Should we re-name LTNs and ULEZ?

Words matter. It’s why it’s important that road crashes are not casually dismissed as “accidents”. And the same might go for road danger reduction initiatives too.

At a Labour conference fringe meeting on active travel this week, Chris Boardman suggested low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) be re-named “child safety zones”.

It got us thinking about other acronyms that might benefit from be rebranded. How about ULEZ (Ultra-Low Emission Zones)?

Would there be less controversy surrounding the initiative if it was called CLEAN (perhaps standing for Controlled Lower Emissions and NoX)?

Those who object to LTNs and ULEZ on principle will not be convinced by new and improved names, but die-hards aside – why shouldn’t road danger reduction initiatives benefit from good branding?

After all, the motoring lobby has long used marketing and public relations (PR) to shape public opinion in favour of cars while undermining alternatives like public transport and active travel (walking and cycling). This strategy has deep roots, particularly in countries like the United States where car culture has become deeply ingrained in society. Just as car ownership over the decades has been linked to notions of freedom and status, campaigns can highlight the health, environmental, and economic benefits of walking and cycling.

Messaging can position active travel as modern, desirable, and a smart choice for those who value sustainability and well-being. Perhaps this positive shift should start with "child safety zones".

{{cta-cycling}}

The ethical choice

The ETA was established in 1990 as an ethical provider of green, reliable travel services. Over 30 years on, we continue to offer cycle insurance , breakdown cover  and mobility scooter insurance while putting concern for the environment at the heart of all we do.

The Good Shopping Guide judges us to be the UK's most ethical provider.

‍