Over a year and a half ago, Sir Rod Eddington was asked to look at the long-term challenges facing transport in the United Kingdom - with specific emphasis on the relationship between transport and economic growth.

What does the Eddington report say? And what does it all mean for Britain's cities?

Centre for Cities reaction

Our initial reaction - following a careful reading of Sir Rod's advice to Government - is extremely positive. Although his brief was to look principally at the relationship between transport and national productivity, Sir Rod has paid a lot of attention to the economic role of Britain's major cities. He makes a cogent argument for tackling congestion, 'pinch-points', and access issues in 'growing urban areas and their catchments' - code for city-regions. He also argues that limited investment resources should be focused on intra- and inter-city transport, where the wider economic benefits of investment are highest. And as an added bonus, Eddington lends his considerable weight to calls for bus franchising in big cities outside London, where deregulation has largely resulted in decline.

All of this is good news for Britain's major city-regions, which have long argued that they need greater powers - and greater investment - in their public transport networks. And Eddington has clearly stated that transport investment must be used to 'sustain success' by addressing demand issues and capacity constraints in places like London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.

As part of its City Transport workstream, the Centre for Cities will be undertaking further work around the Eddington agenda in the next few months. This will include a discussion paper, analysing what Eddington means for cities and city-regions, due in February 2007.

What does the Eddington report say? And what does it mean for cities?
Eddington makes five critically important points:

• Invest in existing transport networks, not new 'icons'. Tackling congestion, poor performance, and capacity constraints on the existing UK transport network should be Government's top priority. Extending urban transport networks may be necessary - but extensions must provide clear, valued economic benefits. Major new schemes, such as a north-south high-speed link, are not a priority. Here, Eddington is making a pragmatic recommendation in the face of a tighter spending round. However, he doesn't entirely rule out big schemes - such as Crossrail - where the benefits clearly outweigh the costs.
• Target investment to specific types of areas. Limited resources need to be concentrated on 'three strategic economic priorities': (1) growing urban areas and their catchments, i.e. city-regions; (2) key inter-urban corridors; and (3) key international gateways. Great news for big cities, especially those where existing transport networks are under severe strain thanks to recent growth. Eddington is recommending a major shift away from spreading investment across the English regions - and for a more focused approach, with resources prioritised on tackling urban congestion.
• Use a range of policies to target congestion and pinch-points. These should include congestion-focused road pricing, and packages of smaller schemes to improve key rail and road links. National, local and private resources should be brought to bear. Addressing demand and capacity constraints, rather than regeneration dreams, must be at the heart of investment decisions. This is good news for growing urban areas - but bad news for places that hoped to use large transport schemes (e.g. trams) as catalysts for economic revitalisation.
• Widen appraisal criteria to include all key benefits. There are both GDP benefits (agglomeration, labour market deepening, etc) and other factors which are not adequately reflected in existing cost-benefit analyses. This may sound technical, but it's critically important to cities - which have long felt that traditional transport appraisal does not account for wider economic benefits (such as agglomeration), or environmental and social factors. The Centre for Cities will be investigating 'wider economic benefits' more fully as part of the City Transport workstream during 2007.
• Reform sub-national decision-making and planning. Powers and resources need to sit at the appropriate level in order to deliver better transport - and current arrangements are unsatisfactory. While the Treasury's Sub-National Review of Economic Development will lead on this issue, Eddington makes a clear statement in favour of governance changes - including bus franchising in metropolitan areas. And Eddington (and Kate Barker) supports the creation of an Independent Planning Commission for major infrastructure projects. The Chancellor's PBR speech announced plans to consult on this proposal - which could blur the line between democratic accountability and efficiency in the planning system.

Eddington sums his own report up extremely well, stating that:

"Government should prioritise action on those parts of the system where [transport] networks are critical in supporting economic growth, and there are clear signals that these networks are not performing…"

We'll be watching carefully as the Government responds - starting with long-awaited announcements on bus policy later this month. More to come…