No Cover Image

Journal article 1253 views 190 downloads

Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport

Geoff Dudley, Phil Goodwin, Glenn Lyons, Charles Musselwhite Orcid Logo, Peter Wiltshire

Transportation Planning and Technology, Volume: 34, Issue: 1

Swansea University Author: Charles Musselwhite Orcid Logo

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1080/03081060.2011.530828

Abstract

This paper reviews available UK evidence on (private sector) business attitudes to transport. It follows a 2008 review of public attitudes to transport, and provides an important frame of reference for considering business attitudes. Accordingly the current paper includes comparisons between public...

Full description

Published in: Transportation Planning and Technology
ISSN: 0308-1060 1029-0354
Published: 2011
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa14670
first_indexed 2013-07-23T12:12:39Z
last_indexed 2019-06-14T19:17:52Z
id cronfa14670
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2019-06-14T11:43:03.0010483</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>14670</id><entry>2013-04-23</entry><title>Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>c9a49f25a5adb54c55612ae49560100c</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-4831-2092</ORCID><firstname>Charles</firstname><surname>Musselwhite</surname><name>Charles Musselwhite</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2013-04-23</date><deptcode>HSOC</deptcode><abstract>This paper reviews available UK evidence on (private sector) business attitudes to transport. It follows a 2008 review of public attitudes to transport, and provides an important frame of reference for considering business attitudes. Accordingly the current paper includes comparisons between public and business attitudes. There are some prima facie similarities between public and business attitudes in relation to congestion, the order of importance of transport attributes (especially reliability), stated conditions for support of road pricing, public transport, travel plans, telecommunications and some issues of reducing travel. There are, however, some differences also: transport concerns are less ubiquitous, less attention is given to the environmental concerns associated with road building and there is less attention to wider government goals such as equity, health, social welfare and the environment. However, both similarities and differences may be misleading, as research on business attitudes is less disciplined, and there are no well-established theoretical frameworks (such as exist for individual attitudes) for understanding attitudes, when applied to the corporate views of a commercial body. In essence, many of the business attitudes reports are framed as lobbying material yet, paradoxically, there can be considerable ambiguity attached to the meanings of business attitudes, that in turn can be partially attributed to doubts as to whether responses represent individual or corporate attitudes. As a result, it is very difficult, from the existing evidence, to interpret a clear and coherent view or set of views of business on transport issues. The authors suggest some protocols, with the aim of improving research methods that, if implemented, could help improve the credibility and clarity of claims to represent the &#x2018;voice (or, more realistically, voices) of business&#x2019;.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Transportation Planning and Technology</journal><volume>34</volume><journalNumber>1</journalNumber><paginationEnd>50</paginationEnd><publisher/><issnPrint>0308-1060</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1029-0354</issnElectronic><keywords>business, attitudes, methodology, interpretation</keywords><publishedDay>31</publishedDay><publishedMonth>1</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2011</publishedYear><publishedDate>2011-01-31</publishedDate><doi>10.1080/03081060.2011.530828</doi><url>http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03081060.2011.530828#tabModule</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Health and Social Care School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HSOC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2019-06-14T11:43:03.0010483</lastEdited><Created>2013-04-23T15:36:03.8048091</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">The Centre for Innovative Ageing</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Geoff</firstname><surname>Dudley</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Phil</firstname><surname>Goodwin</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Glenn</firstname><surname>Lyons</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Charles</firstname><surname>Musselwhite</surname><orcid>0000-0002-4831-2092</orcid><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Peter</firstname><surname>Wiltshire</surname><order>5</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0014670-21122017131308.pdf</filename><originalFilename>14760.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2017-12-21T13:13:08.6570000</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>788056</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2013-04-23T00:00:00.0000000</embargoDate><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2019-06-14T11:43:03.0010483 v2 14670 2013-04-23 Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport c9a49f25a5adb54c55612ae49560100c 0000-0002-4831-2092 Charles Musselwhite Charles Musselwhite true false 2013-04-23 HSOC This paper reviews available UK evidence on (private sector) business attitudes to transport. It follows a 2008 review of public attitudes to transport, and provides an important frame of reference for considering business attitudes. Accordingly the current paper includes comparisons between public and business attitudes. There are some prima facie similarities between public and business attitudes in relation to congestion, the order of importance of transport attributes (especially reliability), stated conditions for support of road pricing, public transport, travel plans, telecommunications and some issues of reducing travel. There are, however, some differences also: transport concerns are less ubiquitous, less attention is given to the environmental concerns associated with road building and there is less attention to wider government goals such as equity, health, social welfare and the environment. However, both similarities and differences may be misleading, as research on business attitudes is less disciplined, and there are no well-established theoretical frameworks (such as exist for individual attitudes) for understanding attitudes, when applied to the corporate views of a commercial body. In essence, many of the business attitudes reports are framed as lobbying material yet, paradoxically, there can be considerable ambiguity attached to the meanings of business attitudes, that in turn can be partially attributed to doubts as to whether responses represent individual or corporate attitudes. As a result, it is very difficult, from the existing evidence, to interpret a clear and coherent view or set of views of business on transport issues. The authors suggest some protocols, with the aim of improving research methods that, if implemented, could help improve the credibility and clarity of claims to represent the ‘voice (or, more realistically, voices) of business’. Journal Article Transportation Planning and Technology 34 1 50 0308-1060 1029-0354 business, attitudes, methodology, interpretation 31 1 2011 2011-01-31 10.1080/03081060.2011.530828 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03081060.2011.530828#tabModule COLLEGE NANME Health and Social Care School COLLEGE CODE HSOC Swansea University 2019-06-14T11:43:03.0010483 2013-04-23T15:36:03.8048091 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences The Centre for Innovative Ageing Geoff Dudley 1 Phil Goodwin 2 Glenn Lyons 3 Charles Musselwhite 0000-0002-4831-2092 4 Peter Wiltshire 5 0014670-21122017131308.pdf 14760.pdf 2017-12-21T13:13:08.6570000 Output 788056 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true 2013-04-23T00:00:00.0000000 true eng
title Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
spellingShingle Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
Charles Musselwhite
title_short Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
title_full Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
title_fullStr Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
title_full_unstemmed Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
title_sort Lost in translation: problems in interpreting business attitudes to transport
author_id_str_mv c9a49f25a5adb54c55612ae49560100c
author_id_fullname_str_mv c9a49f25a5adb54c55612ae49560100c_***_Charles Musselwhite
author Charles Musselwhite
author2 Geoff Dudley
Phil Goodwin
Glenn Lyons
Charles Musselwhite
Peter Wiltshire
format Journal article
container_title Transportation Planning and Technology
container_volume 34
container_issue 1
publishDate 2011
institution Swansea University
issn 0308-1060
1029-0354
doi_str_mv 10.1080/03081060.2011.530828
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str The Centre for Innovative Ageing{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}The Centre for Innovative Ageing
url http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03081060.2011.530828#tabModule
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description This paper reviews available UK evidence on (private sector) business attitudes to transport. It follows a 2008 review of public attitudes to transport, and provides an important frame of reference for considering business attitudes. Accordingly the current paper includes comparisons between public and business attitudes. There are some prima facie similarities between public and business attitudes in relation to congestion, the order of importance of transport attributes (especially reliability), stated conditions for support of road pricing, public transport, travel plans, telecommunications and some issues of reducing travel. There are, however, some differences also: transport concerns are less ubiquitous, less attention is given to the environmental concerns associated with road building and there is less attention to wider government goals such as equity, health, social welfare and the environment. However, both similarities and differences may be misleading, as research on business attitudes is less disciplined, and there are no well-established theoretical frameworks (such as exist for individual attitudes) for understanding attitudes, when applied to the corporate views of a commercial body. In essence, many of the business attitudes reports are framed as lobbying material yet, paradoxically, there can be considerable ambiguity attached to the meanings of business attitudes, that in turn can be partially attributed to doubts as to whether responses represent individual or corporate attitudes. As a result, it is very difficult, from the existing evidence, to interpret a clear and coherent view or set of views of business on transport issues. The authors suggest some protocols, with the aim of improving research methods that, if implemented, could help improve the credibility and clarity of claims to represent the ‘voice (or, more realistically, voices) of business’.
published_date 2011-01-31T06:27:19Z
_version_ 1821385781402402816
score 11.133746

Similar Items