In the accessibility policy, the focus is too one-sided on removing traffic bottlenecks and on investments in projects for new infrastructure. Other solutions, such as spreading traffic during the day, digital alternatives or smart urbanization policy, should weigh more heavily in the choices to improve accessibility. The Cabinet and the House can respond more actively to social trends and technological developments that make other solutions possible. This is the conclusion of the Council for the Living Environment and Infrastructure (Rli) in its advice 'Towards an integrated accessibility policy' drawn up at the request of the House of Representatives. Member of Parliament Rutger Schonis (D66) received the advice on 10 February 2021 on behalf of the Lower House.

The potential of other accessibility solutions is underutilized
Non-infrastructural solutions to improve accessibility, such as working from home or spreading traffic throughout the day, have been part of accessibility policy for some time. But it often concerns temporary programs and pilots. Some non-infrastructural solutions are moreover so sensitive politically or socially that they are not even included in the considerations. As a result, the focus of government policy still too often remains on the construction of new or the expansion of existing infrastructure. De Rli argues for all policy alternatives to be fully and co-ordinately weighed in making policy choices.

This applies, for example, to digital accessibility as an alternative to physical travel. Due to the corona measures, online working from home and video meetings, but also, for example, attending concerts or performances via live streams, are rapidly becoming commonplace. Lessons can be learned from these positive, but also negative, experiences that, according to the Rli, should be given an accelerated place in the accessibility policy in the coming cabinet period.

Broad prosperity as a benchmark for assessments in accessibility policy
De Rlic also calls for other challenges to be more explicitly involved in accessibility policy. Tasks in the field of climate, environment, urbanization, safety and social tasks have an impact on accessibility policy and vice versa. Increasing our prosperity in the broad sense of the word should, according to the Council, be the benchmark for making the right decisions throughout the policy cycle, from vision development to implementation. Social cost-benefit analyzes should be used much earlier and more consistently in decision-making processes. The analysis of the required long-term capacity of roads, waterways, railways and public transport to be published mid-year should do justice to all aspects that are relevant from the point of view of broad prosperity. Moreover, it must be prevented that this analysis, as was the case in the past, merely becomes a list of priorities for infrastructural solutions.

Key role for the House of Representatives
The House of Representatives has an important role to ensure that all policy alternatives are fully included in the accessibility policy. In the House of Representatives, however, the emphasis in the debate and decision-making is often still on individual projects. As an auditor of the government, the House should see to it that the assessment frameworks and decision instruments used are adequately designed to make integrated assessments. And the House should assess cabinet policy more emphatically on links with other relevant policies (urbanization, digitization) and on cooperation between departments and administrative layers.

Also read: Necessary investments in Public Transport

Print Friendly, PDF & Email