1 speakers: björn frauendienst (m.sc.) dr. andreas redecker – ruhr-university bochum –...

1Speakers: Björn Frauendienst (M.Sc.) Dr. Andreas Redecker – Ruhr-University Bochum – Geography Department

Children‘s Independent Mobility:

Where is Germany heading?

Speakers:

Björn Frauendienst

Andreas Redecker

Ruhr-University Bochum

Geography Department

Germany


One False Move

Thesis:

statistics on road casualties are not the only indicator to benchmark the security of traffic

Source: Department for Transport, 1989


Children‘s Independent Mobility

Our understanding todaydistinction between mobility and trafficmobilitymobility: capability of a single person for spatial movementtraffictraffic: sum of people’s realised movements from A to B

(for reference see Gather et al. 2008 or Nuhn & Hesse 2006)

children‘s independent mobility (CIM) children‘s independent mobility (CIM) degree of mobility remaining after parental restrictions apply


Children‘s Independent Mobility

The understanding in 1990 no clear definition of CIM instrument to measure CIM in accordance with today's

definition of mobilitysix licenses six licenses used to measure restrictions in mobility

crossing main roads, going to leisure activities alone, coming home from school alone, cycling on main roads, using public transport, being outside alone after dark


Children‘s Independent Mobility 1990

License to come home from school aloneamong primary school children

Source: Hillman et al. 1990: 131


The 2010 study - background

Factors implying that CIM might have dropped in Germany over the last 20 years:

general traffic studies imply a grown importance of car dependent travel

changes in the German school system (catchment areas, introduction of an optional all-day-school

less road accidents with children involved since 1990s


The 2010 study - targets

1. to reveal possible changes in children’s independent mobility at the ten schools surveyed in 1990

2. to identify influencing factors that may have affected children’s independent mobility

3. to show a possible connection between today’s level of children’s independent mobility and the noticeable decline in road casualties


Methodology 2010 study

aim to re-survey the schools from 1990 cities involved: Bochum, Köln, Witten + Wuppertal children aged 7 to 15 have been interviewed:

- classes 2 to 4 (primary school) and

- classes 5 to 9 (secondary school) identical questionnaire for all ages linkage between parents’ and children’s questionnaire survey was conducted simultaneously on a Monday in

February


Content of the questionnaires

Children(focused on day of survey)

Parents(focused on general behaviour and

statistical data)

• way to school

• leisure time

• behaviour in traffic

• fears in traffic and in the neighbourhood

• licenses in traffic

• reasons for licensing

• questions about age of license granting

• own childhood

• statistical data about the household


Return rate

801 pupils have been surveyed in 2010

579 parents sent back the questionnaires 72,3 %

children surveyed

parents surveyed

return rate parents

primary school 264 242 91,7secondary school 491 448 91,2total 755 690primary school 317 281 88,6secondary school 484 298 61,6total 801 579

1990

2010Source: own figure based on 1990 and 2010 survey data


Key results of the 2010 study

1. The mobility of primary school children surveyed in Germany in 2010 is much more restricted than in 1990

2. This restricted mobility leads to distinct local travel patterns of children and their parents


License granting

Source: own figure based on 1990 and 2010 survey data


Differences at among primary schools



Effects on travel patterns



Two main types of restricted CIM

Car School (Witten) suburban setting high rate of car use children driven long & short distances

Escort School (Köln-Mitte) city centre setting high rate of parents escorting children low level of motorised transport


Causes for reduced CIM (both types)

children not visiting the nearest school to their home

risen parental perception of traffic dangers

the introduction of all-day-school


The 2010 study – results on targets

1. to reveal possible changes in children’s independent mobility at the ten schools surveyed in 1990

CIM has gone down at primary schools

2. to identify influencing factors that may have affected children’s independent mobility

distance to school, risen fears, all-day-school

3. show a possible connection between today’s level of children’s independent mobility and the noticeable decline in road casualties

possible connection, because…


Meanings for road safety

Simply said:

If less children are using active travel modes independently, less children can have accidents as cyclist or pedestrians

Possible conclusion:

It is better for children to be escorted to school because they will have less accidents and parents can spend more time with them


BUT !!!!

To be driven to school is at least as dangerous as walking to school

Participating in traffic is more than getting from A to B as positive results may be more chances to physically exercise higher spatial perception of living environment more social interaction with peer group only chance to practice a proper traffic behaviour

(for reference see Unfallkasse NRW 2010)


Conclusion

The study indicates that Germany is currently heading towards a lower degree of children‘s independent mobility

If less accidents involving children are to be achieved without restricting children’s development, integrated measures need to be developed. more reliable research on the connection between CIM

and children’s development child oriented urban planning educational programs cooperation between actors (parents, teachers, police,

local administration and road safety organisations)

1 speakers: björn frauendienst (m.sc.) dr. andreas redecker – ruhr-university bochum –...

Documents