrate our models to improve future traffic forecasts.
More generally, the widespread adoption of digital navigation is changing how the road network is used. The Department for Transport has substantially revised upwards its estimates of traffic on minor roads. This is most likely due to digital navigation making minor routes accessible to those without local knowledge, with the main impact adjacent to congested major roads where a minor road offers an alternative.
The impact of digital navigation has been strangely neglected by road authorities, transport analysts, practitioners, policy makers and researchers. The providers of digital navigation are secretive about the algorithms they use and their performance. The overall effect is to increase the capacity of the road network, but at the cost of more traffic on minor roads that are well suited to active travel. The lack of liaison between providers of navigation services and road authorities means that we are missing opportunities to improve outcomes for road users while reducing environmental harms, in particular when the network is under greatest stress on account of peak traffic volumes or major incidents.
So, in preparation for RIS3, I suggest actions to be initiated to inform future investment decisions:
Develop a more granular methodology for evaluation of road scheme outcomes, to understand the use made of additional capacity by local users.
Develop a better understanding of the impact of digital navigation on traffic patterns, to improve both modelling and network operations.
The roads sector needs to shift its focus from enlarging civil engineering structures to the digital management of traffic flows. Aviation exemplifies how to make best use of assets, both airlines and air traffic control optimising operations, with only exceptional additions to runway and terminal capacity
David Metz is an honorary professor at the UCL Centre for Transport Studies and will be speaking at Highways UK 2022 at the NEC in Birmingham on 2-3 November.
Richard Bradley, Head of Strategy at Midlands Connect, outlines how the Midlands is ready to take the lead on the UK’s clean energy revolution when it comes to hydrogen-fuelled vehicles.
Richard Bradley, Head of Strategy, Midlands Connect
Energy prices are sky high right now and I could hardly believe my eyes when I saw pump prices had reached an eye-watering £1.76 a litre. Fortunately, I’ve already moved to a plug-in electric vehicle and with EV prices improving all the time, it’s clear that change is truly on the horizon.
We know that the age of petrol and diesel powered transport is coming to an end and coupled with the current energy crisis, switching our fuel sources feels very timely. Government has committed to fully carbon neutral transport by 2050 and green technology is already moving fast in the car industry, with public transport operators also finding new ways of making their vehicles zero emission. But what are the viable alternative fuels for long-distance HGVs? With heavy goods vehicles accounting for around 21% of the Midlands’ road-based emissions overall, solutions are needed.
Electric vehicles dominate the green vehicle market today but we urgently need to diversify our power sources for moving freight, in order to maintain a strong and resilient transport network into the future. Midlands Connect is planning infrastructure which ensures hydrogen power can find its home in our region and help provide a route-map to clean energy alternatives across the country.
One option is hydrogen fuelled vehicles generating their own electricity through a chemical reaction inside the vehicle’s internal fuel cell. At Midlands Connect, we think hydrogen presents a promising offer for several reasons; it feels similar to petrol refuelling, can be easily stored at key locations, has minimal safety issues and fast refuelling without drawing electricity straight from the grid.
You may recall the popular book ‘We’re Going on a Bear Hunt’, which many of the Midlands Connect team love to read to their children at bedtime, where we’re reminded that:
‘We can’t go over it.
We can’t go under it.
Oh no! We’ve got to go through it!’
Just like in this famous book, you can’t go over us, under us or through us, so it’s hardly surprising that the Midlands has become the UK’s premier location for warehousing, freight and logistics and is therefore a fantastic candidate for trialling hydrogen HGVs and refuelling.
40% of the Midlands’ economic activity comes from the manufacturing and distribution industries and we are home to around a third of the UK’s warehouse space. Combining this with a long history in the automotive industry, the region has also become a hotbed for academic research in transport.
Now of course we’re a little bit biased, but we’re not the only people who recognise why the Midlands is an ideal location for developing alternative fuels. The Department for Transport agrees and Baroness Vere has asked us to become the lead sub-national transport body for alternative fuels.
We link the north and south, connecting key routes and UK gateways at air, sea and free ports and our planned improvements will increase their resilience. Our development of a network of hydrogen refuelling, recharging and modal interchange hubs at central locations between the region’s two airports will connect key centres for the production of sand and gravel, food and many other heavy goods vital to the UK’s economy.
The Midlands is already leading on hydrogen technology in the UK, with great research centres such as MIRA and Tyseley Energy Park, as well as JCB, who are developing hydrogen internal combustion engines and have recently signed a large deal to build hydrogen construction vehicles right here in the Midlands.
Hydrogen fuel technology for heavy goods vehicles is still relatively new and Government is now seeking suitable locations to test hydrogen trucks through their zero-emission road freight trial funding competition, as outlined in 2021’s Transport Decarbonisation Plan.
The Midlands was a successful bidder with the ‘H2GVMids’ entry, developed in collaboration with Midlands Engine and led by EDF and the Energy Research Accelerator. The H2GVMids partnership includes businesses from the green hydrogen and hydrogen truck supply chain, as well as numerous hauliers, all highly motivated to kickstart this new technology. If successful, H2GVMids could receive some £30 million funding to run truck trials over the next 5 years and build on the Midlands’ proud history in the automotive, freight and logistics industries.
Today, the world of hydrogen technology is filled with questions, variables and possibilities, from how hydrogen is produced and where it comes from, to switching trucks, buses and trains to this fuel. In the Midlands, we stand united and ready to take the lead on the UK’s clean energy revolution. We can’t wait to harness the power of hydrogen.
From the cost of materials to the impact of legislation and foreign tensions, Marie-Claude Hemming, director of operations at The Civil Engineering Contractors Association, outlines what the future holds for contractors.
Marie-Claude Hemming, Director of Operations, CECA
The Government’s radical proposals for reforming the UK’s procurement process will be published in a Bill which goes before Parliament later this year.
The Civil Engineering Contractors Association believes the reforms – if implemented in the spirit in which they are intended – will lead to a reduction in the cost of public procurement and projects which deliver long term social and economic value.
The policy aims will also introduce a simplified approach and clearer route of delivery, allowing the market to arrange itself accordingly.
CECA played an active role in submitting evidence to the Government’s consultation last year, and we note that many of our members’ concerns have been reflected in its response to the Green Paper which was published just before Christmas.
As we look towards the publication of the Bill, CECA will continue to ask members for their views to ensure our engagement with MPs and Peers is totally reflective of our membership.
We are currently seeking particular clarification on the operation of the proposed Dynamic Markets system and on open and closed frameworks and call for industry views to aid our lobbying as the Bill progresses in Parliament.
We will also work with Government to ensure measures introduced to address payment challenges are easy to manage.
We anticipate that the legislation will also embed the principles of the Construction Playbook and the independent review of frameworks, published by Professor David Mosey and the Cabinet Office onto the statute books.
The publication of the Construction Playbook is the result of substantial collaboration across both the public and private sectors to share learning and best practice. It is focused on getting projects and programmes right from the start and is based on a series of key principles and policies to change how government assesses, procures and manages public works projects and programmes.
This means changing public sector attitudes to risk, driving sustainability, and innovation across projects and programmes, learning from existing examples of excellent delivery and bringing the right people together at the very start.
To complement this client step change, industry and its supply chain must also demonstrate and deliver continuous improvement in safety, cost, speed and quality of delivery, data sharing, and training.
Professor David Mosey’s Constructing the Gold Standard: An Independent Review of Public Sector Construction Frameworks sets out 24 ‘Gold Standard’ recommendations, reflecting a range of reflect a range of policies in the Playbook with detailed supporting actions, designed to improve the outcomes delivered by framework strategies, and to avoid the pitfalls of bureaucratic and inconsistent practices.
Clients are already at various stages of the implementing the principles of the Playbook, which was published just over a year ago. The general consensus is that the Playbook is beneficial to the whole of industry, in terms of improving delivery, effective use of resources and improving social value.
CECA members have welcomed the adoption of Playbook principles by some of our key clients. We note however, continued challenges experienced in obtaining meaningful data from client pipelines, combined with unbalanced investment cycles. This makes it increasingly hard to plan and manage resource across all company projects, with a lack of consistency in standardised pipeline information adding to the confusion.
The Construction Playbook has a three-year implementation plan, after which, CECA hopes that all clients, including local authorities and the private sector will be fully adopting the Playbook model, driving efficiencies, innovation and growth for the long term.
2022 will be a busy year for civil engineering contractors with global tensions exacerbating ongoing issues over the cost of materials and shortages of labour.
Notably, CECA is especially concerned over the UK Government’s removal of the tax rebate on the red fuel used by construction businesses in their plant and machinery in April.
We have consistently supported the aims of the policy, which are to reduce emissions and help meet net zero goals but have always stated that delivering greener growth must work for businesses and the consumer.
The legislation also removes the rebate for cleaner fuels. With greener plant and machinery not yet available at scale in the UK or in Europe, firms will simply switch to standard white fuel.
Before the outbreak of the war between Russia and the Ukraine, we estimated that the removal of the red fuel rebate would cost industry up to £500 million a year and each SME construction firm between £250,000 and £600,000 per annum.
Given the current crisis, these costs will now be much higher, with firms seeking to get back any loss in revenue from consumers and taxpayers.
The Civil Engineering Contractors Association continues to support the policy’s aims, but now is not the right time to implement this change. We are calling on Government to delay the introduction of the rules for twelve months to ensure we can continue to Build Back Better in increasingly challenging times.
The Civil Engineering Contractors Association is an official partner of Highways UK, find out more information on their upcoming projects by visiting their website: https://www.ceca.co.uk/
CECA’s Marie-Claude Hemming will be speaking at Highways UK this year on 2-3 November at the NEC in Birmingham.
I think it’s fair to say that the ADEPT SMART Places Live Labs Programme has at times been a wild ride.
What began as a desktop review into the digital transformation of local roads, became a wide-ranging series of trials that battled through complex procurement challenges, a global pandemic and consequent supply chain difficulties, and the redesign and reassessment of technologies, to become a successful showcase for how to implement innovation across local highways. And many of the tested technologies will make a contribution to reaching net zero!
The £22.9million Department for Transport funded two year programme, initiated and designed by ADEPT, was a collaboration of private and public sector, national and global companies, academia and SMEs all working together across eight different Live Labs. Led by a local authority, each Live Lab set up and implemented a number of trials across data, communications, materials, energy and mobility.
Trials have included:
Harvesting kinetic energy from pavements to power digital screens and provide public charging points
Using thermal energy to de-ice carparks plus light and heat workshops
Using solar surfacing on roads to power buildings
Trialling using sensors, VivaCity cameras on waste lorries and drones to assess highways and local roads’ maintenance needs
Creating composite recycled lighting columns with sensors
Examining last mile mobility
Testing the environmental sustainability and quality of using waste plastics in roads
Creating data analytics to support air quality management areas and public health
Managing congestion using data and video analytics to create personalised travel planning through understanding travel behaviour
The results have far surpassed initial expectations, with key outcomes for the programme also encompassing behavioural change, cross-authority collaboration and a re-examination of public sector approaches to risk and innovation. Central to the programme has also been commercialisation, and the final outputs will include a series of business cases from each Live Lab. These will detail the technical, commercial and supporting data that will enable other local authorities and the wider sector to assess the suitability of an innovation for its own geography and needs.
Many of the lead authorities are taking their work beyond the lifetime of their Live Lab, creating internal cross-sector Innovation and Technology Boards and attracting additional funding and resource opportunities. Others are working with councils outside the programme, for example to discuss how ‘living walls’ can be incorporated into local bus strategies to improve localised air quality. There has even been crossover to other sectors, with two Live Labs exploring how their technology could be used to support adult social care.
Of course, the programme has not been without its own challenges, and if we are successful in moving forward with Live Labs 2, there is much we can build on and incorporate into a new programme.
In the early days, the interpretation of procurement rules differed widely across local authorities, to the extent that some lost the first six months of the two year programme trying to resolve issues. Fast innovation projects cannot bear that sort of delay and we will need to design a new flexible approach that can work through contractual restraints at pace. Although most Live labs were able to adapt to setbacks, for projects that were hugely ambitious and complex in scope, some problems proved difficult to overcome, also resulting in delays.
This type of evaluation and shared learning is all part of the Live Labs ethos. We set out to capture everything – the successes, the challenges, outcomes and failures – and make it all publicly available. We have published white papers, reports, articles and blogs as well as taken part in webinars, conferences and delivered two Live Lab Expos. I would also encourage you to watch the Women in Transport video, where our four female project leads discuss their careers and what it takes to be a female leader in the highways sector with ADEPT CEO, Hannah Bartram. It’s both illuminating and inspiring!
I’d like to thank our lead authorities – Buckinghamshire Council, Central Bedfordshire Council, Cumbria County Council, Kent County Council, Reading Borough Council, Staffordshire County Council, Suffolk County Council and Transport for West Midlands – for their tenacity, humour and creativity, exactly the approach you need when a global pandemic gets in the way of the best laid plans!
Suffolk County Council is setting up a platform where the business cases will be freely available, and you will be able to find details for this when its ready, and much more, on the ADEPT website: www.adeptnet.org.uk/livelabs.
The ADEPT SMART Places Programme is a five-year project examining and developing innovation to enable the adoption of innovative and digital technology across the local highway network. The initial research report ‘Digital Innovation: The route to the highways systems of the future’ was published in October 2017. In January 2019, ADEPT secured £22.9 million funding from the Department for Transport for Phase 3 of the programme, which sees the development of eight individual Live Labs projects led by local authorities across England with university and private sector partners. The Live Labs are piloting innovation across SMART communications, transport, highways maintenance, energy, materials and mobility. The ADEPT SMART Places programme has been developed with partners: SNC-Lavalin’s Atkins business, EY, Kier, 02, Ringway and WSP.
The Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport (ADEPT) represents local authority county, unitary and metropolitan Place Directors. Operating at the strategic tier of local government, members are responsible for delivering public services that primarily relate to the physical environment and the economy, but which have a significant impact on all aspects of the nation’s well-being. ADEPT represents members’ interests by proactively engaging central Government on emerging policy and issues, promoting initiatives aimed at influencing Government policy and through the development of best practices and responding to European and UK Government initiatives and consultations. Out wider membership includes Local Enterprise Partnerships, Combined Authorities, Sub-national Transport Bodies and Corporate Partners.
Delivering Vision Zero will be challenging and resource intensive. The timeframe for delivery also requires focus on what matters most in reducing the number and severity of casualties says Jeremy Phillips, leader of CEDR’s Working Group on Road Safety
The ambition to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries (KSI) on our road networks, often to zero and within relatively short timeframes, is shared amongst several countries and individual road administrations across Europe.
In England, National Highways’ own ambition, for example, is to achieve Vision Zero (in which no one dies or is seriously injured as a consequence of working or travelling on its network) by 2040.
Safe travel is, in general terms, achieved when safe people travel in safe vehicles on safe roads. While national road administrations have direct control over just one of those factors – safe roads – they can exert a wider influence over factors that are linked to collision and casualty reduction. Supporting road users in achieving safe and compliant behaviours, and motivating vehicle manufacturers to design for greater safety are examples of the wider influence exerted by road administrations.
Safe roads remain, however, the area in which the greatest influence may be exerted. It is in this context that CEDR’s Working Group on Road Safety has considered the main challenges that will be faced by roads directors over the next five to ten years. They have outlined the challenges in a position paper which will be discussed at the Conference of European Directors of Roads (CEDR), which is taking place as part of this year’s Highways UK.
The challenges outlined include ensuring a strong link between road safety ambitions and the sustainability agenda. And acknowledging and exploiting areas of common purpose, such as managed speeds for injury reduction, collision avoidance and pollution control.
The paper also acknowledges the importance of delivering safety across the entire road network. There are clear benefits derived from enhancing the safety of routes that carry the highest flows of traffic. But a vision for zero KSI requires that all roads need to deliver the same level of performance, and consequently require proportionate levels of investment. The pathway to achieving this will be one of prioritisation. This presents a further challenge to roads administrators to share data and intelligence, to help ensure that we collectively achieve the greatest good for the greatest number in the shortest possible time.
Similarly, the paper recognises that a zero KSI ambition requires that enhanced safety is provided for all categories of road user. This is a challenge that becomes more demanding as the types of roads for which an administration is responsible becomes wider. Physical infrastructure to segregate modes, especially those most vulnerable to injury, and to protect those working on the highway will be an important contributor. But it will also be a challenge where road space is limited.
New technologies, including digitisation, are likely to make a significant contribution to casualty reduction. Roads authorities have a role to play in supporting technological advancement, especially in providing the data that will enable more digitised vehicles to operate efficiently. There will also be challenges in managing the transition period between now, and a future in which connected and autonomous vehicles are dominant.
Delivering Vision Zero will not be easy and it will require considerable resource to achieve. The relatively short time period over which this needs to be done also means that road administrations will need to focus on the measures that matter most, and which are most likely to ensure fewer casualties. The Working Group for Road Safety’s paper will help to provide that focus, whilst accepting that decisions about priorities will be greatly influenced by the challenges faced by each road administration in their own jurisdiction.
Jeremy Phillips is the Leader of the Conference of European Directors of Roads (CEDR) Working Group on Road Safety. He is also Head of Road User Safety at National Highways. His presentation: The Main Road Safety Challenges for European Roads Directors for the next five to ten years – towards Vision Zero, will be held in the National Highways theatre at 9.45 – 10.00 on Thursday 4 November at Highways UK.
We need to see a cultural change towards approaches to carbon, says John Dixon, Jacobs’ Vice President and Highways Market Director, and we should take inspiration from the transformationl improvements in safety achieved within the sector over the last 20 years
Over the last 20 years we can take pride in the transformational improvements made in health, safety and wellbeing in the highways sector. Key to this has been the significant investments in cultural safety programmes. This has driven a mindset change throughout the value chain, with so many more people now choosing to do the right thing and lead the way on safety, regardless of their level of experience or seniority. These were ‘no regrets’ investments that in many cases have yielded delivery and bottom-line business benefits, as well as improved safety performance.
Just like safety, carbon reduction now demands the full and absolute focus of the industry over the next thirty years, but critically over the rest of this decade. There is so much we can do together to reduce carbon emissions in highway infrastructure solutions, and we have the talent to do it.
If we look at how safety has now become embedded into organisations’ business strategies and operations, we can take inspiration to do the same with carbon. Many of you will be familiar with having a ‘safety moment’ at the start of each meeting. This is one relatively small feature of a typical safety programme that places health, safety and wellbeing management at its heart. Perhaps the next time you’re holding a meeting you could think about also having a ‘carbon moment,’ and help place carbon reduction at the centre of your organisation?
In addition to safety moments other features of the safety culture change architecture include leadership commitment training, all staff orientation training, staff-led action groups, observation records/’don’t walk bys’ and stand downs, amongst others. Drawing on this existing architecture we can make a running start to embed carbon management in our organisations, crucial to driving environmental, social and economic growth within our sector.
There are some challenges to this, with few organisations implementing transformational change in the same way. This has been the case with safety management. Imagine how much faster it might have been if everyone adopted the same approach, whether that be highway authorities/clients or suppliers, especially when the goal of zero accidents or harm has been so universally sought by the sector.
Adoption of a common standard to frame our investment and transformation therefore makes perfect sense for carbon, as net zero is the goal we are all striving for. PAS 2080 ‘Carbon Management in Infrastructure’ is increasingly being adopted and promoted in the highways sector. It provides a systematic way for managing whole life carbon in infrastructure delivery that the industry could use to accelerate improvement. This is a flexible standard that can be applied to different project types, sizes and stages. If we use it as a means to facilitate consistency and collaboration at pace we stand a better chance of making a difference on time!
The sooner we see a cultural change towards approaches to carbon, the sooner we can meet our net zero targets, and ensure better business performance, reduced costs, increased competitiveness and innovation. We need to build on what we’ve achieved so far, and make sure our highways are fit for a truly sustainable world.
John Dixon is speaking at Highways UK in the Main Theatre panel Getting serious: climate action towards net zero which takes place at 10.40 on 3 November. Other panelists include Rachel Skinner, Ben Harris, Jamie Bardot and Elliot Shaw.
Fiona O’Donnell, Jacob’s Head of Health, Safety and Environemnt (HSE) outlines her organisation’s efforts to break down the barriers that hinder honest conversations about mental health and encourage an open culture of support around the globe
How would you feel if you had a tool that allowed you to check your mental health regularly to spot early warning signs, avoid prolonged suffering and treatment and increase your mental resilience? That’s what our One Million Lives campaign is all about, and I’m proud to be its champion…
At Jacobs we’ve been supporting the mental health of our colleagues for a long time by hosting a mental health resilience programme, dealing with topics such as navigating the challenges of lockdown, how to build resilience and coping with grief.
However, insights from the programme, combined with feedback received from mental health champions, employee surveys and conversations with mental health experts all highlighted the need for more proactive and preventative solutions. And that’s where we decided to develop ‘One Million Lives.’
Launched in December 2020 One Million Lives is a complimentary campaign accessible to everyone, no matter where you live, or who you work for. It’s as relevant to people working in the Highways sector as to any other area of activity. Many people don’t have access to corporate resources or Employee Assistance Programs, so we wanted to develop a tool that detects early signs of mental distress and offers proactive strategies, such as sleep, exercise, and social media behaviours.
Our goal? To break down the barriers that hinder honest conversations about mental health and encourage an open culture of support around the globe.
To complement the app we developed a website with additional resources to help you to engage with the One Million Lives campaign and help you with your mental health growth. By inviting people to routinely check-in to see how they are doing and encourage their own networks to do the same, we hope more people will become aware of their state of mental health.
While still in its infancy, the data collected to date (14,000 check-ins) has already helped us at Jacobs to gain insights into the mental wellbeing of our employees, and allowed us to make informed, data-driven decisions in response.
We, and many other organisations believe that this campaign has the potential to transform our collective approach to mental health. But ultimately One Million Lives is more than just about an app or a website. It’s about encouraging everyone to have open and honest conversations.
To learn more about One Million Lives make sure you look out for Fiona’s session at Highways UK running on the Big Thinking Stage at 2pm on 4 November. Highways UK is free to attend, book your place now
National Highway’s puts customers at the core of everything it does. And it’s vital, says Customer Experience Director Pete Martin, that everyone in our business and supply chain understands how they can make a difference for our customers and are empowered to do so
Think about the last time you bought a branded product; perhaps an electrical appliance like a TV. It’s highly likely you did some research before pressing the ‘buy’ button. You probably looked at various price points, delivery times and warrantee options. Before making a final commitment, you may also have looked at customer reviews; not just about the product but also about the service of the company selling. Ultimately, your final selection was probably down to trust in the company you selected to deliver your product on time and in great condition.
But what happens when there’s less choice for your customers? And fewer tangible touchpoints like a point of sale or a friendly note when they receive their shiny new product. How do you gain, and retain, the trust of your customer base and make them feel like you care?
That’s the challenge we face at National Highways every day. We know that many of our customers don’t have a choice about whether to travel on our roads. But they can choose to listen to us, to follow our advice or use our information, and they can choose to trust us. Their expectations and experiences matter hugely to us, which is why customer service is one of our top priorities.
Our first customer service strategy, launched in 2016, has played an essential role in putting customers at the core of how we work. But our customers are diverse, and their needs are changing. So, we need to keep driving change and improving on those things our customers are telling us mean the most to them.
Since late last year we’ve been undertaking a review of our strategy to ensure it reflects the evolving expectations of both the people who use our roads and those who live and work near them. In May 2021, we released our new strategy: Making a difference for our customers. The new strategy is evolutionary. It’s built on greater insight and analysis into what really matters to our customers, as well as our performance goals for the second Road Period. It also recognises our customers’ changing needs in relation to travel patterns, the environment and technology.
The new strategy focuses on building capability by empowering our people and developing better relationships with our customers. This will help us improve how we deliver the basics, operate a well maintained and safe network, and provide better information for our customers.
For example, we’re making improvements to our roadside signs and signals so that they display information that is helpful and relevant to our customers. At the same time, we’ve enhanced how our operators set these signs through virtual reality training. This immersive training brings to life the broader impact of incidents on our customers, encouraging operators to ask, ‘If I were the customer, what information would I like to have in this situation?’
We also want to make sure that contacting us is easy and stress-free for all our customers. We’ve introduced the video relay service, SignLive to our contact centre so that our Deaf customers have equal access to this service. And if someone breaks down on our roads and is unable to use a SOS phone due to an impairment, they can now text us on 07380 283 600 for roadside assistance
Ultimately, we want to enable our customers to have better end-to-end experiences and feel confident that they’ll have a safe and reliable journey.
To help deliver our customer service strategy, it’s vital that everyone in our business and supply chain understands how they can make a difference for our customers and be empowered to do so. We all need to understand which areas of customer experience we can contribute to, and where we can do more.
Pete Martin is National Highways’ Customer Experience Director. To find out more about working together to make a difference for customers, come to Pete’s talk at Highways UK, which is running in the National Highways Theatre on 3 November, 14.15-14.35
What does equity, diversity and inclusion (ED&I) mean to you? asks Rachel Billington Head of Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (ED&I), Europe at AECOM. Is it a more diverse workforce? Is it flexible working? Getting students interested in STEM? A bid requirement? Or is it something that’s for the human resources department to deal with?
From my perspective, it’s not one of the above, it’s all of the above and so much more. Yes, it means recruiting a more diverse workforce, it means rounder educational opportunities and it means there are some legal obligations around it too as part of the Equality Act 2010. And any of us involved in bids know ED&I is nowadays routinely mandated in procurement.
But the responsibility for a workforce where everyone has fair opportunity, which is diverse and where people feel included, is also down to every single one of us. In an organisation where ED&I truly works, the principles are integrated both at a corporate and personal level.
Many people think ED&I is about celebrating difference and events, and this is really important, but there is more to it if you want to really bring about cultural change. This means at a corporate level ensuring a robust and effective strategy, with supporting governance, to encourage ED&I. This not only locks-in good practice, it sets a precedent about the values of that company, which can cascade down from management to staff. But how well does industry do this?
When we’re thinking about ourselves and our impact on ED&I, it involves taking a step back and thinking about what we do and how our own biases can impact others. Whether that’s an off-the-cuff comment or a decision about staffing.
On a personal level, the issue can sometimes include behaviours we’re not aware of. At AECOM I recently held a webinar on microaggressions and the negative impact on the way they make people feel in the workplace. Have you ever been in a situation where the only woman in a meeting is automatically asked to take notes or a person from a different ethnicity being asked where they’re really from? Some of these microaggressions don’t come from malice, but how can we deal with these situations better? How can we raise awareness?
I believe a good place to start is to become comfortable in having difficult discussions. One way we have done this at AECOM is by launching our employee resource groups, or ERGs. By sharing experiences, ideas and opinions, we can better understand why ED&I is important to the industry, but also understand what challenges the industry and our people face when dealing with the issues which arise from this.
It’s not a new issue, so we need to take stock and ask ourselves whether we’ve made tangible progress and what has worked well. And how well are we engaging leaders and holding them to account for delivering meaningful change in industry?
Rachel Billington is Head of Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (ED&I), Europe at AECOM. She is convening a panel at Highways UK on 3 November to explore these issues further and will be joined by Ron Calderwood-Duncan – Head of EDI & Engagement at National Highways, Jyoti Sehdev – Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Lead at Costain, and Rory Poole, Roads Sector Leader, UK & Ireland at AECOM.
Road use charging is back on the agenda. While the economic and environmental arguments stack up, public acceptability will be a significant challenge. Getting this right is important and the infrastructure sector, says Stantec’s Dougie McDonald, must actively engage with Government to influence policy development
Over the past 50 years there has been extensive research and assessment of the benefits and challenges of different approaches to directly charging for road use in the UK. Until relatively recently, the London Congestion Charge and M6toll provided the only two examples of implementation of large-scale schemes, other than estuarial crossings.
Now road user charging (RUC) is back on the agenda, this time due to the emergence of a roads policy ‘trilemma’ for the Government to solve. This consists of the need to decarbonise our roads network to meet climate change commitments, a potential £40billion blackhole in Government finances from the associated mass adoption of electric vehicles and fuel tax loss, and the ongoing necessity of supporting economic growth through free-flowing road-network connectivity—particularly as we seek to close the lost economic performance from the pandemic.
Current policy proposals can comfortably address particular aspects of the trilemma; however, it is likely that all three issues will need to be addressed over time. As a result, there is renewed interest in RUC in the UK and its role on our future road systems.
Applying RUC anywhere comes with significant known challenges. We have to consider the best technology, which parts of the network it will be applied to, and different approaches between cars and heavy goods. We must assess the impact on different social groups, particularly low-income, marginalised groups, and those with few options other than a car and travel at certain times of the day. RUC schemes collect a large amount of data on the travel habits of millions of people—meaning privacy is a challenge. And finally timing and transition are key as the Government has set ambitious targets for a net zero UK.
Taken together, these challenges all lead towards the issue of acceptability whereby the public feel confident and willing to use toll systems.
Trials in the United States have shown the importance of equity and privacy arrangements, and that rural, low income groups and certain ethnicities may be more difficult to convince of the merits of RUC. Lessons from schemes in Europe and Asia/Pacific show the importance of demonstrating how funds raised can support public transport improvements or environmental gains. These schemes show that the technology is ready for RUC implementation and that “back office” account management arrangements are important.
In the UK, an upgrade programme has begun to improve the tolling system on the M6toll, introducing new digital systems and enabling broader interactions with the user base who complete 18 million journeys annually, or around 50,000 every day.
Public acceptability of a new RUC system will be a significant challenge, so the infrastructure sector must actively engage with Government to influence policy development.
Dougie McDonald is Stantec’s UK Regional Director for Transport. He is speaking with Andy Cliffe, CEO of Midlands Expressway, in a session at Highways UK at 9.30am on 4 November which will further explore current trends in road user charging and lessons learned. Highways UK takes place at the NEC, Birmingham on 3/4 November. It is free to attend, register now!