Equity in transport: Learning from the policy domains of housing, health care and education

Abstract

Introduction The aim of this paper is to explore the equity principles in three main domains of government intervention (health, education and especially housing) and to draw lessons for the domain of transport. In line with the burgeoning literature, we consider equity in transport to be primarily -albeit not only -concerned with the level of accessibility conferred by the transport-land use system to persons. While some (recent) research has explored what requirements of fairness may imply for accessibility the issue has received scant attention in the practice of transport planning and policy. In contrast, equity principles are fairly well established in the domains of health care, education and housing. By analyzing the equity principles in each of the latter domains, and assessing their possible relevance for the domain of transport, we want to contribute to the rapidly growing literature addressing equity concerns in the domain of transport. Methods The paper consists of two parts. In the first part, we conduct a thought experiment with the aim to provide a rough first estimate of the population at risk of what we call accessibility poverty. In the second part of the paper, we contrast the (lack of) equity principles in the transport domain with the type of equity principles underpinning three domains of government intervention: health care, education, and housing. We have selected these domains, because in contrast to transport, they are generally considered key anchors of developed welfare states; and in parallel to transport, they are each concerned with the delivery of a particular good to citizens. Results We estimate that in developed (Northern-European) countries about 9% to 11% of households is at risk of accessibility poverty. Of this group, 7% of all households is at risk because of a poor transport system (and sometimes also because of affordability problems), while another 2% to 4% is at risk of accessibility poverty because of disproportionally high motoring costs. We observe that most Western societies have well-established policies regarding the fair provision of health care, education and housing for all (income) groups. In contrast, decision-makers have not even started to define what fairness in the domain of transport could amount to. Conclusion Given the importance of mobility in modern societies, we argue that there is an urgent need for societal and policy debates about fairness and for subsequent translation of the outcomes of these debates into adequate principles, standards, and policies for the transport domain.

Examining the Equity Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles: A Travel Demand Model Approach

“…Although health, education, and housing have established equity principles, fairness in access has only recently received attention in transportation (2). As such, there is not a universally adopted methodology for assessing transportation equity (1).…”

Justice in Regional Transport Planning through the Lens of Iris Marion Young

“…Further, together with an increasing interest in critical perspectives in transport, a specific attention has risen around issues of justice and equity. Research on transport justice is primarily based on recognizing the transport system's pivotal role in guaranteeing or hindering access to crucial opportunities and, thereby, delivering equity in all welfare domains (such as health, education and housing) (Jeekel & Martens, 2017). Some scholars (Enright, 2019;Sheller, 2018;Verlinghieri & Schwanen, 2020) have indicated that research on justice in transport planning mainly draws upon distributive approaches.…”

Foreign countries, foreign customs: an analysis of short-distance mobility of new immigrants in the Rhine-Main region in Germany

“…Mobility is an important component of social participation and integration. It allows access to employment, education, and social networksin total, to modern life and societal opportunities [1][2][3]. Digitalisation can have a substituting effect: Internet and mobile devices allow home office solutions for a number of jobs.…”

“…Generally, the share of immigrants strongly differs between 7% in Vogelsberg, in the northern part of the region, to almost 35% in Offenbach, which is located in the heart of the metropolitan region. However, different groups of immigrants have to be differentiated: (1) people with immigrant background, which covers all people who either have immigrated themselves or have at least an immigrated parent, and (2) immigrants, which describes people who have immigrated themselves. For the second group, motivation can be very different, such as employment, political instability due to wars, poverty, social reasons, education, and many more.…”