Last updated: 10/09/2024
Invest in active transport
Invest £500 million over five years in Local Authorities (LAs) to plan and deliver active transport
- Low impact on obesity
A percentage estimate of how much the policy would reduce national obesity rates
- Relative reduction in obesity prevalence: 0.4%
- This policy has limited impact for reducing national obesity rates. It is beneficial for other health outcomes including mental health and wellbeing.
- Low evidence quality
A rating of the strength of evidence, accounting for both reliability and validity of the evidence
- Reliability and validity rating: 2/5
- High cost to governments
Cost to UK and devolved governments over 5 years
- Costs to governments over 5 years: £500m
- Benefit to governments per year: £0.1bn
What is the policy?
This policy would invest £500 million over five years in local authorities (LAs) to support the planning and delivery of active transport initiatives. Active transport refers to modes of transport that involve physical activity, such as walking, cycling, and other non-motorised forms of travel.
LAs would have the flexibility to utilise these funds for various purposes, such as:
- Infrastructure development: Constructing or improving pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, including pavements, bike lanes, multi-use trails, pedestrian crossings, and other amenities that enhance safety and accessibility for active modes of transport.
- Urban planning and design: Integrating active transport considerations into urban planning processes, promoting mixed-use development, and creating pedestrian-friendly neighbourhoods with improved connectivity and accessibility.
- Public awareness and education campaigns: Launching campaigns to raise awareness about the benefits of, and promote use of, active transport among residents.
- Incentive programmes: Implementing incentive programmes to encourage people to choose active transport options, such as bike-share schemes, subsidised public transit passes, or employer-sponsored initiatives.
Recent context
Active Travel England (ATE) is an executive agency set up by the Department for Transport in 2022 to manage walking, wheeling, and cycling policy. ATE’s objective is for 50% of trips in England’s towns and cities to be walked, wheeled, or cycled by 2030. As a statutory consultee, ATE will help planning authorities implement good walking, wheeling and cycling infrastructure. ATE has been involved in several funding initiatives, such as a £101 million investment to boost cycling and walking nationwide, and a £60 million government investment to transform the school run for two million children.
In Wales, the Active Travel Act (2013) is the main legislative driver to promote active travel, including walking, cycling and wheeling. It places a legal duty on the Welsh Government to improve active travel provision across Wales and on LAs to develop and implement Active Travel Network Maps. It is supported by Llwybr Newydd – the Wales Transport Strategy, the National Transport Delivery Plan and subsequent Active Travel Delivery Plan 2024 to 2027.
The Active Travel Delivery Plan focuses on goals and actions to increase investment, encourage behavioural change and focus on safety. The Welsh Government works collaboratively with partners such as Sustrans and Transport Wales to meet its objective to increase the number of journeys by active travel or public transport by 45% by 2040.
In Scotland, the Active Travel Framework brings together the key policy approaches to improving the uptake of walking and cycling in Scotland for travel. It has been produced collaboratively by Transport Scotland and key delivery partners, with input from Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) and LAs. As part of their Just Transition Strategy, the Scottish Government also has the target of reducing car kilometres by 20% by 2030, driven in part by a greater use of active travel. In the last budget, the Scottish Government committed to spending £220 million on active travel nationally and use of this is monitored by Transport Scotland.
Case studies
The University of Bristol Travel Plan, Bristol, UK
The University of Bristol implemented a Travel Plan in 2009. The plan aimed to reduce car usage by limiting and increasing the cost of parking while simultaneously promoting alternative modes of transport.
An evaluation of the plan revealed:
- the percentage of respondents who reported walking to work 4-5 times per week increased from 19% to 30%
- the percentage of respondents who reported cycling to work 4-5 times per week increased from 7% to 12%
- the percentage of respondents who commuted by car decreased from 50% to 33%.
Conservative estimates suggest that approximately 70% of employees who regularly cycled or walked to work met at least 80% of the recommended 150 minutes of weekly physical activity. Additionally, around 70% of those who sometimes walked or cycled (two to three times per week) were estimated to meet at least 40% of their physical activity recommendations.
Car-free Livability Programme, Norway
Oslo has been implementing a Car-free Livability Programme since 2016 to create a greener, more pedestrian-friendly city centre by reducing private car traffic and parking spaces. The programme was launched in response to Oslo’s rapid population growth, poor air quality from vehicle emissions, and a desire to prioritise people over cars in urban spaces.
The programme was implemented in three phases from 2016 to 2019, removing nearly 800 parking spaces, closing some streets to vehicles, extending bike lanes and pedestrian areas, and hosting community events to activate public spaces.
An evaluation showed an 11%–19% reduction in car traffic in the city centre from 2016 to 2019, along with increases in pedestrian activity, cycling, and public transit use, though effects were localised.
Considerations for implementation
Allocating the £500 million budget strategically and prioritising projects based on impact and feasibility is a key step. Identifying which LAs to target to have the largest impact on health, and assessing existing infrastructure for walking and cycling is crucial. Identifying gaps, safety issues, and areas needing improvement will guide decision-making. LAs should collaborate with community leaders, residents, businesses, and organisations to gather input and ensure buy-in.
Estimating the population impact
We estimated that this policy would reduce the prevalence of adult UK obesity rates by approximately 0.4%
Estimating the per-person impact
We estimated that this policy would lead to approximately 15 additional minutes of physical activity for affected individuals
Goodman et al. (2014) found that active travel infrastructure leads to an additional 15 minutes of walking or cycling per week. We made an assumption that as a result of the policy, 50% of people living with excess weight would now be engaged in 15 additional minutes of physical activity in the form of walking or cycling per week. This is approximately 2.14 minutes of physical activity per day.
We used the following equation to calculate the energy expenditure resulting from the increased physical activity: Energy expenditure = [(metabolic equivalent x 3.5 x body weight kg)/200] x time spent doing activity (see the following references for more details 1, 2, 3).
We took values for the metabolic equivalent (MET) of walking and cycling as 3 and 6 respectively. For calculating the energy expenditure, we assumed an average MET value of 4.5. Using these inputs and body weights of individuals from the health survey data we calculated the energy expenditure in calories for each individual and assumed the energy expenditure as being the equivalent of a calorie reduction for our modelling. Further, we assumed that individuals do not compensate for the additional physical activity, given the light nature of the physical activity and the small time period for which it is done.
Estimating the population reach
In our analytical model, we applied the effect sizes to people living with overweight or obesity. For adults, that is people aged 18 or above with a BMI of 25+. Further, we assume that £500 mil would be distributed to 5 local authorities at £100 mil each. We find that on average local authorities (County, Unitary Authority, Boroughs and Metropolitan districts) together make up 151 units with an average population of 293,135 people. Implementing the policy in 5 local authorities @ £100 mil per authority implies that ~ 1,465,675 individuals would be exposed to the policy. Further, given that the proportion of people living with excess weight in England is ~ 66% of the population, which equals 967,346 individuals.
Changes in the prevalence of people living with obesity
As a result of the effect sizes identified in the literature, our modelling suggests this policy would lead to a 0.4% and a 0.6% reduction in prevalence of obesity among adults in England and Scotland respectively. We are in the process of estimating the impact of this policy for children and will publish findings when complete.
| Adults (England and Wales) | Children (England and Wales) | Adults (Scotland) | Children (Scotland) |
| 0.4% | In progress | 0.6% | In progress |
Cost and benefits
Cost over 5 years
We estimated that this policy would cost the governments approximately £500 million over five years
Table 2 presents the costs. Given the nature of the policy, a literature review to identify costs to governments and industry was not required.
| Group affected | Cost | Horizon | Detail |
| Costs | |||
| Government | £0.5bn | Annual (5 years) | Implementing active travel infrastructure |
Total annual benefit
We estimated that this policy would have an annual benefit of approximately £0.1 billion
Using analysis conducted by the Tony Blair Institute and Frontier Economics we estimate this policy would result in benefits of approximately £0.1 billion per year via obesity reduction. Approximately two-thirds of this saving would benefit individuals (via quality-adjusted life years, and informal social care). The remaining third relates to savings that benefit the state via NHS treatment costs, productivity and formal social care. It is feasible that other health benefits (unrelated to obesity prevalence) may lead to cost saving health benefits, but it was beyond the scope of this project to review and estimate these. See our Methods page for more information about the cost breakdowns.
Impact on disease incidence
We commissioned HealthLumen to report disease incidence avoided if the policy were implemented. These estimates do not represent the total health benefits. Table 3 presents a summary of disease incidence avoided.
The specific diseases selected are those where there is good evidence that living with obesity is associated with the development of the disease.
| Disease | Incidence avoided |
| Type 2 diabetes | Not statistically significant |
| Hypertension | Not statistically significant |
| Coronary heart disease | Not statistically significant |
| Colorectal cancer | Not statistically significant |
| Gall bladder disease | Not statistically significant |
| Ovarian cancer | Not statistically significant |
| Stroke | Not statistically significant |
| Liver cancer | Not statistically significant |
| Depression | Not statistically significant |
| Musculoskeletal disease | Not statistically significant |
Behind the averages: impact on inequalities
By investing in a safe and accessible active transport infrastructure, the policy can promote social inclusion and reduce isolation for marginalised groups. It could make it easier and safer for people to access essential services, employment opportunities and recreational facilities without relying on private vehicles.
Rating the strength of evidence
We asked experts working in the fields of obesity, food, and health research to rate the strength of the evidence base for each policy, taking into account both reliability (size and consistency) and validity (quality and content) of the evidence. Policies were rated on a Likert scale of 1–5 (none, limited, medium, strong, and very strong evidence base). The Blueprint Expert Advisory Group rated this policy as having a Limited evidence base due to there being limited evaluations of policies implementing active transport infrastructure.
Extend access to universal healthy free school meals
Introduce universal free healthy school meals for all primary school children during term time