Institute for Climate Change and Sustainable Development, University of Malta
Discourses, Social Practice and Travel
Application of Q Methodology
Dr Robin Hickman
Bartlett School of Planning
r.hickman@ucl.ac.uk
The Research Focus
•
•
•
•
The concept of sustainable travel has
been well discussed for over three
decades – but the meaning of
sustainability in travel remains interpreted
in many different ways.
A transition to more environmentally
sustainable travel remains difficult to
achieve, particularly in suburban areas –
at the individual level, there are many
different aspirations for and constraints
on travel – the appropriate infrastructure
is still uncertain ..
This paper explores the discourses
surrounding the return home journeys
from a major employer in Ealing, London.
An in-depth survey is undertaken with 35
employees, using Q methodology,
analysing the reasons for the choice of
mode for the commute home, including
the multiple and door-to-door journey
links and nodes.
Previous Literature
Debates about sustainable travel can be analysed in discursive terms, yet there are
few studies that use discourse analysis in transport planning.
• There is a wider tradition in environmental studies (Hajer, 1995, Dryzek, 1997,
Barry and Proops, 1999, Hajer and Versteeg, 2005, Stevenson, 2015).
• But little in transport; with the exception of Rajé (2007), who considers transport
and social inclusion issues – but not sustainable (environmental) travel issues.
A discourse can be viewed as:
“A shared way of apprehending the world. Embedded in language, it enables those
who subscribe to it to interpret bits of information and put them into coherent stories
or accounts […] each discourse rests on assumptions, judgements, and contentions
that provide the basic terms for analysis, debates, agreements and disagreements.”
(Dryzek, 1997, p.9-10)
The Case Study: Ealing
A London suburban town centre, developed
from the late 1800s onwards, surrounding the
new rail/underground network – known as the
‘Queen of the Suburbs’.
•
•
•
Ealing has excellent transport links and good access into central London – but still
private car and walking and bus dominate trips at the borough level (Ealing
Borough Council, 2014).
There has been a recent increase in the percentage of household without a car –
rising from 32% in 2001 to 35% in 2011.
People are moving back into the cities (urban renaissance) and car usage is
reducing (peak car) – the younger cohorts and people migrating into London are
using the car much less than previous generations?
Methodology
There are different approaches to analysing discourse, and one
useful technique is Q methodology – a research method used
widely in the social sciences, originally developed by psychologist
William Stephenson (1953) – a former Professor at UCL.
Combined quantitative and qualitative analysis of personal
experiences, preferences and beliefs – concerning the vast amount
of communication on a subject (the concourse).
A typical Q study:
1. Definition of the research area under consideration.
2. Generation and selection of statements for the Q sample –
typically a set of 40-60 statements, with answers given on a
semantic scale.
3. Administration of the Q sample to participants through
interviews.
4. Statistical analysis of collected data to extract ‘typical’ Q sorts
through factor analysis using Q software.
5. Discursive interpretation of typical Q sorts.
Methodology
The outcome of a typical Q sample is shown in Figure 1, where each column is used to place
statements which have been ranked from -4 (strongly disagree) to +4 (strongly agree) – hence the
survey respondent is forced to rank statements into a normalised sample.
Strongly disagree
-4
-3
-2
-1
Neutral
0
1
2
Strongly agree
3
4
All research interviews were conducted at Ealing Borough Council (Ealing BC) Offices in Ealing, West
London, UK. Most participants were employed by Ealing BC, a major employer in the borough.
Dedicated Q methodology software (PQMethod) is used to perform correlation and factor analysis on
the completed Q sorts – statistical significance and qualitative judgement are used to develop the
discourses. The Eigenvalue (EV) (i.e. the sum of its squared factor loadings) is used to identify
significance – an EV > 1 is used.
Completing the Q Sort
Strongly disagree
-4
-3
-2
-1
Neutral
0
1
2
Strongly agree
3
4
14. I need a car for my day-to-day life
2. Driving is an enjoyable hobby
3. Car ownership is a universal goal
and a natural step in life’s progression
4. Driving is tiring and stressful – time
spent driving is often the worst part of
my day
6. I enjoy driving nice or expensive cars
21. We should spend more money to
improve the Underground/train network
31. I love cycling – it is the best way to travel around
38. A society where the majority of people cycle to work
is ideal
64. We need Dutch-style segregated cycle paths in
London
Q Sample and Discourses
No. Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
I enjoy the freedom and independence of driving
Driving is an enjoyable hobby
Car ownership is a universal goal and a natural step in life’s progression
Driving is tiring and stressful – time spent driving is often the worst part of my
day
Driving is often in congested conditions and we should build more roads to
make driving easier
I enjoy driving nice or expensive cars
I like driving fast and get a kick out of driving
I feel safer in a car – it is the safest way to get around
Being in a car stuck in traffic is better than riding a bus stuck in traffic
If you are successful in life you tend to drive a nice car
Car parking spaces are much too difficult to find and expensive
Driving a car enables me to carry out my busy life through greater accessibility
I like the carrying capacity and utility of the car (for luggage and other
passengers)
I need a car for my day-to-day life
It is not necessary to own a car in a large city like London – there are many
other options to travel around
It is hard to be truly independent and flexible without a car
I would use a low emission car or electric car if they became much cheaper
Car clubs are an ideal model of car ownership
I only travel by car for recreational trips and holidays – never to go to work
I use the Underground/train as it is much quicker than other modes
We should spend more money to improve the Underground/train network
Public transport is the only feasible way to get around in the city environment
A
Cycling
Advocate
-4
-2
-2
-1
Statement by Discourse
B
C
Public Transport
Committed
User
Cyclist
0
2
-1
1
-3
-4
-1
-2
D
Reluctant
Motorist
1
-3
-4
2
-3
-2
-1
-2
-4
-4
-2
-3
-3
-2
-2
-1
-3
-3
-2
-2
-2
1
-2
2
-1
-1
-1
-1
2
1
0
2
-4
-4
2
4
-3
1
0
3
-2
4
-4
3
-3
2
1
1
-3
-1
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
0
-1
4
-2
0
-3
-1
4
3
-3
3
1
-4
68 attitudinal statements (Q statements) – 4 discourses identified, using
PQMethod – an open source Q methodology software package.
Q Sample and Discourses
No. Statement
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
I use public transport as it is much cheaper than other modes in the long run
The Underground/train is much too crowded to enjoy travelling on it
Our current public transport network is not good enough to make car ownership
unnecessary
The best part of travelling on public transport is the capacity to read/write/use
my phone throughout the journey
Affordable public transport is a necessity
It is really only the poorest people in society that use the bus regularly
I enjoy travelling on the bus – when it runs on time it is a good way to travel
I would cycle more if there were much better cycling facilities
I love cycling – it is the best way to travel around
I would love to ride the newest, fastest bicycles
Being a cyclist says a lot about someone’s character
I enjoy cycling regularly as it gives me exercise
Cycling on the road is too dangerous and there are no adequate facilities for
cycling
I don’t cycle because the weather is too wet and cold for too much of the year
Cycling to work isn’t feasible due to distance or the need to arrive at work in
professional attire
A society where the majority of people cycle to work is ideal
You should be able to walk anywhere you need to go
Walking is my favourite means of travel
I only tend to walk as it is free – I much prefer other modes of travel
I would much prefer if I could walk, cycle and use public transport all of the time
– and never travel by car
I would prefer to work at home and do it whenever I can
I would prefer to live in a suburban city centre like Ealing
A
Cycling
Advocate
0
0
-1
Statement by Discourse
B
C
Public Transport
Committed
User
Cyclist
2
0
2
1
0
2
D
Reluctant
Motorist
-2
2
1
The composite Q sort represents how
a hypothetical respondent with a 100%
1
3
-2
-1
loading on that factor would have
4
3
4
ordered the -23statements.
-4
-2
-1
1
0
3
1
0
2
-1
3
0
-3
-3
-1
-4
3
-2
1
4
0
0
4
0
-3
0
-1
-2
-2
2
0
-1
-2
-1
-1
-4
-4
2
-2
3
3
2
-1
2
0
0
0
-2
0
2
-3
-1
1
1
0
0
-2
-3
0
-1
0
-1
1
-2
0
1
0
Q Sample and Discourses
No. Statement
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
I would prefer to live in a smaller country town or rural village community
I would prefer to live in central London
I am in my comfort zone when driving a car
It is difficult to use the Underground/train – many of the stations are not
accessible for those with disabilities or mobility difficulties
I would use the bus – but it is difficult to find out where bus services run from/to
I would not feel confident cycling in heavy or fast-moving traffic
Cyclists are the most vulnerable of all road users
Travelling by public transport should be made easier and more accessible
My preferred mode of transport is influenced by daily weather conditions
How I get around each day says a lot about who I am
Roads and streets are a public good and should be used democratically
We need much more and much better road space for the car
We should provide much more car parking spaces, and make parking cheaper
Taxis are important and should be given greater priority on our roads
Cars are given too much priority on roads
I believe a more extensive Underground/rail network should be built
I believe there should be more space for car clubs – with more rental vehicles
parked on residential streets
We need a system of trams in London as well as other public transport modes
A fast and efficient bus system requires giving more space to buses on streets
and roads
We need Dutch-style segregated cycle paths in London
There should be more road space allocated for pedestrians and cyclists
More cycle parking spaces should be built in city centres and at stations
We need higher densities in town and city centres, with mixed employment and
residential uses – so that people can work and live locally
Oyster cards and the contactless system employed by TfL are easy to
understand and use – and help me use public transport
A
Cycling
Advocate
0
0
-3
0
Statement by Discourse
B
C
Public Transport
Committed
User
Cyclist
-2
-3
-1
-1
-1
0
1
0
D
Reluctant
Motorist
2
-1
0
-1
The
composite
Q sort
represents
how
The
composite
Q sort
represents
how
a hypothetical
respondent
with
a 100%
a hypothetical
respondent
with
a 100%
loading
that
factor
would have
loading
on on
that
factor
-1
-4would have
-4
-2
ordered
the
statements.
0
4
-3
-1
ordered the 1statements.
3
4
4
3
1
0
2
-3
-4
-1
1
2
1
4
0
-2
2
-3
-1
-1
0
2
0
3
-3
1
2
-1
1
-1
2
-2
0
0
3
-1
3
-3
-1
-2
1
1
2
2
1
0
2
-2
0
0
0
4
4
4
3
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
3
2
1
0
2
4
3
-1
Discourse A: “The Cycling Advocate”
Discourse A is formed by seven participants – they are strong supporters
of improved cycling facilities and more active-transport oriented cities –
represented by the statements below:
Rank
4
3
0
-3
-4
•
•
•
“The influence of the car on social
[concepts] such as success or other
positive things is not true anymore –
certainly not in central London.” (P7)
“The [Ealing] Borough Council need to
get a lot more radical with cycling
infrastructure for [other people] to
consider cycling more, and shouldn’t
worry about prioritising it against the
car driver.” (P36)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Statements
15, 64, 65, 66
27, 31, 38, 39, 52, 67
18, 19, 23, 24, 30, 33, 44, 45, 46, 48, 50, 54
5, 9, 10, 16, 47, 56
1, 6, 7, 57
There should be more road space for cyclists and pedestrians (65)
We need Dutch-style segregated cycle paths (64)
More cycle parking spaces should be built in city centres and at key
stations (66)
It is not necessary to own a car in a city like London (15)
Travelling by public transport should be made easier and more
accessible (52)
I love cycling – it is the best way to get around (31)
Disagree, I enjoy the freedom and independence of driving (1)
Disagree, I enjoy driving nice or expensive cars (6)
Disagree, it is hard to be truly independent and flexible without a car
(16)
Disagree, we should provide more parking spaces (57)
Discourse B: “The Public Transport User”
Discourse A is formed by 14 participants – of the use of public transport
and advocate for more affordable and accessible public transport systems
– represented by the statements below:
Rank
4
3
0
-3
-4
•
•
•
“Policy should encourage more public
transport usage and cycling amongst
the population, and less car usage.”
(P2)
•
•
•
•
Statements
27, 50, 52, 68
15, 21, 26, 29, 35, 51
1, 16, 25, 30, 38, 39, 40, 42, 53, 59, 61, 62
3, 6, 7, 31, 32, 56
14, 28, 34, 49
Affordable public transport is a necessity (27)
I would not feel confident cycling in heavy or fast moving traffic (50)
Travelling by public transport should be made easier and more
accessible (52)
Oyster cards and the contactless system are easy to understand and
use (68)
It is not necessary to own a car in a large city like London (15)
Many of the car-centric statements are negatively sorted – disagree,
car ownerships is a universal goal (3), we need more road space
(56), I need a car for my day-to-day life (14), it is only the poorest
people in society that use a bus (28)
Disagree with some of the pro-cycling statements – disagree, I love
cycling (31), I love to ride the newest, fastest bikes (32), I enjoy
cycling regularly as it gives me exercise (34).
Discourse C: “The Committed Cyclist”
Discourse C is formed by seven participants – they are strong supporters
of improved cycling facilities and are confident cyclists even with poor
facilities – represented by the statements below:
Rank
4
3
0
-3
-4
““Cycling in the region is horrendous.
Disjointed cycle lanes, terrible
implementation… There are some nicer
places to cycle but they aren’t along main
routes.” (P19)
Statements
19, 31, 34, 51
27, 52, 64, 65, 66, 68
12, 17, 21, 23, 32, 33, 35, 44, 47, 48, 61, 63
14, 22, 39, 45, 50, 53
3, 36, 37, 49
•
•
•
•
•
I love cycling – it is the best way to get around (31)
I enjoy cycling regularly as it gives me exercise (34)
Cyclists are the most vulnerable of all road users (51)
We need Dutch-style segregated cycle paths in London (64)
I only travel by car fro recreational trips and holidays – never to go to
work (19)
•
Disagree, I do not feel confident cycling in heavy or fast-moving
traffic (50)
Disagree, I do not cycle because the weather is too wet (36)
Disagree, car ownership is a universal goal (3)
•
“I used to cycle semi-professionally, so a
lot of my bias comes from that. I just enjoy •
it more.” (P3)
Discourse D: “The Reluctant Motorist”
Discourse A is formed by seven participants – they are supporters of car use,
but mainly for its instrumental benefits – represented by the statements
below:
Rank
4
3
0
-3
-4
•
•
“I would prefer to cycle more and use
the car less really. I’m not much of a
fan of buses, however, and don’t use
the tube much as I don’t go into
central London often.” (P9)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Statements
9, 17, 27, 51
13, 18, 20, 53, 55, 64
12, 30, 35, 38, 39, 42, 44, 47, 52, 62, 63, 67
2, 10, 19, 29, 41, 56
3, 6, 7, 22
Being in a car stuck in traffic is better than riding a bus stuck in traffic (9)
I would use a low emission car or electric car if they became cheaper
(17)
Cyclists are the most vulnerable of all road users (51)
I like the carrying capacity and utility of the car (13)
Car clubs are an ideal model of car ownership (18)
Disagree, car ownership is a universal goal (3)
Disagree, I enjoy driving nice or expensive cars (6)
Disagree, public transport is the only feasible way to get around in the
city environment (22)
Disagree, driving is an enjoyable hobby (2)
Disagree, if you are successful in life you tend to drive a nice car (10)
Socio-Economic Breakdown by Discourse
DISCOURSE
A: The Cycling Advocate
B: The Public Transport User
C: The Committed Cyclist
D: The Reluctant Motorist
•
•
•
•
Average
Individual
Income by
Discourse (£
Annual)
34,900
31,900
42,700
45,300
Average Age by
Discourse
Gender
(Percentage Male
by Discourse)
43.1
41.6
45.9
47.8
71%
50%
43%
67%
The highest incomes and oldest age groups are found with the Reluctant Motorists
and Committed Cyclists
The Public Transport Users have the lowest incomes and are the youngest age group
The highest male percentage is found in the Cycling Advocates and Reluctant
Motorists; whilst the Public Transport Users and Committed Cyclists are at least 50
percent female.
Further research required on likely take up of policy measures – and social equity
impacts of transport strategies.
Conclusions
•
•
•
•
•
Achieving greater sustainability is a difficult task – more
difficult than many policy makers have imagined.
Often it can be difficult to obtain funding to put in the
appropriate infrastructure (e.g. public transport, walking
and cycling and public realm).
But we also need to look beyond this to the people using
(or not using) the infrastructure – to examine and shape
the psychological and structural (societal) elements of
travel.
Q methodology allows us to consider the nuances
between the different viewpoints – to reveal agreement
and disagreement in the stakeholder debate that is
otherwise obscured by the rhetoric (and perhaps the
central viewpoint offered by the project promoter).
It has much potential for strategy development, project
development and participation – and to help think about
the broad discourses that need to be responded to and
developed in policy and implementation.
Further work: examining different discourses by different
contexts, to see how the viewpoints and level of debate
changes – London, Berlin, Manila, Suzhou (and perhaps
Malta?), etc.
Key Reading
BARRY, J. & PROOPS, J. 1999. Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecological Economics, 28, 337-345.
BROWN, S. R. 1980. Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science, New Haven, Yale University Press.
CROSS, R. M. 2005. Exploring attitudes: The case for Q methodology. Health Education Research, 20, 206-213.
DRYZEK, J. 1997. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
EALING BOROUGH COUNCIL 2014. Local Implementation Plan. Transport Delivery, 2014 - 2017 Ealing.
HAJER, M. & VERSTEEG, W. 2005. A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges,
perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7, 175-184.
HAJER, M. A. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process, Oxford, Clarendon
Press.
HICKMAN, R & VECIA, G. (2016) Discourses, travel behaviour and the ‘last mile’, Built Environment, submitted.
HICKMAN, R & VECIA, G. (2016) Discourses, social practice and travel behaviour, Transport Policy, submitted
MCKEOWN, B. & THOMAS, D. B. 2013. Q Methodology, Thousand Oaks, California, SAGE.
RAJÉ, F. 2007. Using Q Methodology to develop more perceptive insights on transport and social inclusion. Transport Policy, 14,
467-477.
SHOVE, E. 2012. Putting practice into policy: reconfiguring questions of consumption and climate change. Contemporary Social
Science, 1-15.
STEELMAN, T. A. & MAGUIRE, L. A. 1999. Understanding participant perspectives: Q methodology in national forest
management. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 361-388.
STEG, L. 2005. Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research, Part A,
39, 147-162.
STEPHENSON, W. 1953. The study of behaviour: Q-technique and its methodology, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
STEVENSON, H. 2015. Contemporary discourses of green political economy: A Q method analysis. Journal of Environmental
Policy & Planning, Online, 1-21.
WATTS, S. & STENNER, P. 2012. Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method and Interpretation, London, Sage.