2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.09.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Equity in transport: The distribution of transit access and connectivity among affordable housing units

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
72
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(76 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
72
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Benefit was formulated as "connectivity power," which is a function of accessibility and mobility similar to (but not the same as) the formulation of Welch et al (2013) and Kaplan et al (2014). In public transportation systems, stations bridge demand with supply.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Benefit was formulated as "connectivity power," which is a function of accessibility and mobility similar to (but not the same as) the formulation of Welch et al (2013) and Kaplan et al (2014). In public transportation systems, stations bridge demand with supply.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From an economic perspective, complete equality means a situation in which all process gains are equally distributed among community members (Welch 2013). A profile of this status is the first quadrant coordinate system.…”
Section: (4)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Horizontal equity refers to the equal allocation of resources for all members of society under certain conditions. It mainly analyzes the spatial distribution of accessibility in space, and does not take into account the social needs of different regions [56]. Vertical equity needs to take into account the income of different residents, residents' needs, age groups, and so on, followed by an analysis of the issue of spatial equality [57,58].…”
Section: Spatial Equalitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Major locational factors are the distance from the city center, the average level of socioeconomic status, the crime level, and the level of accessibility to medical, education and entertainment activities, among others. Based on the structure of the index proposed by Currie (2004Currie ( , 2010) and the socioeconomic condition of the case, there are 4 personal factors in this paper that represent the need for public transit in the community: a population over 65, teenagers aged 6-19, unemployed individuals and illiteracy levels [44][45][46]. There are three locational factors: the number of public service facilities within walking or bicycle distance of the community, and the distance from the community to CBD [47][48][49].…”
Section: Index Of Community Public Transit Needsmentioning
confidence: 99%