The launch of the ultra-low emission zone in central London has been linked with an increase in the number of inner-city children walking or cycling to school.
Four in 10 children who were previously driven to school – a total of 44 children out of 105 - switched to more “active” modes of travel, such as walking, cycling, or public transport, according to research.
This compared with two in 10 schoolchildren (74 out of 364) in Luton – where there was no Ulez - who made the switch over the same period.
The Ulez was launched in central London in April 2019 by Mayor Sadiq Khan and reduced the number of more polluting, “non compliant” vehicles in the area by about 9,400 a day.
The launch of the £12.50-a-day levy may have discouraged some parents from driving their children to school, resulting in the increase in walking and cycling.
However the vast majority of London schoolchildren in the study already walked, cycled or caught a bus to school.
Researchers at the University of Cambridge and Queen Mary University of London compared the travel patterns of primary school children at 44 schools within or near the central London Ulez zone with those at primary schools in Luton.
Almost 2,000 children aged six to nine were included in the research, which was part of CHILL study (Children’s Health in London and Luton). Travel patterns before and after the Ulez launch were compared.
In London, 42 per cent of children who travelled by car switched to “active” travel – but five per cent switched from “active to inactive” modes.
In Luton, 20 per cent of children switched to active modes while 21 per cent switched to car travel.
Of the 950 London children, 809 continued to travel to school by “green” means after the Ulez was introduced, and 44 switched from inactive to walking, cycling or public transport.
The impact of the Ulez on switching to active travel modes was strongest for those children living more than half a mile from school, the report said.
This was probably because many children who lived closer to school already walked or cycled.
Just over half of the London schoolchildren were from a family that had access to a car, compared with almost 90 per cent in Luton.
The researchers admitted that low traffic neighbourhoods and “school streets” could also have also been factors in children not travelling by car, but did not factor this in to theirstudies, saying that many schemes were introduced during or after the study period.
Study author Dr Christina Xiao, from the University of Cambridge, said: “The introduction of the Ulez was associated with positive changes in how children travelled to school, with a much larger number of children moving from inactive to active modes of transport in London than in Luton.
“Given children's heightened vulnerability to air pollution and the critical role of physical activity for their health and development, financial disincentives for car use could encourage healthier travel habits among this young population, even if they do not necessarily target them.”
Fellow researcher Dr Jenna Panter said: “Changing the way children travel to school can have significant effects on their levels of physical activity at the same time as bringing other co-benefits like improving congestion and air quality, as about a quarter of car trips during peak morning hours in London are made for school drop-offs.”
Professor Chris Griffiths, from Queen Mary University of London, said: “This is evidence that clean air zone intervention programmes aimed at reducing air pollution have the potential to also improve overall public health by addressing key factors that contribute to illness.”
