IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

'Devolution' of transport powers to Local Government: Impacts of the 2004 Traffic Management Act in England

Listed author(s):
  • Canning, Paul E.
  • Hellawell, Emma E.
  • Hughes, Susan J.
  • Gatersleben, Birgitta C.M.
  • Fairhead, Christopher J.
Registered author(s):

    The concept of 'Devolution'--the transfer of powers away from the Central Government to more local bodies of Government, has been used across many different areas of policy and by many different national governments. This paper examines the devolution of transport powers to the existing Local Traffic Authorities in England via the 2004 Traffic Management Act. The paper first presents a summary of how several different nations have undertaken this process of devolving transport powers and responsibilities to either new or existing bodies. It then presents research from an electronic survey concerning how English Local Traffic Aut`horities are choosing to use some of the new powers available to them and their opinion on complementary areas of transport policy. Research is also presented from structured telephone interviews, concerning how individual Local Authorities perceive the efficacy and equity of the new legislation. Overall, the results show that only some of these new powers are likely to be used by English Local Authorities, with limited variation in how different types of LTA are choosing to implement these new powers. The structured telephone interviews provided some evidence that rural Authorities in particular are more dissatisfied with the legislation and consider some of the measures unhelpful. The results provide some insights on the formulation of devolved policy applicable to existing Local Government bodies and the varying benefits that can be perceived to apply to different types of Local Authority. Conclusions are drawn on some of the practical difficulties arising from the English experience, and lessons of relevance are drawn for other nations considering a similar devolution of transport powers.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Transport Policy.

    Volume (Year): 17 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 2 (March)
    Pages: 64-71

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:17:y:2010:i:2:p:64-71
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64, pages 416-416.
    2. Taylor, Brian D. & Schweitzer, Lisa, 2005. "Assessing the experience of mandated collaborative inter-jurisdictional transport planning in the United States," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 500-511, November.
    3. Lee, R. W. & Rivasplata, C. R., 2001. "Metropolitan transportation planning in the 1990s: comparisons and contrasts in New Zealand, Chile and California," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 47-61, January.
    4. Lee, R.W. & Rivasplata, C.R., 2001. "Metropolitan Transportation Planning in the 1990s: Comparisons and Contrasts in New Zealand, Chile and California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6sb5p14g, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:17:y:2010:i:2:p:64-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.