Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/transportation-
research-interdisciplinary-perspectives

Transport governance system response during the COVID-19 pandemic: The

allure of a ‘new normal’ and its implications for tackling the polycrisis
Iain Docherty a , Greg Marsden b,*
a
Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, Work and Organisation, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, United Kingdom
b
Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper examines how the UK transport governance system responded to the COVID-19 pandemic and what
COVID-19 this reveals about its capacity for transformative change amid broader societal challenges, or the “polycrisis.”
Transport Drawing on a unique longitudinal dataset of interviews with senior transport decision-makers across four waves
Travel behaviour
from 2020 to 2021, the study explores the tension between policy stability and change. While the pandemic
Policy change
Power
disrupted travel behaviour—reducing commuting, increasing remote work, and shifting modal prefer­
Governance ences—governance responses largely aimed to restore pre-pandemic norms and practices rather than seize the
opportunity for systemic transformation.
Despite recognition of significant behavioural shifts and the potential for substantial long-term behavioural
adaptations, a combination of institutional inertia, rigid funding mechanisms, and entrenched professional norms
constrained adaptive policymaking. Instead, a desire to “return to normal” dominated, driven by political, fiscal,
and operational pressures, which has left the sector in a worse position than before in terms of its capacity to
tackle longstanding policy challenges and achieve the non-incremental shifts required to address the critical
problems it faces.
The implications of the work are a need to move beyond the false “change versus stability” narrative and
recognise that some societal trends are constantly in flux whilst others endure. Policy recognition of the change
in the everyday is a pre-cursor to policy change in both more stable and turbulent times, rather than hoping that
events will somehow conspire to unlock the more radical responses that are recognised to be necessary to
respond to the polycrisis.

1. Introduction of previously unforeseen changes across society and the economy. These
range from the impact on healthcare systems of ‘long COVID’ and
At the time of writing this article, five years after the first lockdowns treatments missed or delayed due to lockdowns (Rajan et al., 2021;
imposed following the emergence of COVID-19, decision makers across Wilkinson, 2022) and the impact on educational attainment (OECD,
almost all domains of public policy are coming to terms with the lasting 2023), to the potential restructuring of labour markets brought about by
impacts of the behaviour change triggered by the pandemic and the ‘the great resignation’ and the early retirement of people who can afford
disruption to established trends and long-term plans that it brought to leave the workforce (Fuller and Kerr, 2022).
about. In what might be termed the ‘early aftermath’ of the acute phase Although less immediately visible in the public debate compared to
of the public health crisis, much soul searching is being undertaken to issues such as health and social care, education and employment, the
reflect on how governments responded to COVID across the range of transport and mobility sector has nevertheless been one of the policy
public policy domains, what the lessons of the pandemic are in terms of domains most profoundly impacted upon by the pandemic, both as a
the capacity of government to act effectively, and whether we are any direct result of restrictions put in place during the pandemic and wider
better prepared for the next pandemic or other ‘long emergency’ as a restructuring of aspects of society resulting from it. Whilst there has,
result (Martin et al, 2023; Davies et al, 2025). As the more persistent hitherto, been a very limited tradition of studying what we can learn
impacts of COVID linger, policy postures are being recast to take account from behaviour change during major disruptions (Kontou et al., 2017;

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (I. Docherty), [email protected] (G. Marsden).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101459
Received 27 November 2024; Received in revised form 2 May 2025; Accepted 6 May 2025
Available online 11 May 2025
2590-1982/© 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

Marsden et al., 2020; van Exel and Rietveld, 2009; Zhu and Levinson, that the mobility system moves towards a more environmentally sus­
2010; Marsden, 2025) the COVID-19 pandemic sparked a huge inter­ tainable, less car dependent position overall, whilst avoiding destabil­
national wave of data collection. The overwhelming majority of these ising disruption to everyday economic and social life. This sits in stark
studies were conducted into how travel patterns changed at specific contrast to the evidence which suggests that transport is now the sector
inflection points in time, which have now been summarised in various with the highest carbon emissions in many economies and where real­
systematic reviews (Peralvo et al., 2022; Lee and Eom, 2024; Lizana istic strategies to get back on track with committed carbon budgets go
et al., 2024). The findings from the UK, where this paper is written from, well beyond incremental change (Brand et al., 2020). A priori there is
share common characteristics with many parts of the developed world: strong evidence to suggest that institutions can be slow and difficult to
steep declines in public transport patronage which have not fully change until “challenged or problematized” (Torfing, 2009: 81). In the
recovered, reductions in commute travel by all modes and, an increase transport sector, there is a significant path dependency assumption in
in service traffic with a switch to more intense on-line practices (see terms of the commonly held view that change is inevitably slow given
Table 1). the fixed nature of major infrastructure such as road and rail networks,
Those rare policy ‘moments’ at which the evidence base and/or the intricacies of the planning system and more generally due the highly
exogenous factors shaping established trends are brought into unusually complex infrastructure/service provision/travel behaviour interactions
sharp focus, such that the potential to achieve substantive shifts in at­ that define the socio-technical systems underpinning mobility (Cass
titudes and/or behaviours becomes more widely visible than usual, are et al., 2018; Thompson, 2022). However, it is critical to test these po­
potentially crucial opportunities to alter the trajectory of policy devel­ sitions and the extent to which policy shaping strategies which are path
opment and implementation (Pykett et al, 2023). In the face of a poly­ changing rather than path dependent can succeed.
crisis including climate change, energy costs, political shifts to the right This paper explores the nature of policy change and policy stability
and war (Lawrence et al., 2024), it is essential to know whether the and how competing actors and interests understood and expressed their
response to the pandemic shows a pathway to more adaptable and logics and actions through the governance system in response during the
ambitious policy making or whether it risks locking in past practices COVID-19 pandemic. Given the considerable uncertainty resulting from
which become even less well aligned with the challenges of the day. successive waves of infection and responses to them across the public
However, compared to studying the impacts on travel behaviour, there health crisis phase of the pandemic, exploring institutional responses at
has been very little attention paid to the study of how institutional actors single points in time is important but limited. In this study, we report on
behaved during the crisis and what the implications of the pandemic are a four-wave set of interviews with decision-makers in 17 organisations
for future policy making in the sector. Hirschorn (2021) explored how across all transport modes and a range of geographies in England and
governance arrangements in the Netherlands influenced the way in Scotland conducted between May 2020 and December 2021. We are not
which state-aid was provided to the public transport system. Harris and aware of any other longitudinal data set of this nature and, whilst the
McCue (2022) explored the politics around ‘pop-up cycle lanes’ in context reflects the UK governance system and its debates about the
Sydney, finding that the pandemic unlocked previous objections to bike impact of devolution and policy divergence between its constituent
infrastructure. Neog et al. (2025) examined the behaviour of public countries, the analytical framework deployed allows for the identifica­
transport agencies in 2020 which, prior to the pandemic, had generated tion of some key transferable themes and insights.
an upward trajectory of patronage, finding that they believed that the The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2, we review the public
pandemic had created a ‘new normal’ with lower patronage levels and policy literature on modes of policy change and the debates about how
their response should be to focus on their core market that had returned best to understand crises and policy turbulence (Ansell et al., 2023). For
to the bus. Perhaps given the unprecedented scale of the changes seen, the transport sector, which is heavily rooted in engineering and eco­
both in terms of how the demand for travel changed and how the nomic traditions of resilience and equilibrium, the innate response has
significantly greater government financial support for transport pro­ been to label the post-pandemic period as a return to some sort of
viders was managed, it is unsurprising that there is a wider narrative ‘normality’, or, moving to a ‘new normal’ (e.g. Zafri et al., 2021; Peralvo
about how transport might ‘get back to normal’ (e.g. UITP, 2023). et al., 2022; Filgueiras et al., 2024; Neog et al., 2025) which is variably
Understanding the institutional response during COVID-19 is critical described as incrementally better or worse than the status quo ante. This
because, for decades now, the key debate in the transport and mobility is set against the need to deliver more transformational governance in
sector has been about how to manage policy change incrementally so the face of the polycrisis, and other contributory long-standing policy
challenges (Pot et al, 2023), which frames change as desirable and on-
going. An analytical framework to explore the interactions between
Table 1 stability and change is described before discussing the role of different
Key COVID-19 Impacts on the transport sector. actors within the governance system and their power to promote or
Indicator
frustrate change within the transport and wider policy system. Section 3
describes the research methodology and the approach to coding. Section
Rail patronage 40 % fall from pre-pandemic levels
4 presents the results of the interview analysis aligned to the analysis
Rail Season Tickets Reduction from 20 % to 7 % of industry revenue
Bus patronage* 20 % reduction compared to equivalent figure in 3rd week of framework and coding outcomes. The paper concludes with a discussion
January 2020 and conclusion in Sections 5 and 6 respectively of what the study of the
Bus service levels 8 % reduction in bus service miles operated from 2019/2020 governance system response to COVID-19 tells us about future research
(bus02_mi.ods)
needs and the potential for more transformative governance in response
London 26 % fall from pre-pandemic equivalent weekday
Underground*
to the polycrisis.
Weekday car use* 3 % fall from February 2020 levels
Working from home Increase to 40 % at least once per week in Jan/Feb 2023, up 2. Literature review ¡ governing change
from 12 % in 2019a
Car ownership Reduction of 1.8 % by June 2023 from longitudinal panel
studyb
2.1. Policy purpose
Car purchasing 1.61million (2022) 700,000 below pre-pandemic levels
Light Goods 115 % of February 2020 levels We take as our philosophical starting point that the task of governing
Vehicles is essentially purposive, and that administrators within any democratic
*
Weekday average 03/07/23 to 04/08/23. system of governance seek to define and achieve a set of policy goals that
a
ONS data. represents the balance of competing “beliefs, practices, traditions and
b
TRANSAS COVID-19 Study data (contact corresponding author). dilemmas” that are negotiated in the civic sphere (Rhodes, 2007: 1244)

2
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

as fully as possible. We subscribe to Bryson et al’s (2014: 446) model of moves towards a ‘new normal’ (Peralvo et al., 2022), which denies or
the role of the state having evolved such that its legitimacy is now marginalises the potential for more fundamental long-term shifts in
derived from acting as the guarantor of public values defined from this beliefs, goals, actions or resources.
negotiation of agreed societal objectives, and acceptable regulatory
boundaries for the operation of the market determined through “broadly
2.3. Crisis responses
inclusive dialogue and deliberation”. At the practical level, this means
that the purpose of public policy development can be crystallised as
In transport research, there is comparatively little study of gover­
being about “solving common problems to achieve lasting public or civic
nance and policy change during crises. Kim (2021) reviewed the changes
value” (Boyte, 2011: 632).
to US security policy in response to the terrorists attacks of 9/11 noting
The transport sector plays an important role in a wide range of
the formulation of new Government Agencies, rules, security procedures
common problems and it impacts on a series of societal objectives such
and infrastructures. In our previous work, we explored responses to
as climate change, air pollution, economic growth, inequalities, physical
events such as bridge closures and major weather events, noting that
activity and health, safety, severance, biodiversity etc. (Van Wee, 2023).
there was a reconfiguration of social expectations facilitated by gov­
Whilst progress can be made in particular areas such as safety (Fisa et al.,
ernment, businesses and individuals to events and that some of this
2022) or air pollution (Khreis et al., 2023) the pace of change is often
would persist even when the initial stimulus for action was removed and
slow, uneven and can be insufficient, for example in the case of climate
the infrastructure and services went ‘back to normal’ (Marsden et al.,
change (Marsden and Schwanen, 2024), or small in scale relative to
2020). The COVID-19 pandemic had an extended impact on society and
transport growth in the whole economy (e.g. in the case of congestion
governments around the world, with transport being particularly
externalities (DfT, 2022)). The challenges of formulating effective
impacted (Lee and Eom, 2024). The scale and depth of the crisis pre­
transport policy are well documented (McTigue et al., 2020; Sørensen
ciptated by the pandemic provides a critical opportunity to understand
et al., 2014; Curtis and Low, 2012) in part because many of the chal­
how institutions responded and adapted and, in-turn, to learn what this
lenges are ‘wicked problems’ which defy simple solutions (Stead and
tells us about the scope for the policy system to respond to the imper­
Reardon (2025). However, transport policy has also been characterised
ative of tackling climate change and other aspects of the polycrisis and
as slow to change because of the different institutional histories of the
the potential for future more radical change.
different modes (Low and Astle, 2009) and the path dependencies of
The literature on public administration and public policy explores
different infrastructures (Arts et al., 2016). Coupled with this is a tightly
governance responses to turbulence which is defined as a “state in which
developed technical hegemony which has developed around the
change is sudden, surprising and difficult to understand or track”, where
expansion of car-based transport (Urry, 2004) and which struggles to
the complex nature of the changes requires multiple actions which can
recognise alternative pathways (Marsden and Schwanen, 2024).
create “contradictions and dilemmas” (Ansell et al., 2023: 2). The
presence of such contradictions requires that bureaucracies and net­
2.2. Stability and change
works “have the wherewithal to disrupt their own expectations, biases,
hopes and group norms as they interpret information” (Ansell et al.,
The framing of stability, equilibrium and normal sits in stark contrast
2023: 16). In order for the governance system to emerge from such
to the growing literature on turbulence and ‘polycrisis’ / ‘permacrisis’
shocks, and be better capable of delivering public value, means it must
that seeks to set out the scale of the challenge facing 21st century cap­
be better equipped for future policy change. Such outcomes are reflec­
italism and democracy given climate change, geopolitical tension, so­
tive of what is deemed a “robust governance response” which allows for
cietal aging, automation and other profound challenges to
the learning to impact on goals, logics and approaches to solving policy
contemporary society (Kotarski, 2023). What then, of the prospects for
problems (Howlett and Ramesh, 2023: 26). This can be contrasted with
more rapid policy, and perhaps institutional change, to be able to
more “resilient” governance practices which enable existing policies to
respond to these crises? Ansell et al. (2023) highlight that orderliness in
continue functioning despite the changes to the policy environment
public policy has often been viewed as temporary, with punctuations of
(Howlett and Ramesh, 2023: 29). In cases where perturbations to the
crisis, turbulence and change emerging frequently over time. However,
policy system are small then a resilient policy design approach may be
whilst order might inevitably be temporary, it is also the dominant
appropriate, but such an approach could be a poor fit to an environment
framing of what makes for ‘good’ or ‘successful’ public policy and
where the nature of the policy problem, politics and solutions have more
governance. Stability is associated with mathematical equilibrium,
radically changed.
balancing opposite ends of the political spectrum in a democracy, and
therefore ensuring that democracy itself is resilient (Przeworski, 2005).
Indeed, in the transport sector the notion of equilibrium and the 2.4. Analytical approach
importance of engineering resilience are both reflective of stability and a
normal order of things (Mattson and Janelius, 2015) to which the system Understanding how institutions and agents of public administration
should return to following any shock. react at those moments of turbulence is therefore crucial to deepening
Ansell et al. (2023: 5) further suggest that the desire for stability is our understanding of the scope to reposition key policies to meet
not just an operational concern but a political one, as the “bureaucratic contemporary challenges and is the first major topic of exploration for
quest for stability and predictability is motivated by an interest in this paper. The analytical framework informing our approach is built
maintaining sovereign political leadership while simultaneously pro­ first from the work of Ansell et al. (2023), who argue that stability and
tecting citizens against arbitrary administrative decisions. Hence, sta­ change are not, in fact, polar opposites but are instead both present to
bility is seen as inherently good, thus making instability and disorder a differing degrees in contemporary governance. Understanding the
problem”. This is reinforced by the behaviours of bureaucrats and pro­ public policy system’s capacity to respond to events and capture public
fessionals who seek to limit “deviation from the organizational script” value therefore requires a deep understanding of how stability and
(Ansell et al., 2023: 5). Of course, no system of governance is completely change interact through the following three components (Ansell et al.,
stable, and so in the framing of stability as the prime objective of the 2023: 9):
state, those challenges to the status quo that do appear − and might even
be regarded as positive agents of change − are nonetheless regarded as • System functions (e.g. providing an affordable public transport
short punctuations in a longer narrative of stability (Hall, 1993; service);
Baumgartner et al, 2018). This framing of crises as only temporary • Institutional infrastructure (e.g. regulation of public transport mar­
moments of change means that any shifts observed are characterised as kets and transport taxes);

3
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

• Societal transformations (e.g. behaviour during pandemics, de­ Table 2

mographic trends or structural changes to e.g. the cost of housing). Participants in studya.
Participant Round 1 Round Round 3 Round 4
Our approach also draws on discussions around the importance of May-June 2 May- Nov-Dec
the shift from hierarchical to network governance. Whilst it is widely 2020 Oct- June 2021
Nov 2021
accepted that a greater range of non-state actors now influence how
2020
policy is made and delivered, it is also suggested that during crises, the
state may become a more influential actor within the network and that 01 English Local Authority x x x x
Transport Strategy Lead
studying how network coordination plays out is important (Peralvo 02 Scottish Civil Servant 1 x x x x
et al., 2022). Indeed, returning to the recognition that large complex (National)
socio-technical systems that exist within transport are difficult to change 03 Scottish Civil Servant 2 x x x x
suggests that there is a need to understand the impact of the power and (National)∞
04 English Combined Authority x x x x
agency of key actors within these systems (Kok et al., 2021). This is
1
closely aligned with Cairney’s (2019) version of Lukes’ (1974) classic 05 UK Non-Governmental x x x x
three dimensional framing of power as being about the varying capacity Organisation (cycling)
of different actors within the system to ‘win debates’ determining key 06 GB Rail strategy and x x x x
decisions, their related ability to ‘set the (broader policy) agenda’ delivery leadb
07 English Civil Servant 1 x x x x
through these decisions, and therefore their scope to achieve ‘thought (National)
control’ in terms of how the parameters of the policy debate are defined 08 GB Network Operator (rail)b x x x x
and understood in wider public discourse. This conceptualisation of 09 UK Industry body (public x x x x
power as a multifaceted phenomenon through which discrete ‘victories’ transport)
10 GB Rail operator x x x x
of key players can shape systemic decisions at critical moments offers a
11 UK new mobility service x x* x ​
crucial lens through which to perceive, conceptualise and understand provider
the motivations of these actors as they seek to achieve their objectives 12 GB Bus operatorb x x x x
within the policy system, and what the wider implications of their ac­ 13 Scottish Local Authority x x x x
tions might be. In practical terms, the second critical area of exploration Politician
14 Regional Transport Body 1 x x x x
in this study is, how do the various actors and interests shape what the
15 Regional Transport Body 2 x x x* x*
policy response is and whose version or versions of a “post-Covid” re­ 16 English Combined Authority x x x x
covery strategy hold sway and whose do not? 2
17 UK Transport Consultantb x x x x
18 English Civil Servant 2 x x x
3. Methodology
​
(National)
19 UK Infrastructure expert ​ ​ ​ x
The original data on which this paper is based are drawn from a *
marks a point of change in lead interviewee.
longitudinal series of interviews with some of the most senior policy a
For a further in depth exploration of the different transport responsibilities of
makers and industry leaders in the UK transport sector. We established
tiers of government see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/futu
the panel in spring 2020 by contacting several elite actors with whom re-of-mobility-governance-of-uk-transport-infrastructures.
we have corresponded with and/or interviewed for other research pro­ b
participated in a validation interview to discuss our interpretation of find­
jects over a considerable number of years. Every person we approached ings in Summer 2023.
agreed to participate in the project, illustrating the seriousness of the
circumstances in which our request was made: we asked for participa­ number of the most senior people across the industry, interviewees
tion in our research on the basis that the deep and unprecedented un­ would in many cases know each other, have important ongoing working
certainty of the initial lockdown period meant that there was an relationships, and so some views and turns of phrase would likely be
opportunity to create a genuinely novel and potentially unique dataset identifiable. This did not inhibit discussion: the openness and candour
tracing how the industry would react, and what the long-term implica­ about the scale of the challenges being faced and, in some cases, the
tions of the pandemic might be, for the benefit of the whole sector in doubts we heard about whether they could be overcome, were stark. We
future. 17 interviews were held in the first round. Two additional in­ have chosen not to provide further specification on role type, age or
terviewees were added, one for rounds 2 to 4 and one for round 4. On gender in Table 2 to minimise the risks of identification.
some occasions multiple people participated from a single organisation, A generic framework of semi-structured interview questions was
but this was dependent on the circumstances of the time, and we had developed for each round (available in the data repository) which was
continuity of interviewees in all but two cases (as a result of role then tailored for the specific organisation and geographical re­
changes). The nature of the participants, timing of interviews and sponsibility of each respondent. After the initial round, we chose the
participant numbers are set out in Table 2. We are not aware of any other time windows for subsequent interview waves to capture as best we
longitudinal study of this nature in transport. Neog et al. (2025) report could views about both policy cycles (e.g. lockdowns and gradual
on interviews with stakeholders of 10 ’successful’ bus-oriented transit reopening of the economy by sector) that had recently ended, and also to
agencies and how their leadership responded, but as a one-off survey ask about the outlook for key forthcoming time periods such as the
during late 2021 and early 2022. This lack of longitudinal exploration is autumn’back to school’ weeks when travel demand was traditionally at
reflective both of the challenges of accessing stakeholders in a crisis, but its highest in the year. The interview sessions themselves, each around
also of the more limited engagement of transport researchers with un­ one hour in length, were undertaken using Microsoft Teams, and our
derstanding the detail of policy change with policy makers (Marsden interview notes and the edited transcripts generated by the Teams
and Reardon, 2017). application form our dataset. Once our analysis was complete we met
Whilst this approach could be conceptualised as a relatively ‘stan­ with a sub-sample of the interviewees to test our findings in ‘validation’
dard’ purposeful sampling strategy designed to capture knowledge from interviews, the purpose of these being to inform and cross check our
critical information-rich, senior people (Suri, 2011), the degree of access interpretation rather than generating new primary data.
we had was remarkable. At the outset of our work, we obtained ethical In our first round of interviews, undertaken in May and June 2020 at
consent for the research based on strict anonymity, although we were the height of the first wave of infection and mortality and under
clear with each participant that, given we would be working with a

4
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

conditions of maximum uncertainty, we discussed with our participants Table 3

the gravity of the situation, the scale of its impact on the sector, and the Analytical nodes.
collective moral imperative of researchers and participants to capture as Stability Change
much information about why decisions were made in the ways they
System Functions Foundational Logics & Foundational Logics &
were. These interviews were the most intense that we have experienced Norms Norms
in our careers, with the scale of uncertainty, potential risks to the very Transport System Transport System
existence of some organisations, and the personal cost of the pandemic Characteristics Characteristics
clearly evident in many of these conversations. Our interview material Institutional Institutional Processes and Institutional processes
Infrastructure Speed and speed
records reflect the acknowledgement that COVID-19 represented the Financing Financing
most significant disruption that anyone then working in the sector had Institutional Structures ​
experienced, and how this evolved into consideration about whether the Rail as ‘Exceptionalist’ ​
scale of behaviour change in transport use, mobility and the wider Societal Agendas Future of Travel Demand
Transformation Culture and Norms Critical reflection
economy meant that many aspects of the sector might never be the same
Politics ​
again.
In undertaking our interviews, we did not formally specify any
overarching hypothesis or proposition set, recognising that the unique Table 2), with an indication of which wave of data they came from (e.g.
context and dataset generated by our work. Instead, we defined our role W1 for Wave 1) although the thematic narratives came across more
as being that of observers well placed (and indeed, given our level of strongly than change over time (which was not the case in our earlier
access to key decision makers, with a moral imperative) to record, work exploring more operational response considerations).
interpret and understand how the transport sector reacted to the
pandemic given its lasting significance for public policy. The dual 4. Analysis of stability and change
change and stability narrative emerged strongly from the interviews
both within and across interviewees. This informed our approach This section presents a narrative overview of key aspects of the sta­
exploring the interdependencies of change and stability evident in the bility and change logics set against each of the three components from
literature review in order to understand the role of power within and Ansell et al. (2023).
across the elements of the transport policy system, and the charged is­
sues surrounding decision making in crisis conditions. For this paper we 4.1. System functions
put aside quotes relating to the dynamic nature of change in relation to
managing the practicalities of the social distancing restrictions and ‘Foundational Logics and Norms’ featured strongly in both the
focused on those which appeared relevant to the longer-term potential change and stability narratives. Arguments advanced around stability
pathways for policy. emphasised the long time horizons over which transport modes and
The manuscripts were first coded inductively for quotes related to technologies develop, how this time frame shapes consistency in the
these two broad macro-headings of change and stability. The next stage ways in which society moves, how the transport system has been
of the approach was deductive with mind maps of the nature of the organised to facilitate these patterns of mobility, and in turn the wider
quotes drawn up and these were used to cluster quotes into a smaller societal values that transport has come to represent. Example statements
number of nodes (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Fig. 1 below shows an included “connectivity is still vital” (W1-08) and “mass transit is part of
example node, focusing on how different narratives of changing travel the fabric of how we live” (W1-08). Others talked of the importance of
demand emerged and how they related to the functions of city centres. human contact (despite the rapid expansion of digital tools), freedom to
After revisiting quotes and thematic clusters, the set of nodes was move around and the importance of face-to-face interactions and the
finalised and deployed across both the stability and change data impacts of loneliness. The movement of goods, which very quickly
(Table 3). These were, in turn, sorted according to the three components recovered after initial lockdown to soon exceed pre-pandemic levels,
identified by Ansell et al. (2023) as set out above (system functions, was flagged as being critical but often overshadowed by passenger
institutional infrastructure and societal transformation). Drawing on the transport concerns. For some, there was little need to rethink the basics
example from Fig. 1, these nodes were merged into one theme which of travel demand because the problems which they had been planning to
was ‘future of travel demand’ under ‘change’ and ‘societal trans­ address − such as a lack of capacity on East-West rail corridors in the
formation’. As will be seen in the analysis, there is considerable cross­ North of England − had been left unresolved for decades, and even if
over of nodes spanning change and stability, referencing the anticipated committed to now, would not see solutions come to fruition for similarly
complexity in the interaction of the two. However, there are also long periods of time. Any shifts in travel behaviour resulting from
distinctive areas of discussion that appear unique to each of the two COVID-19 were, given these very long planning horizons for infra­
macro themes. In reporting our analysis, we use respondent IDs (from structure development, seen as a temporary distraction. For others,

Fig. 1. Initial Mind Mapping of statements on the Future of City Centres (ultimately coded under societal transformation).

5
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

stability in other aspects of travel behaviour experienced during the 4.2. Institutional infrastructure
pandemic reinforced some long-held views about the real scope for
policy change, e.g. “it’s just shown how hard it is to get people walking ‘Institutional Process and Speed’ threw up some interesting examples
and cycling” (W1-16). of both rapid change and stability. Institutional flexibility such as
Other respondents questioned the basic assumptions on which changes to emergency timetabling for railways and approval timescales
transport planning has been built upon more fundamentally. One for new bus services showed that “Government has realised it can make
respondent suggested that we require a “total rethink of the economics decisions very quickly” (W1-15). Operationally, the system responded
of transport” (W1-01) and that “large parts of the economy don’t need as well to developing public health guidance on social distancing,
much transport as perhaps they thought” (W1-16). Another said that this maximum vehicle occupancy and so on. This was attributed, in part, to
was because people were re-evaluating a lot of travel as a “waste of time” preparedness for other emergencies for which operational response
(W1-17), using the example of business trips to in-person meetings. This plans existed. What the sector was less well prepared for was something
led to a discussion about whether the decisions which followed from the which impacted on both operational practicalities and the demand for
established logics were, in any case, the optimal ones given what we travel simultaneously.
know about the contemporary transport sector. In particular, long Despite the examples of rapid adaptation of rules and regulations,
running attempts to design and fund more and more infrastructure and respondents quite quickly reported frustration with the experience of
services to accommodate a highly concentrated (morning) commuter making, or trying to make, even minor changes to physical infrastruc­
peak were robustly challenged. The very low levels of road traffic during ture. Key issues were the long timescales over which public consulta­
the initial lockdown period in spring 2020 were seen by some as an tions were expected to be undertaken and the rigidity of the rules
unexpected opportunity to think through the factors underpinning the surrounding these. Several respondents were mindful of the potential
attractiveness of walking and cycling, and led to the emboldening of (political) risks arising from experimental interventions such as low
logics around delivering low traffic neighbourhoods and car free city traffic neighbourhoods if they were not well received. There were also
centres, with roadspace transferred to active travel, businesses such as difficulties in translating the available central government funding to
cafes and restaurants and other public uses. Whether the schemes new bus and cycling improvements on the ground. The decision making
implemented at the time were ideal in terms of design was perhaps less and scrutiny processes that came with new money were described as
important than the busting of myths about what people really valued in unwelcome and/or inappropriate “micromanagement” (W2-04) or even
their local communities, and the building of practitioner and political “surreal” (W2-17) given the context. One crucial observation was that
confidence about what could really be done in terms of developing low despite the invocation to local authorities to act quickly, policy making
traffic zones in the UK. had in fact become even more centralised than before given “Treasury
In the early stages of the pandemic, there was considerable optimism control over policy has increased because everything depends on
about the potential to introduce meaningful change in terms of the printing money” (W2-14).
‘Transport System Characteristics’ node by, for example, rapidly real­ On top of this, when stimulus money was made available for larger
locating roadspace from the car to public transport, cycling and walking schemes, it was only those organisations with ‘shovel ready’ projects
given most road traffic-generating economic activities were closed, and that could take advantage. Local authorities in particular reported a
there was evident scope (and in many cases, a longstanding desire) to re- chronic lack of capacity to accelerate progress on delivering new
purpose space on the road network to non-car modes. Yet much of this transport schemes both because of a shortage of workers due to COVID-
ambition faded before long due to difficulties in delivering even modest 19 absences but also because a lot of professional services staff had been
schemes in practice, due at least in part to the ability of those opposed to diverted to other ‘front-line’ positions. Indeed, one of the key learnings
this kind of policy change to argue against it, particularly by mobilising reported by central government actors in England was “just how thinly
local objections. stretched” local authorities really are (W2-18). There was very little
Even amongst advocates for change, there was often a significant discussion of horizontal links between organisations or notions of
interest for short to medium term stability in order to prepare the ground network governance, with the particular exceptions of business interests
to embrace (radical) new mobility choices in future. Several public lobbying extensively for ‘back to work’ policies to rebuild city centre
transport operators and planners we spoke to described their own footfall (and thus retail spend), and bus operators managing service
version of the ‘dual crisis’ management challenge in these terms: it is changes in discussion with local authorities as part of emergency
well understood that it is much more difficult to win customers back to financial support mechanisms. We heard many accounts of decision
public transport once they have found other ways of doing things. Even makers’ time being devoted to the requirement to respond to govern­
more difficult is bringing back services which have been withdrawn (see ment and manage the different financial mechanisms for the release of
Table 1 on the reduction in bus miles operated). Maintaining pre- emergency funding.
pandemic service levels to the greatest degree possible, despite un­ Competition law and procurement rules, which limited how and
precedented falls in demand, so that a longer-term view could be taken where funds could be channelled, were also identified as key constraints
on service pattern adjustment therefore became a prime objective for limiting the extent to which policy change could be enacted in practice
many. The transport system was necessarily going to have to change in even if the desire to change had been established. The crisis in rail
response to COVID-19, but it would be preferable to take a managed patronage occurred during the middle of a review of how to reorganise
approach safeguarding as much as possible of the existing assets and the national rail system in response to various timetabling and fran­
employment in the system. These arguments about the need to avoid chising problems faced prior to the pandemic. COVID-19 accelerated
‘hastiness’ in reacting to the pandemic quickly formed the basis of much reaching the conclusion that there would be a need to change the
of the sector’s lobbying of the Treasury to extend pandemic support franchising model for rail services as it had “finished off private sector
funding sufficiently to underwrite pre-pandemic service levels as much revenue risk taking in rail contracts” (W1-08). The UK government’s
as possible. From an overall system perspective, there was a collective review of rail industry organisation (DfT, 2021) was published in May
belief that fewer public transport services would be run as we emerged 2021 and set out a programme of options to reform rail governance
from the pandemic with a significantly higher subsidy requirement than across Great Britain. Despite the recognition of the imperative for reg­
pre-pandemic. There was less agreement over how long such a position ulatory change, the necessary legislation to actually achieve it was not
would be supported by Treasury. brought forward before the change of government following the general
election of July 2024. Indeed, the pre-pandemic institutional rule set for
strategic decision making remains largely untouched across all transport
modes, and therefore how things actually unfold on the ground has seen

6
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

little change. sought to reprioritise their investment pipeline to bring forward schemes
The ‘Financing’ node brought together a complex mix of signals. they considered would retain strong business cases in most post-COVID
There was a widespread recognition that despite the unprecedented scenarios given their alignment with central priorities, especially
(and in many cases unexpected) level of emergency funding in the early decarbonisation. Some described this as part of a natural process of
stages of the pandemic, there would nevertheless be at some point a moving projects around in a portfolio to maximise their chances of
public spending ‘reckoning’ that would precipitate severe cuts to the successfully attracting funding. Rather than managing a ‘dual crisis’, this
level of financial support available to the sector, with the potential to perspective could be seen as a ‘dual opportunity’ approach in which
profoundly reshape the scale and scope of the public transport network. consistent tactical reprioritisation of policy priorities is attempted in
As it became clear that social distancing restrictions would remain in order to plan and secure funding for a set of schemes for the long term by
force well into 2021, funding that had originally been earmarked for reformulating arguments to ensure they continue to align with the
‘transformative’ change to help the bus sector meet climate goals and strategic priorities of the day. Again, those larger organisations that had
‘Bus Back Better’ (Department for Transport, 2021) was diverted to a retained greater depth in professional skills − in contrast to the general
significant degree to short term revenue support for services suffering trend of ‘hollowing out’ − were most likely to be adept enough to take
from significantly reduced patronage. The impacts of patronage re­ this approach. Others, however, viewed the implications of the seismic
ductions would also be felt by private companies and hence their ability shift in behaviours with sufficient trepidation. This was especially the
to borrow to fund investment programmes, with bus operators sug­ case in the rail sector given the scale of its subsidy requirement:
gesting to us that as decarbonising the fleet was a ‘non-negotiable’ goal,
“if you don’t think COVID has changed the world you are in denial. If
the trade-off would inevitably be in the form of service reductions. As
you don’t think it has changed the railway you are in denial” (W4-
one respondent reflected, it was difficult to see what the exit path would
06).
be for public transport subsidy and that however difficult things were in
the midst of the pandemic, public finances were in a perilous state and
hence: “enjoy COVID, what comes next will be worse” (W4-12). At the 4.3. Societal transformations
time of that statement, the impacts of the war in Ukraine and the tariffs
from the USA could not be foreseen, but these developments have There was common ground that COVID-19 had not altered any of the
further weakened the fiscal environment in which any post-COVID-19 macro-strategic ‘agendas’ that defined the transport sector’s wider so­
recovery plans are playing out in. cietal contribution. Stability in narratives around the role of transport in
Another critical issue was the apportionment of risk. Those com­ achieving decarbonisation, raising economic growth and addressing
mercial operators facing revenue risk directly (such as private sector regional economic inequality was clearly evident. It was, however,
public transport operators or car clubs) had limited time to respond in possible to discern a shift in emphasis between the importance of these
order to protect their day to day financial viability and/or on-going different objectives. For example, decarbonisation projects claimed to
capacity to service debt. There were also key differences in the gov­ promote a ‘green recovery’ were moved ahead of capacity enhancement
ernment sector, depending on the degree to which revenue risk was held projects previously justified on the basis of economic growth. As noted
by local transport authorities as opposed to central government. Devo­ above, tactical considerations about safeguarding funding were para­
lution was also important: In Scotland, the ‘alliance’ structure that mount, and as such, many substantial pivots in policy rhetoric were
combines several aspects of management and operations between observed.
Network Rail and the Scotrail train operating company had generated a We heard many different opinions as to how the travel behaviour
more integrated understanding of exposure to cost and revenue risks. As change precipitated by the pandemic might play out in the medium to
a result, decisions on altering service patterns and investment priorities long term, and about what this might mean for how observed shifts in
appeared to be quicker and more dynamic than in England with its much behaviour are framed, analysed and injected into debates on policy re­
more complex operational structure. form. Once again, the interdependency of notions of stability and
In contrast, there also existed a set of organisations with planning change, and the dual timescale nature of addressing policy challenges
responsibilities but little or no exposure to revenue risk who were fun­ came to the fore. Despite there being reasonable consensus that the
ded to simply carry on with business as usual. This resulted in the macro policy objectives for transport had not changed, there was almost
continued development of investment cases for projects, including universal recognition that quite substantial shifts in travel behaviour,
major infrastructure schemes, that were on the books prior to the working practices, shopping and the nature of business and leisure
pandemic and for which the economic case would be completely markets had occurred, and that therefore the fundamental logics and
upended if patronage and/or revenue lost due to pandemic-induced norms of transport planning had been substantially challenged at the
travel behaviour change did not (quickly) return. This was driven, in very least. This recognition spanned many journey purposes: “A lot of
part, by the top-down nature of project development and appraisal business trips are dead” (W1-04); “Generally speaking, we can be sure
methodologies that are extremely complex but essentially ‘fixed’ be­ that the 9–5 will never be the same again” (W2-07); “We all see offices as
tween major periodic reviews. In England especially, where there is being something different now… the 3 day week” (W2-10); “(COVID)
particularly strong adherence to quantitative investment appraisal hastened the decentralisation of public sector jobs away from London”
underpinned by a national set of estimates for future travel demand, (W4-07); “Some things are becoming more hybridised, for example
there was “little evidence of strategies changing” (W2-04). This led to healthcare provision – that is not going to stop” (W4-16). Retailers “were
the paradoxical situation in which the potential for travel demand to be maybe holding onto the possibility that they could somehow compete
permanently − and in some cases radically − altered by the pandemic against online retail” (W4-13) but this has now largely gone.
was not only well understood but also widely discussed in professional It was in response to these questions that we heard some of the most
circles at the same time as scheme development continued as if nothing insightful commentary about the problematic nature of discerning what
had happened because “no promoter wants to jump first on re- can really be defined as ‘normal’ for the transport sector, and therefore
calibrating proposed investment schemes” in case this led to a loss of that the ‘normal’ that some interests were advocating getting ‘back to’
funding (W2-17). This led to a sense of frustration amongst our gov­ was itself much more dynamic (and problematic) than many voices were
ernment respondents about how little some parts of the industry thought projecting. For example, one of our respondents pointed to the “danger
COVID would change things: “One thing you learn is that people of thinking it’s exactly the same kind of traffic we had before” (W4-15)
continue to ask for the same things and ask you to pay for them” (W4- because even if the overall quantum of vehicle miles is similar to pre-
12). pandemic levels, trends in weekday versus weekend travel, the bal­
Others, however, proactively planned for fiscal ‘reckoning’ and ance of business versus leisure and peak hour versus off-peak hours

7
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

within this headline metric all changed substantially. Many participants Transport infrastructure and services are built around durable assets
described what happened during the pandemic as amplifying trends that and regulatory and fiscal environments designed to operate over time
were pre-existing but not widely recognised or understood: “COVID has horizons measured in years or decades. The ‘systemic inertia’ generated
accelerated a set of changes that would have taken years or even decades by the scale and ‘lumpiness’ of the key building blocks of the sector is
to happen into a matter of months” (W2-07). One participant suggested amplified by the weight and complexity of its extant system of regula­
that teleworking had “always been in our plans but we maybe never tory and service delivery institutions, their rules and norms, and the
really believed it” (W2-02). networks in which actors come together in to perform the task of
Having presented some of the contrasts and conflicts between sta­ governance (see also Schwanen, 2016). The testimonies of our in­
bility and change which revealed themselves as the pandemic unfolded, terviewees underlined the key role of strong technical and professional
we now turn to some reflection on what this tells us about the politics hegemonies in reproducing the rules and norms within which the sector
and power underpinning narratives of ‘back to normal’. operated rather than repositioning to capture the potential for change,
reflecting the desire for hegemonies to domesticate events (Laclau and
5. Discussion Mouffe (1985)). As Glaiser et al. (2019) argue, the strategic capacity to
deliver more sustainable outcomes needs to be different and needs to be
5.1. Research implications deliberately developed in institutions and the governing networks built
from them.
As we set out in the literature review, political institutions and their There were strong formal and informal expectations to ‘keep calm
elected representatives generally prefer stability in policy plans and and carry on’ developing costly and ambitious projects. Indeed, some of
narratives, and seek to manage reactions to exogenous shocks such that these were seen to be much needed good news propositions in an
those policy shifts that are required to manage them are incremental in otherwise negative news cycle. So, rather than stopping to consider
nature. In addition, the literature confirms that transport agencies and significant changes in approach to ‘lock in’ observed changes in travel
governance institutions are largely organised by mode with a tendency behaviour (e.g. in home working or more local active travel), such shifts
to ‘siloed’ behaviour, forming one element of larger socio-technical were ignored in case this suggested some sort of ‘weakness’ in strategic
systems that are slow to change. Overall, our findings show that the capacity of organisations and/or lack of professional commitment to
policy system struggled to even prepare for the possibility of shaping a shared macro policy objectives. The systemic importance of government
path-changing exit from the pandemic by implementing more radical appraisal and investment rules was crucial, since skilled professional
policy shifts in pursuit of long held strategic aspirations. Indeed, we staff developing investment proposals did not want to give up on
were consistently astonished that not one respondent was able to iden­ schemes and think that “the last 3, 4 or 5 years (of their) work is
tify a key individual in their organisation whose job it was to watch, potentially worthless” (W1-17). Equally, in a capital funding environ­
think and learn about the impacts of the pandemic in order to help frame ment based on competition between places for central government
potential policy responses in response to our question on this, suggesting monies, public authorities did not want to be the first ‘over the top’ to
a lack of strategic capacity (Glaiser et al., 2019). The extent of hollowing question previously-held priorities since this might simply mean that
of the sector was laid bare by the need to redeploy resources to frontline available funding was redirected elsewhere.
concerns, which reduced the strategic capacity to consider change still Such logics also applied to service provision. Large capital in­
further. vestments in fleet or rolling stock, warehousing or depots, planning and
We concur with Ansell et al. (2023) in their assessment that notions staffing all underpin the established business models. The pandemic
of change and stability are intertwined, rather than polar opposites. threatened the viability of long-standing systems of transport provision,
Some respondents articulated that stability provided a platform for and so arguments were strongly advanced that existing activities should
experimentation rather than frustrating it. However, this was not a be supported (financially) to build back or even ‘build back better’ (DfT,
consistently held view and the provision of a platform did not mean it 2021). The net result has been significantly higher per passenger sub­
was executed in practice. Some respondents set out narratives about sidies, especially for the rail industry, in an environment where service
how (the potential for) major social change co-existed with business as levels, patronage and revenues from fares have not recovered to pre-
usual planning during the pandemic with a more on-going model of pandemic levels. With respect to the literature on robust governance
policy change. However, this was seen as optimistic or was implied to be responses, we would describe the outcome as an attempt at ‘resilient
naïve by more respondents who described the stability of processes, response’ – to put things back as close to pre-pandemic levels as possible.
particularly funding and project appraisal, which stifled experimenta­ Howlett and Ramesh (2023; 29) suggest such a response is characteristic
tion. Analysing each of the three different elements of Ansell et al.’s of “standard operating procedures and “silo” policy work” and will ul­
(2023) framework separately helped to more clearly demarcate change timately “undermine rather than promote robustness by reducing agility
and stability in what and how those narratives interacted. in volatile times“.
There was widespread recognition from key actors that the pandemic
really did present a significant ‘moment’ to achieve policy repositioning 5.2. Practical implications
(see also Schmidt et al., 2021). Yet, despite there being an evident desire
to see through such changes on the part of many of our interviewees, the This paper is based on interviews from key decision makers working
wider governance system found it difficult if not impossible to achieve in the context of the UK transport policy system and it is important,
them in practice, because other components of the system worked therefore, to caveat wider practical implications with a recognition that
directly against change. Large parts of the ‘system functions’ remain different governance systems elsewhere have different characteristics
unchanged in a broad sense, such as facilitating the movement of people (Veeneman, 2023). That said, there are many common characteristics of
and goods and the need for a blend of modes. This made for powerful how the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded and the behavioural responses to
arguments to carry on as before. However, this inertia was in the face of it that are broadly applicable to many developed countries, with key
clear recognition that the relative importance of different aspects of aspects of the path dependencies of large socio-technical systems shared
system provision was fluid given the changing nature of the needs of across national contexts.
many travellers as discussed above. Whatever the arguments about the The system of transport planning and service operation works, to a
‘purpose’ of transport provision, that significant change in policy did not large degree, over long timescales. Business cases for new infrastructure
occur reflects the profound inertias resulting from the scale of socio- are built on decades-long assumptions about travel demand, and public
technical system that the transport sector represents (the institutional transport operations are altered incrementally in response. Opportu­
infrastructure). nities for path changing outcomes are vanishingly rare. Indeed,

8
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

transport’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have created key finding emerging repeatedly from our respondents’ testimonies was
conditions that make it less well prepared for future shocks because by that there was more to this than transport operating as a silo; the
not pro-actively adapting to changing travel market conditions, the transport sector was seen to be a ‘rule taker’ rather than a ‘rule maker’,
sector is delivering less for more. A very tight technical hegemony largely unable to shape the wider direction of public policy and at the
supports this, which has been engineered over time to make the case for mercy of decisions made elsewhere for different – and sometimes con­
state funding for capital projects and subsidy for services. Indeed, many tradictory – reasons. There was no ‘ringmaster’ able to collate infor­
of our respondents emphasised how the case for new projects was put mation across the sector and speak or lobby on its behalf. This provided
forward as being just as necessary during the pandemic as beforehand, opportunities for producer interests in other sectors such as commercial
irrespective of changing policy agendas. property and retailing, to make (semi-informed) pronouncements about
Scenarios for more radically different travel futures that practitioners transport and how it should react to achieve their objectives. Wider calls
had discussed but “never really believed in” were realised. Yet, despite for ‘back to normal’ from some government ministers and elements of
this, more radical future pathways were once again marginalised by the the business community and in particular the need to get ‘back to the
system-wide assumption that the priority was to get ‘back to normal’. office’ gave little or no thought to the costs of providing the same kind of
The narrative of ‘back to normal’ is particularly troubling because most transport system to service a set of working patterns which had become –
respondents identified the changes as an acceleration of underlying and still remain – much less evenly distributed across the week as many
trends. That is to say, change is on-going but under-recognised. To people work flexibly. As one respondent put it to us, “nobody ever thinks
illustrate, in the UK car mileage driven per household fell by 15 % be­ about transport. Apart from transport planners, who don’t think about
tween 2002 and 2019 (DfT, 2025) but there is limited exploration of anything else” (W4-01). Looking ahead, rather than seeing transport as a
this. A core practical implication of this narrative of going back to pre- sector whose role is largely to respond to public policy concerns else­
pandemic conditions is that transport policy risks drifting further where, a stronger case needs to be made that it is part of a whole range of
away from serving the needs of the public, not recognising the changed other Governmental departmental missions. This remains a difficult
commute, retail and servicing market for example. If a more robust puzzle to resolve given the strong institutional siloes, histories of the
governance response is to be possible, then greater attention needs to be organisation of transport in Government as either its own entity or as a
paid to developing a planning approach which is founded in a more subset of a Ministry of Public Works and ours is not the first such call
responsive model of social change, capable of integrating of digital, (Stead, 2008).
physical proximity and transport connectivity (e.g Lyons et al., 2024). It
is not possible for a switch to suddenly be thrown during a crisis to 6. Conclusions
upend planning practices for various technical, practical and episte­
mological reasons. Our longitudinal interview process with senior leaders across the UK
We also asked whether the response to the COVID-19 crisis makes transport system during the COVID-19 pandemic provided an unprece­
transport policy better placed to tackle other aspects of the polycrisis, dented opportunity to observe the thoughts, actions and responses of
and to be blunt, it has not. In the UK, instead of promoting measures to key organisations in a mature governance system with the aim of better
reduce travel demand during the oil price spike following the invasion of understanding what the real scope for radical policy changes beyond the
Ukraine in 2022, a reduction in fuel duty was introduced (the opposite of incremental might be. We sought to build an account of how and why
what happened in the 1970 s). This suggests a lack of policy recognition decisions emerged so that we can learn from the experiences recorded
of the potential for behaviour change, or a reticence to invoke travelling and think differently about how to approach future crises. Our dataset is
less because of the negative associations of this and wider ‘behavioural unique but it was also collected in the particular context of the UK, and
interventions’ with the pandemic more generally. We can also see a lack as such it invites further (comparative) work to explore how the
of follow through on policies designed to change travel behaviour for pandemic has changed policy making and practice in different institu­
other reasons. For example, in December 2020, during the second tional settings and national political cultures. More generally, we further
lockdowns associated with the emerge of the Alpha COVID-19 variant, underline the importance, yet dearth, of studies of the nature of the
Scotland championed a target of a 20 % reduction in vehicle kilometres institutional response relative to the behavioural response or the specific
by 2030 as necessary for meeting its climate change obligations (SG, temporary policy interventions introduced during COVID-19. This
2020). However, this target will now be dropped as no “realistic” shortcoming remains characteristic of wider transport research
pathway to achieving it has been put in place (Hyslop, 2025). (Marsden and Reardon, 2017).
More broadly, what happened to travel behaviour, business prac­ Our research demonstrates that in many important ways, the UK
tices, land-use and property utilisation and transport patterns as a result transport sector has emerged from COVID-19 in a worse position than
COVID19 is being treated as a one-off, and not an acceleration of before in terms of its capacity to tackle longstanding policy challenges
established trends. The presumption that COVID was a discrete exoge­ and achieve the non-incremental shifts required to address the critical
nous shock rather than a lens revealing the true extent of ongoing dy­ problems it faces. The loss of public transport patronage has raised
namic change in transport and mobility means that the sector has in fact service subsidy requirements, has already resulted in service cuts and
made itself less robust to future shocks, with a more limited scope to generated increasing uncertainty about whether current reduced service
change than is desirable given the policy environment facing us. It is provision is sustainable (Financial Times, 2023). Ansell et al. (2023: 4)
possible that more agile state responses have happened elsewhere, but describe robust governance as being “able to continue providing public
we reflect on Neog et al. (2025) finding that in the US, public transit value in the face of variable, inconsistent, unexpected, or unpredictable
agencies decided to focus back on their core markets following the events and demands”. If we consider public value to reside in the long
pandemic. run goals of public policy as well as the short-run emergency response,
Our interviews also revealed the sheer extent to which transport then transport has undoubtedly become less robust. COVID-19 has not
concerns were removed from the heart of government, and its main been a path breaking moment.
policy making machinery during the pandemic. The limited connectivity The ‘allure of normal’ as a narrative seems an almost unavoidable
between transport and wider cross-sector responses that we observed siren’s call given the embedded institutions, infrastructures and systems
was in stark contrast to the established rhetoric about the purpose of of provision, all reinforced by a technical hegemony that is dominated
transport being to serve societal demand for access to health, education, by carefully managed and repetitive planning processes with long his­
employment and so on. This lack of policy integration, or ‘policy dis­ tories. The ‘allure of normal’ is also perhaps understandable in policy
tance’ from core concerns, is perhaps characteristic of tightly knit terms given the economic and social scarring that COVID-19 caused.
specialist technical hegemonies (Antonson and Åkerskog, 2015). But a Certainly, the advocates for ’back to normal’ (stability) were able to

9
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

express the power they held within the policy system to achieve their Cass, N., Schwanen, T., Shove, E., 2018. Infrastructures, intersections and societal
transformations. Tech. Fore. & Soc. Change 137, 160–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/
desired outcome in practice, pushing back against those advocating to
j.techfore.2018.07.039.
seize the opportunity for more radical change. Curtis, C., Low, N., 2012. Institutional Barriers to Sustainable Transport. Taylor and
If crises are revealing of the potential for policy change, but limited Francis.
as moments for enacting policy change, then what? The answer may lie Davies, N, Hodgkin, R, Keenan, H., Hoddinott, S. and Dellar, A., 2025. Five years since
Covid: four ways government has changed, Institute for Government, London.
in moving beyond the false dichotomy of change and stability. The Retrieved from website https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/five-
behaviour changes observed were already evident but ‘accelerated’. The years-covid Last accessed April 25, 2025.
policy actions or infrastructure changes which were most easily enacted DfT, 2021. Great British Railways: Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail, Cmnd 423. HMSO,
London. Retrieved from website www.gov.uk/government/publications/great-
were already largely developed. Change was, it could be argued, already british-railways-williams-shapps-plan-for-rail Last accessed April 25, 2025.
part of the everyday, albeit substantially under-recognised. Perhaps DfT, 2022. National Road Traffic Projections 2022, Department for Transport, London.
then, it is essential to make the case for a more radical rethink of Retrieved from website https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-
road-traffic-projections Last accessed April 25, 2025.
transport policy, planning and practice. A rethink which looks for and DfT, 2025. National Travel Survey Table nts0705, Department for Transport, London,
adapts to change in the everyday so that it is better placed to respond Retrieved from website https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/
more urgently to the breadth and scale of the challenges it faces and, 66ce119f8e33f28aae7e1f7d/nts0705.ods Last Accessed April 29, 2025.
Filgueiras, M., Amorim, M., Lobo, A., Couto, A., Kern, M. and Ferreira, S., 2024. Adapting
better equipped to take a more adaptive response in future crises. to the new normal: Understanding public transport use and willingness-to-pay for
social distancing during a pandemic context, J. Urban Mob., 5, 100079, https://doi.
CRediT authorship contribution statement org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2024.100079.
Financial Times, 2023. England’s train operators brace for further budget cuts, December
28. Retrieved from website https://www.ft.com/content/09ba84ea-e62f-4782-baa4-
Iain Docherty: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, 0562d72cccf3 Last Accessed April 29, 2025.
Validation, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Fund­ Fisa, R., Musukuma, M., Sampa, M., Musonda, P., Young, T., 2022. Effects of
ing acquisition, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Greg interventions for preventing road traffic crashes: an overview of systematic reviews.
BMC Public Health 22, 513. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12253-y.
Marsden: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Valida­ Fuller, J. and Kerr, W., 2022. The Great Resignation Didn’t Start with the Pandemic,
tion, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Funding Harv. Bus. Rev., March 23. Retrieved from website https://hbr.org/2022/03/the-
acquisition, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. great-resignation-didnt-start-with-the-pandemic Last Accessed April 29, 2025.
Glaiser, M., te Brömmelstroet, M., Bertolini, L., 2019. Learning to build strategic capacity
for transportation policy change: An interdisciplinary exploration. Transportation
Declaration of competing interest Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 1, 100006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trip.2019.100006.
Hall, P.A., 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: The case of economic
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial policy-making in Britain. Comp. Pol., 25 (3), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.2307/
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence 422246.
the work reported in this paper. Harris, M., McCue, P., 2022. Pop-Up Cycleways: How a COVID-19 “Policy Window”
Changed the Relationship Between Urban Planning, Transport, and Health in
Sydney. Australia. J. Am. Plan. Assoc., 89 (2), 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Acknowledgements 01944363.2022.2061578.
Hirschorn, F., 2021. A multi-level governance response to the Covid-19 crisis in public
transport. Transp. Pol., 112, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.08.007.
This research was funded through a combination of personal
Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., 2023. Designing for adaptation: Static and dynamic robustness
research time from the University of Leeds and University of Stirling as in policy-making. Public Admin. 101 (1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/
well as from three UKRI research grants: Centre for Research on Energy padm.12849.
Hyslop, F., 2025. Evidence to Public Audit Committee, Scottish Parliament, Holyrood,
Demand Solutions (Grant agreement number EP/R035288/1); The
Retrieved from website https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nHo5u5I0zM Last
DecarboN8 network+ (Grant agreement number EP/S032002/1) and Accessed April 25, 2025.
The Productivity Insights Network (Grant agreement number ES/ Khreis, H., Sanchez, K.A., Foster, M., Burns, J., Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., Jaikumar, R.,
R007810/1). Ramani, T., Zietsman, J., 2023. Urban policy interventions to reduce traffic-related
emissions and air pollution: A systematic evidence map. Environ. Int., 172, 107805.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.107805.
Data availability Kim, K., 2021. 9/11 Transformation of transportation research. Transportation Research
Interdisciplinary Perspectives 12, 100472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trip.2021.100472.
Data is available at https://doi.org/10.5518/1562. Kok, K., Loeber, A., Grin, J., 2021. Politics of complexity: Conceptualizing agency, power
and powering in the transitional dynamics of complex adaptive systems. Res. Policy
References 50 (3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104183.
Kontou, E., Murray-Tuite, P., Wernstedt, K., 2017. Duration of Commute Travel Changes
in the Aftermath of Hurricane Sandy using Accelerated Failure Time Modeling.
Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., Torfing, J., 2023. Public administration and politics meet
Transp. Res. A 100, 170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.015.
turbulence: The search for robust governance responses. Public Admin., 101, 3–22.
Kotarski, K., 2023. The New Era of Polycrisis and How to Tackle It, Fut. Eur. J., 3.
https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12874.
Retrieved from website https://feu-journal.eu/issues/issue-3/introduction-the-new-
Antonson, H., Åkerskog, A., 2015. This is what we did last time Uncertainty over
era-of-polycrisis-and-how-to-tackle-it/ Last Accessed May 01, 2025.
landscape analysis and its procurement in the Swedish road planning process. Land
Laclau, E., Mouffe, C., 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Verso.
Use Policy 42, 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.07.001.
Lawrence, M., Homer-Dixon, T., Janzwood, S., Rockström, J., Renn, O., Donges, J.F.,
Arts, J., Hanekamp, T., Linssen, R., Snippe, J., 2016. Benchmarking Integrated
2024. Global polycrisis: the causal mechanisms of crisis entanglement. Glob. Sus., 7,
Infrastructure Planning Across Europe – Moving Forward to Vital Infrastructure
e6.
Networks and Urban Regions. Transp. Res. Procedia 14, 303–312. https://doi.org/
Lee, K.-S., Eom, J.K., 2024. Systematic literature review on impacts of Covid-19
10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.024.
pandemic and corresponding measures on mobility. Transportation 51, 1907–1961.
Baumgartner, F.R., Jones, B.D., Mortnesen, P.B., 2018. Punctuated Equilibrium Theory:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-023-10392-2.
Explaining Stability and Change in Public Policy Decision-Making. In: Weible, C.M.,
Lizana, M., Choudhury, C., Watling, D., 2024. Analysing the impacts of individual-level
Sabatier, P.A. (Eds.), Theories of the Policy Process. Taylor and Francis, pp. 55–102.
factors on public transport usage during the Covid-19 pandemic: a comprehensive
Bryson, J.M., Crosby, B.C., Bloomberg, L., 2014. Public Value Governance: Moving
literature review and meta-analysis. Transp. Rev., 44 (2), 434–460. https://doi.org/
Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management. Public
10.1080/01441647.2023.2295967.
Admin Rev 74, 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238.
Low, N., Astle, R., 2009. Path dependence in urban transport: An institutional analysis of
Boyte, H.C., 2011. Constructive Politics as Public Work: Organizing the Literature. Polit.
irban passenger transport in Melbourne, Australia, 1956-2006. Transp. Pol., 16 (2),
Theory 39 (5), 630–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591711413747.
47–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2009.02.010.
Brand, C., Anable, J., Ketsopoulou, I., Watson, J., 2020. Road to zero or road to nowhere?
Lukes, S., 1974. Power: A Radical View. Macmillan.
Disrupting transport and energy in a zero carbon world. Energy Pol., 139, 111334.
Lyons, G., Marchau, V., Paddeu, D., Rye, T., Adolphson, M., Attia, M., Bozovic, T.,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111334.
Bylund, J., Calvert, T., Chatterjee, K., Comi, A., Cragg, S., Fancello, G., Lenferink, S.,
Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. in
Mladenovič, L., Piras, F., Svensson, T. and Witzell, J., 2024. Triple Access Planning
Psychol., 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
for Uncertain Futures – A Handbook for Practitioners. March, ISBN 978-1-86043-
Cairney, P., 2019. Understanding Public Policy: Theories and Issues, Vol. 2. Bloomsbury
Publishing.

10
I. Docherty and G. Marsden Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 31 (2025) 101459

621-5. Retrieved from website https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/ Schmidt, K., Sieverding, T., Wallis, H., Matthies, E., 2021. Covid-19 - A window of
11751967/ Last accessed May 01, 2025. opportunity for the transition towards sustainable mobility? Transportation
Marsden, G., 2025. Travel behaviour and disruptions. In: Potoglou, D., Spinney, S. (Eds.), Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 10, 100374. https://doiorg/10.1016/j.
Handbook of Travel Behaviour (pp. 435–456), Edward Elgar. https://www.elgaronl trip.2021.100374.
ine.com/downloadpdf/edcollchap-oa/book/9781839105746/book-part-9781839 Schwanen, T., 2016. Rethinking resilience as capacity to endure : Automobility and the
105746-31.pdf. city. City 20 (1), 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2015.1125718.
Marsden, G., Anable, J., Chatterton, T., Docherty, I., Faulconbridge, J., Murray, L., SG, 2020. Securing a green recovery on a path to net zero: climate change plan 2018-
Roby, H., Shires, J., 2020. Studying disruptive events: Innovations in behaviour, 2032 - update, Scottish Government, https://www.gov.scot/publications/securing-
opportunities for lower carbon transport policy? Transp. Pol. 94, 89–101. https:// green-recovery-path-net-zero-update-climate-change-plan-20182032/ Last Accessed
doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.04.008. 25/04/25.
Marsden, G., Reardon, L., 2017. Questions of governance: rethinking the study of Sørensen, C.H., Isaksson, K., Macmillen, J., Åkerman, J. and Kressler, F., 2014. Strategies
transportation policy. Transp. Res. A 101, 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. to manage barriers in policy formation and implementation of road pricing packages,
tra.2017.05.008. Transp. Res. A, 60, 40-52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2013.10.013.
Marsden, G., Schwanen, T., 2024. Planning to fail? How science can respond to reduced Stead, D., 2008. Institutional aspects of integrating transport, environment and health
climate mitigation ambition. npj. Sustain. Mobil. Transp. 1 (2). https://doi.org/ policies. Transp. Pol., 15 (3), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1038/s44333-024-00002-8. tranpol.2007.12.001.
Martin, C., Kan, H. and Fink, M., 2023. Crisis Preparation in the Age of Long Stead, D., Reardon, L., 2025. Understanding transport challenges through the lens of
Emergencies, Blavatnik School of Government, Oxford. Retrieved from website wicked problems: recognising the ‘non-rational’ in transport policymaking. In:
https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-03/BSG-Crisis-preparation-age- Perl, A., Ray, R.S., Reardon, L. (Eds.), Handbook of Transportation and Public Policy.
long-emergencies.pdf Last accessed May 01, 2025. Edward Elgar, pp. 32–46.
Mattson, L.G., Janelius, E., 2015. Vulnerability and resilience of transport systems - A Suri, H., 2011. Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qual. Res. J., 11
discussion of recent research. Transp. Res. A 81, 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. (2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ1102063.
tra.2015.06.002. Torfing, J., 2009. Rethinking path dependence in public policy research. Crit. Pol.
McTigue, C., Rye, T., Monios, J., 2020. Identifying barriers to implementation of local Studies 3 (1), 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460170903158149.
transport policy – Lessons learned from case studies on bus policy implementation in Thompson, J., 2022. Why Has the UK Spending on Rail Increased? A Discourse Analysis.
Great Britain. Transp. Pol., 91, 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. PhD thesis, University of Leeds. Retrieved from website https://etheses.whiterose.ac.
tranpol.2020.03.002. uk/id/eprint/31826/ Last accessed May 01, 2025.
Neog, D., Shekari, E., Brown, J., 2025. Navigating disruption in public transit: Lessons UITP, 2023. What does ‘new normal mobility’ look like? June, Knowledge Brief,
from the COVID experiences of ten agencies that enjoyed pre-pandemic ridership Retrieved from website https://cms.uitp.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/
growth. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 30, 101353. https:// Knowledge-Brief-NewNormal-JUN23.pdf, Last accessed April 29, 2025.
doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101353. Urry, J., 2004. The ‘system’ of automobility. Theory Cult. & Soc., 21 (4–5), 25–39.
OECD, 2023. PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046059.
OECD, Paris. Retrieved from website https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa- van Exel, N., Rietveld, P., 2009. When strike comes to town. anticipated and actual
2022-results-volume-ii_a97db61c-en Last accessed May 01, 2025. behavioural reactions to a one-day, pre-announced, complete rail strike in the
Peralvo, F.C., Vanegas, P.C., Avila-Ordóñez, E., 2022. A systematic review of COVID-19 Netherlands. Transp. Res. A 43, 526–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
transport policies and mitigation strategies around the globe. Transportation tra.2009.01.003.
Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 15, 100653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Van Wee, B., 2023. The transport system and its effects on accessibility, the environment,
trip.2022.100653. safety, health and well-being: an introduction. In: van Wee, B., Annema, J.A.,
Pot, W., Scherpenisse, J., ’t Hart, P., 2023. Robust governance for the long term and the Banister, D., Pudae, B. (Eds.), The Transport System and Transport Policy, an
heat of the moment: Temporal strategies for coping with dual crises. Public Admin. Introduction, 2nd edition. Edward Elgar, pp. 3–17.
101 (1), 221–235. Veeneman, W., 2023. Governance, COVID responses, and lessons on decision-making un
Przeworski, A., 2005. Democracy as an Equilibrium. Public Choice 123 (3/4), 253–273. uncertainty, in Zhang, J. and Hayashi, Y. (Eds.) Transportation Amid Pandemics (pp
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-005-7163-4. 441-450), Elsevier https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-99770-6.00019-3.
Pykett, J., Ball, S., Dingwall, R., Lepenies, R., Sommer, T., Strassheim, H., Wenzel, L., Wilkinson, E., 2022. NHS England’s backlog recovery plan is at serious risk. Watchdog
2023. Ethical moments and institutional expertise in UK Government COVID-19 Warns BMJ 379, o2779. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o2779.
pandemic policy responses: where, when and how is ethical advice sought? Evidence Zafri, N.M., Khan, A., Jamal, S., Alam, B.M., 2021. Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on
& Policy 19 (2), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16596928051179. Active Travel Mode Choice in Bangladesh: A Study from the Perspective of
Rajan S, Khunti K, Alwan N, Steves C, MacDermott N, Morsella A, Angulo E, Winkelmann Sustainability and New Normal Situation. Sust., 13 (12), 6975. https://doi.org/
J, Bryndová L, Fronteira I, Gandré C, Or Z, Gerkens S, Sagan A, Simões J, Ricciardi 10.3390/su13126975.
W, de Belvis AG, Silenzi A, Bernal-Delgado E, Estupiñán-Romero F, McKee M. In the Zhu, S. and Levinson, D.M, 2010, A Review of Research on Planned and Unplanned
wake of the pandemic: Preparing for Long COVID [Internet]. Copenhagen Disruptions to Transportation Networks, 89th Annual Transportation Research
(Denmark): European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2021. PMID: Board Meeting, Washington D.C. Retrieved from website https://www.researchgate.
33877759. Retrieved from website https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33877759/ net/publication/5198211_A_Review_of_Research_on_Planned_and_Unplanned_
Last Accessed May 01, 2025. Disruptions_to_Transportation_Networks Last accessed May 01, 2025.
Rhodes, R.A.W., 2007. Understanding Governance: Ten Years On. Organ. Studies 28 (8),
1243–1264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076586.

11