Reduced CO2 through Sustainable Household Travel   2004         2005           2005           2006           2006             2007         2007             2008         2008             2009         2009      
                                                                                                                                 
  Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan  Feb Mar  Apr May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan  Feb Mar  Apr May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan  Feb Mar  Apr May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan  Feb Mar  Apr May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Objective One                                                                                                                                  
 
 
                   [1]                                                                                                            
  Regression Analysis with existing Data    [2]        [3]                  [4]                [5]                                                              [6]        [7]            
            Social & Behavioural Components of Travel (ARMS)  [8]      [9]            [10]      [11]                  [12]                [13]                      [14]                      
  Qualitative Methods Identifying High vs Low                                   Feildwork                       Feildwork                                                        [15]            
            Travel Surveys International Comparison            [16]                                                                                                  
Objective Two                                                                                                                                  
  Longitudinal study of shifting attitudes towards public transport        [17]    [18]  [19]      [20]                 Case studies of provision of public transport                          [21]                                                  [22]            
                        Social Parameters                                                                                                        
  Safety Policies v Efficiency Targets                  [23]      [24]    [25]                  [26]      [27]          [28]      [29]        [30]    [31]                                                
                                                                                             [32]      [33]                              
Objective Three                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                   
                            Access/Mode                                                                                                    
  Access deficits and social well-being              [34]          [35]  [36]                  [37]                                                                                    
            Feildwork Validation            [38]  [39]                  [40]                                                                                    
  A conceptual and operational definition of accessibility                  [41]  [42]    [43]                                            [44]                        [45]    [46]                [47]    [48]            
                                                                       [49]                                                            
Partnerships Innovations and Collaborations                                      [50]                            [51]                                                [52]              
   [53]    [54]  [55]  [56]                                                                                                                    
                                           [57]                                                                                    
            Team Meet       Team Meet           Team Meet       Team Meet                 Team Meet             Team Meet           Team Meet                     Team Meet                    
                                                                                                                                   
 
     
[1]
Op 1
Technical report prepared on trends in NZ travel data distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website.

[2]
MS 1
Gathered exsiting travel survey data
[3]
MS 2
Identified factors correlated to increased fuel consumption from analysis of NZ travel survey trip data.
[4]
Ms 5
Gathered raw Australian Travel Survey data and identified factors correlated to increased fuel consumption from analysis of this data (as done for NZ in Year 1).
[5]
Op 4
Paper on the relationships and differences between Australian and NZ travel patterns submitted to peer reviewed journal.
[6]
Ms 11
Determined degree of change in fuel consumption, and probable reasons for any change, from repeating the Year 1 analyses of NZ Travel Survey data and examination of ARMs.
[7]
Op 8
National publication (e.g., Logistics and Transport NZ) of reanalysis of travel survey data and incorporation of preceding year's surveys.
[8]
Ms 4
Established, from discussions with key stakeholder reference group, the Access Resolution Measures (ARMs) to investigate the behavioural and social components of travel.
[9]
Ms 6
Developed ARMs through pilot testing in questionnaire or Computer Aided Telephone Interviewing (CATI) form and discussions with key stakeholder reference group.
[10]
Ms 7
Established social and behavioural components of travel by applying ARMs to Auckland and Christchurch samples.
[11]
Op 5
Conference paper on the social and behavioural consequences and constraints of travel in Auckland and Christchurch.
[12]
Established the generality of the social and behavioural components of travel; by applying ARMs to Wellington and P.North Samples
[13]
Ms 9
Identified factors associated with key measurements of increased fuel use, access demand, and increase in car size from analysis of ARM data.
[14]
Ms 10
Determined the validity of the findings from the social and behavioural component of travel surveys by comparing the NZSLI with the ARMs
[15]
Op 7
Conference paper on the cross validation of the social and behavioural consequences and constraints of travel with the NZSLI.

[16]
Op 3
Presentation of results of qualitative study of high and low fuel users to appropriate peer reviewed journal or conference.
[17]
Ms 1
Identified samples and developed best practice for inclusion of panel sample in longitudinal study of shifting attitudes towards perceived acceptability of public transport, knowledge of vehicle emissions, and concern for environment.
[18]
Op 1
Technical paper outlining best practice for subject retention for panel study to accompany draft survey of shifting attitudes towards perceived acceptability of public transport, knowledge of vehicle emissions, and concern for environment. Distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website.
[19]
Ms 2
Developed, in consultation with key stakeholder reference group, the survey for the longitudinal study of shifting attitudes to public transport.
[20]
Ms 4
Established baseline attitudes for the longitudinal study of shifting attitudes to public transport and determined regional effects from surveying samples from Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch.
[21]
Ms 8
Established the trend in attitudes to public transport two years after baseline for the longitudinal study of shifting attitudes by re-applying the survey to the panel sample.
[22]
Ms 11
Established the shift in attitudes over time by re-applying the survey to the panel sample and comparing results with those of baseline and two years after baseline.

Op 7
Paper on the stability of NZ attitudes to public transport over time submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.
[23]
Ms 3
Developed and pilot-tested instrument for measuring concern for safety, fashion, and price in decision making to purchase or retain vehicle types, in consultation with key stakeholder reference group.
[24]
Ms 5
Determined the relationship between concern for safety, fashion, and vehicle price from surveying six hundred drivers in a case-control design.
[25]
Op 2
Paper on the relationship between vehicle safety concern, vehicle size, environmental concern, and self-assessed beliefs about driving submitted to peer reviewed journal.
[26]
Ms 6
Established the key social factors that influence walking, public transport, and private transport use from investigation of the assumptions developed in Year 1, Objective 3 of the definition of accessibility using methods of field observation and surveying including, if established as suitable, contingent valuation methodology.
[27]
Op 3
Peer reviewed presentation reporting key social parameters.
[28]
Ms 7
Identified how local and regional government consent processes around new land use or change of use may conflict with their broader goals of increased public transport use by examining recent discussions in 4 case study areas identified in conjunction with key stakeholders.
[29]
Op 4
A technical report (distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website) or conference paper on how the local government regulatory environment affects new land developments and involves public transport provision.
[30]
Ms 9
Developed, in consultation with key stakeholder reference group, a measure to quantify the provision of public transport by means of an index that takes into account factors such as accessibility as defined by Objective 3 (years 1 and 2), travel times, frequency of service, and suitability for use.
[31]
Op 5
Technical paper on the index of public transport provision distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website.
[32]
Ms 10
Established the 'change in context' effect of car dependency by applying case-control survey to areas of 'increasing' public transport provision and 'increased and decreased' public transport provision brought about by residential movement. The 5 case study areas will be selected by a case framing exercise in consultation with key stakeholder reference group.
[33]
Op 6
Submission of paper to international transport orientated journal on the effects of 'context' and 'habit' in New Zealander's car dependency.
[34]
Ms 1
Sourced sample of corporate drivers (n = 200) and drivers who have lost their licences from (1) age related conditions (n = 200) and (2) court imposed penalty (n = 200) for study to determine effects of access deficits on social well-being. Discussed with key stakeholder reference group and piloted the measures addressing effects of loss of access due to change of circumstances.
[35]
Ms 5
Applied measure developed to determine effects of access deficits on social well-being to samples of Objective 3, Milestone 1.
[36]
Op 4
Submission of paper on the social impacts of reduced access due to loss of vehicle licence to a peer-reviewed publication.

[37]
Ms 6
Quantified the relative effect on accessibility, by key demographics, of the provision of different mode types, including mass public transport, cycling, and walking, by analysing existing LTSA data in combination with the operational definition of accessibility.
[38]
Ms 4
Validated the operational definition of accessibility by fieldwork in two locations: (1) a location where the population has low accessibility and (2) a location where the population has high accessibility.
[39]
Op 2
Internal report, distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website, on the validation of the operational definition of accessibility by field work.
[40]
Op 5
A paper presented to a conference on the relative effect on accessibility of the provision of different mode types including mass public transport, cycling, and walking.
[41]
Ms 2
Established a conceptual and operational definition of accessibility from a review of literature including that on mode availability, cost of travel, need to travel/motivation, distance, and time.
[42]
Op 1
Internal technical report covering the issues and overseas experience of potential operational definition of accessibility, including limits and benefits of potential definitions for use in Objective 3, Milestone 5. Report distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website.
[43]
Ms 3
Identified, in conjunction with key stakeholder reference group, the key social assumptions inherent in the developed definition of accessibility to be investigated in Objective 2, Milestone 6.
Op 3
Internal technical report, distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website, for use by Objective 2 in the investigation of the key social parameters underlying accessibility by different mode types.
[44]
Ms 7
Refined the definition of accessibility by integrating the knowledge from Objective 1 (LTSA database analysis) and Objective 2 (key social parameters field studies) with the conceptual development and operational definition of accessibility (Milestone 1 and 2) to enable a modelling tool to be developed using key datasets covering the Auckland conurbation.
[45]
Ms 8
Evaluated the benefits of a spatial-temporal scenario model for depicting the effects of reduced fuel consumption scenarios on accessibility related social outcomes from applying model to the cities of the Auckland conurbation.
[46]
Op 8
Paper to a local conference on the spatial-temporal scenario model applied to the Auckland conurbation.
[47]
Ms 9
Determined the robustness and sensitivity of the spatial-temporal scenario-modelling tool by comparing the modelled effects of strategies to reduce fuel consumption with the effects predicted by traditional social impact assessments.
[48]
Op 9
A presentation to a conference or end users outlining the key differences, benefits, and limitations of the spatial-temporal scenario-modelling tool compared to traditional social impact assessment.
[49]
Op 6
Internal report on the definition of accessibility derived from the integration of the knowledge from Objective 1 (LTSA database analysis) and Objective 2 (key social parameters field studies) with the conceptual development and operational definition of accessibility (Milestone 1 and 2). Report distributed to key stakeholder reference group and made available to the public via the programme website.
[50]
Workshops with Policy Analysts
[51]
Policy analyst workshop
[52]
Policy analyst workshop
[53]
Exchange with other parties in the sustainable cities programme
[54]
Dec 2004 Create Website

Hold meeting with End Users
[55]
Meeting With Collaborators
21 Jan in Auckland
[56]
Newsletter to inform of project progress
[57]
Secondments are to be established