The approach of deciding where to add connections and capacity to our transport networks based on predictions of future demand for travel, by whatever means, and then facilitating that travel (as long as it was by a private car, van or lorry) may finally be over.
Well, almost – announcements in the recent Budget about more funding for Lower Thames Crossing, mean that ‘predict & provide’ may still be kicking around for a while yet in the UK. Meanwhile ‘across the pond’ the US Government has just committed $13 billion to widening Interstate 45 in Houston and nearly $11 billion on the New Jersey Turnpike, so perhaps the fallacy of ‘building your way out of trouble’ has some legs still in some quarters.
In the main though, the tide seems to be turning, albeit slowly. Many transport planners have been arguing for years (mainly amongst ourselves) that predict and provide is neither affordable, sustainable or, frankly, logical.
Insanity is often defined as ‘doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result (Einstein never actually said this by the way). Planning for the future based on what we’ve done in the past despite all the negative impacts of this behaviour is, when you think about it, an equally valid definition. You only have to look at the number of lanes added to freeways around Los Angeles, or our own M25, to realise that doubling-down on past mistakes won’t end well…..
So what’s the alternative?
It’s not unreasonable perhaps to work out what you want to achieve and then work out how you’re going to get there. Like buying ingredients for a meal or decorating your house. Some practitioners have been doing ‘objective-led’ rather than ‘solution-led’ planning for some time, particularly in the education sector and, since the late 2010s, in transport planning too. This approach seems more logical than ‘predict and provide’ and has grown in popularity perhaps due to the need to reduce carbon emissions or perhaps due to a shift towards more people-centric planning.
Since the early 2020s, terms such as ‘decide and provide’ and ‘vision and validate’ have emerged as new epithets for ‘objective-led’. The DfT and National Highways were early adopters in DfT Circular 1/2022 on sustainable development and the strategic road network.
Here at City Science ‘vision and validate’ is at the heart of our mission to help our clients on the journey to sustainability and net zero. Coming up with a clear vision, and a robust plan to there, has become the norm across our transport, planning and energy consultancy commissions.
Perhaps most interesting is the application of ‘vision and validate’ in land use planning. It is here where the December 2026 deadline to submit Local Plans for examination under the current planning system has prompted a flurry of recent activity across the country. City Science is supporting several planning authorities by providing transport evidence and preparing Strategic Transport Assessments.
Whilst everyone is (rightly) doing things in a way which reflects their local context, most are grappling with what ‘vision and validate’ means in the context of Local Plans and transport investment. In truth, the ‘vision’ part is relatively straightforward: the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and guidance such as that from Active Travel England, provide a strong steer on what people-centric, sustainable development should look like.
The ’validate’ part is more difficult to deal with in practice, as it is multi-faceted and requires a degree of iteration aimed at working towards the vision. However it is this iteration which adds value to the process as it allows for reflection and improvement. In our experience with Local Plans, ‘validate’ can refer to:
- Testing whether the vision is the future that the general public aspires to through consultation.
- Challenging and checking the assumptions made during the plan development process, for example trip rates.
- Assessing the extent to which the proposed transport interventions achieve the intended outcomes and ultimately the vision. Simultaneously confirming that the vision is achievable.
- Testing the feasibility, deliverability and public acceptability of the measures required to achieve the vision.
- Evaluating whether the intended outcomes in the vision, such as mode share, are being achieved through the development management process (sometimes referred to as ‘monitor and manage’).
All of these interpretations rely on the interpretation of data, and application of innovative techniques. Best practice is still evolving but our data scientists, transport planners and modellers are at the forefront of finding robust, practical solutions to the practical challenges that ‘vision and validate’ presents us.