« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
This research project, conducted by Transport & Travel Research Ltd on behalf of the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department of the Scottish Executive, has reviewed current evidence for the effectiveness of a range of intervention measures for tackling the abuse of off-street parking facilities intended for use by disabled people. 1 The overall aim of this research was to investigate and review measures used to combat the abuse of parking bays for disabled people and put forward best practice guidance, based on a review of the evidence, on the most effective measures that can be used in off-street car parks in Scotland. The purpose of this research is to provide advice and assistance for those responsible for provision of off-street parking in adhering to the guidelines set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005.
1.1 Background
The focus of the work has been on enforcement measures that can be used to combat the abuse of parking bays intended for use by disabled people, in off-street locations in Scotland. Off-street parking refers to both public car parks provided and managed by municipal authorities, and privately owned car parks that are provided for customers, clients and patients by providers of a given core service. The provision of off-street parking facilities for disabled people has the dual purpose of fulfilling certain statutory obligations, and enabling disabled people to gain access to the core service more easily by providing parking spaces close to their destination.
Whilst the abuse of on-street parking spaces reserved for members of the Disabled Persons Parking Scheme (i.e. Blue Badge holders) by non Badge holders can be addressed using the powers that Local Authorities have for administering this Scheme, the reservation of parking spaces for disabled people off-street is not legally enforceable. In a privately owned facility, the use of a car park is a contractual matter between the provider and the user, and the conditions of use and charges, if any, must be clearly displayed.
According to government statistics for Scotland there are approximately 1 million disabled people living in Scotland which is around 1 in 5 of the population ( DRC Scotland, 2004). It is widely known that the prevalence of disability increases with age. As the population of Scotland is ageing the number of disabled people in Scotland continues to grow (Scottish Executive, 2007). One of the most common mobility problems faced by disabled people is the lack of availability of parking spaces in off-street car parks that are located near to their destination, and which have been designated for their use. This is often because they are occupied by the cars of drivers for whom they are not intended.
The problem of parking abuse in Scotland and the UK was highlighted in 2004 by campaign group Baywatch who monitored parking at more than 800 stores owned by the four major supermarket chains across the UK. The results show that almost 21% of parking spaces for disabled people were occupied by cars without a blue parking badge - which compared with 18.5% at the same time the previous year (Baywatch, 2004). It was found that in more than one third of stores, disabled people were unable to park in a designated space because of abuse by non-badge holders. The problem of abuse in off-street car parks has also been identified by a survey by the Access Committee for England on the Blue Badge scheme. Of a sample of 15,000 disabled, 71% of people responded to the survey of which 90% believed that the scheme was being abused and 76% thought that private car parks were unsupervised and no action was taken against abusers. Research conducted for the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee ( DPTAC) in 2002 revealed that a specific concern for disabled people was finding a suitable place to park when reaching their destination. Eighty per cent of a sample of nearly 1000 disabled people stated that they did not feel that there is adequate enforcement of parking restrictions. ( DPTAC 2002).
Further to this research a Mystery Shopper Survey conducted by Capability Scotland in 2003, found that 44% of reserved parking bays for disabled people, in retail outlet car parks in Scotland, were used by non-Blue Badge holders. The inability of retailers/outlets and traffic wardens to properly police the misuse of parking facilities reserved for disabled people made many outlets totally inaccessible to disabled people. Capability Scotland called for a review of the situation whereby traffic wardens are not permitted to monitor retail car parks (without a Traffic Regulation Order), suggesting that either traffic wardens' powers need to be extended or retailers or outlets need to be able to penalise the misuse of parking facilities reserved for disabled people. (Capability Scotland, 2003).
1.2 Research Aims and Method
The overall aim of this research was to investigate and review measures used to combat the abuse of parking facilities for disabled people and put forward good practice guidance. This has been based on a thorough review of the evidence through both desk based research and consultation with car park providers who have implemented intervention measures, and consultation with disabled people and non-disabled people (including those who have abused reserved parking facilities), on the most effective measures that can be used in off-street car parks in Scotland.
More specifically the research aimed to:
- Explore and review the existing evidence-base of what is known about the effectiveness of different intervention methods
- Conduct an evaluation of a range of existing intervention methods which are considered to be of practical interest within a Scottish context, including perceived attitudes towards their effectiveness and practical considerations/constraints
- Build on existing knowledge of the psychological factors influencing abuse of parking facilities reserved for disabled people
- Provide advice and assistance for those responsible for the provision of off-street parking in adhering to the guidelines set out in the Disability Discrimination Act (2005)
The research has comprised a range of activities aimed at gathering a range of views, experiences and solutions including:
1) A comprehensive desk-top review: a preliminary review of the current evidence for the effectiveness of intervention measures for tackling the abuse of off-street parking facilities intended for disabled people. A key function of this review has been to identify any innovative anti-abuse measures (a) for which there is little or no evidence as to their effectiveness, and (b) which might be worthy of closer analysis and evaluation. The findings of this review informed the decision as to which intervention measures were to be examined in the project.
2) Case studies: a large proportion of the research work was undertaken through six case studies of off-street car parks in Scotland - these sites were selected to reflect a range of different contexts, geographical locations, and approaches to intervention to enforce reserved parking facilities. Some of these case studies include locations where it is known that there is a problem with the abuse of parking facilities provided for disabled people, such as Monklands and Ninewells hospitals. The sites included:
- One charging, and one non-charging NHS facility - Ninewells hospital in Dundee (urban) and Monklands hospital in Lanarkshire (rural)
- Falkirk High railway station ("stickering" used as enforcement measure)
- Asda supermarket in Aberdeen (barrier system and polite notices used as enforcement measure)
- Decriminalised municipal car parks in Edinburgh, and non-decriminalised car parks in Inverness
The case studies involved:
- Site visits and telephone interviews with the site manager for each of the six case study sites, to appraise the cost, practicality and effectiveness of intervention measures used at the sites.
- Thirty-three face-to-face depth interviews with non-disabled drivers who have used parking facilities for disabled people at the case study sites and elsewhere (5-6 participants were recruited from each of the six case study sites), to explore the factors underlying abuse and reactions to intervention. This sample of participants comprised a mix of gender, socio-economic groups, and age groups. A pre-screening questionnaire was used to recruit the participants which included questions designed to reveal inappropriate behaviour, including the use of parking facilities for disabled people. This group of participants has been referred to as 'Bay Abusers' in this report.
3) Consultation with disabled people: two focus group discussions (each comprising 8-10 participants) were undertaken with disabled people and carers of disabled people, to ascertain attitudes to and experiences of off-street parking and impacts of abuse.
4) Consultation with non-disabled people (non-abusers): two focus groups (each comprising 8-10 participants) were carried out comprising non-disabled drivers. A pre-screening questionnaire was used to recruit participants and included questions designed to reveal whether or not they had attempted to misuse a reserved parking bay or were inclined to. The purpose of consulting this group was to explore attitudes to the misuse of parking facilities for disabled people and the likely effectiveness of intervention measures. The groups were recruited at different geographical locations (covering urban and rural areas) and comprised a mix of genders and age groups. This group of participants has been referred to as 'Non-abusers' in this report.
5) Stakeholder consultation: two interactive workshops took place during the course of the project; one at the beginning of the research (attended by 17 participants) to help guide the project, and one towards the end of the research (attended by 31 participants), to help guide the recommendations for the presentation and content of the good practice guide. Participants included site managers of facilities featured in the case studies, other service providers, organisations representing the interests of disabled people, the research team and representatives of the Scottish Executive.
6) Appraisal and analysis of practicality and constraints: as noted above, interviews were held with management staff at the case study sites, during which information was elicited on the practicality (including cost considerations) and constraints of the intervention measure. This information was also sought during the desk-top review and the stakeholder workshops. Views were also sought on how effective the case study providers thought that the intervention measure(s) that had been used at the sites had been, whether any positive or negative feedback had been received as a result of the interventions, whether the intervention scheme(s) had had any impact (positive or negative) on the organisation's core business, and whether, on balance, the organisation would like to retain, extend, modify or terminate the scheme.
1.3 Contents of this Report
The remainder of this document is compiled as follows:
Chapter 2 provides an overview of current guidance and policy developments in relation to parking provision in Scotland and the rest of the UK. Chapter 3 presents the behavioural characteristics of the participants who abused parking facilities for disabled people while Chapter 4 evaluates the factors that influenced the participants to abuse such facilities. Chapter 5 introduces the possible enforcement measures for off-street parking facilities for disabled people and Chapter 6 includes an evaluation of user reactions to these measures. Chapter 7 provides a summary of the findings related to the case study site evaluation while Chapter 8 focuses more on the effectiveness, practicality and constraints of the individual intervention measures for enforcement. Chapters 9 and 10 present the conclusions and recommendations of the study.
The annexes to this report provide additional information on the findings of the desk-top review and of the primary research that was carried out during the study. The annexes also provide more detail on the research methodology and the complete list of references. Copies of the annexes are available on request.
« Previous | Contents | Next »