A bridge, some bicycles and the benefit of time

It has been quite the week here in Aotearoa - actually it has been quite the few weeks, months even - for safe streets activists, cycling advocates and those more broadly seeking real action on the country’s promised climate ambition and the transformation of our transport system that this ambition requires.

Perhaps amplified by the angst surrounding recent Low Traffic Neighbourhood and Innovating Streets trials, the Liberate the Lane protest last Sunday (30 May) on Auckland’s Harbour Bridge – and subsequent announcements to reshape the country’s transport investment – have sparked some interesting kōrero across a whole range of different platforms – and not just the usual anti-cycling debate that follows any bicycle-related media attention.

One of the most interesting has been the concerns raised about equity, accessibility, and representation as we seek to make our transport system safer, less carbon intensive, more efficient, resilient and equitable. There are a host of different threads and discussions that canvas these issues, and I would encourage anyone to seek them out, read them, and most importantly, to digest and reflect on them.

It is often easy to just focus on, and push back at, criticism and critique, particularly as our social media structures obscure nuance, require brevity and amplify conflict. However, it is important to use opportunities like this to reflect and reconsider how inclusive and equitable our words and actions actually are, and whether we are living up to our own aspirations.

A range of different authors have written on this topic much more eloquently and articulately than I ever could (see for example threads on Twitter from Jason Boberg, Rhys Jones and David Hall), however there is one small contribution that I would like to make and that is to reiterate the benefit of time.

"Also politics is messy. You can do the right thing for the wrong reasons. You can do the wrong thing for the right reasons. With collective action, it’s usually a case of scattered results for scattered reasons. It’s OK to admit that a political action isn’t perfect / faultless!"
[David Hall, via Twitter]

Often when we think of inequality and poverty in relation to the accessibility of alternatives (one of the main themes in this past week’s discussion), we think primarily of dollars and cents, of material wealth, or lack thereof. We equate affordability to accessibility. However, for many, time plays as critical, if not more critical, a consideration in both their ability to access more sustainable options, and also to engage in the process of change.

The two - time and wealth - are obviously inter-twined. Those with more wealth are likely to have more choice in how and when they use the time available to them – or even the ability to ‘create time’ by bringing in support and resources to help. Those who are less affluent could be juggling multiple jobs and a range of roles in order to earn enough for basic essentials and so have less time to do or consider anything else. Roles and professions that demand higher salaries are also often more likely to provide for greater flexibility in how the work is delivered.

So, as we consider our path forward in the critical transformation of our systems and structures, we need to think not just of the material cost and/or savings in the options being put forward, but also whether they help to address the paucity of time that we have to deal with, or whether they add to that burden. We also need to think more cleverly about how we engage with those who are time poor so that those views and perspectives are not lost as we progress.

Throughout my work, I have argued that we need better indicators of economic success and societal wellbeing than those simply focused on wealth and finance. Perhaps one future measure could look at how well our societies and economies are creating time for its people. How, through our systems and structures, we are enabling people to engage in, participate and support the communities that will be so critical to our future resilience and sustainability.