BookPDF Available

Transport Justice: Designing Fair Transportation Systems

Authors:

Abstract

Transport Justice develops a new paradigm for transportation planning based on principles of justice. Author Karel Martens starts from the observation that for the last fifty years the focus of transportation planning and policy has been on the performance of the transport system and ways to improve it, without much attention being paid to the persons actually using – or failing to use – that transport system. There are far-reaching consequences of this approach, with some enjoying the fruits of the improvements in the transport system, while others have experienced a substantial deterioration in their situation. The growing body of academic evidence on the resulting disparities in mobility and accessibility, have been paralleled by increasingly vocal calls for policy changes to address the inequities that have developed over time. Drawing on philosophies of social justice, Transport Justice argues that governments have the fundamental duty of providing virtually every person with adequate transportation and thus of mitigating the social disparities that have been created over the past decades. Critical reading for transport planners and students of transportation planning, this book develops a new approach to transportation planning that takes people as its starting point, and justice as its end.
Transport
Justice
Designing Fair Transportation Systems
Karel Martens
Transport Justice Karel Martens
“In Transport Justice Martens considers many dimensions of fairness in society’s provision of
physical accessibility, demonstrating clearly how concepts of justice developed by renowned
thinkers like Rawls and Dworkin can be extended to, and quantified in, the assessment of urban
transport systems to improve the process or regional transport planning.” – Martin Wachs,
Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Transport Justice is an exceptionally important and original addition to urban studies
literature. Combining theoretical and practical insights, it shows the way in which transportation
policy, usually a technical domain focused on efficiency, can be a significant contributor to
equity and sets up principles for evaluating transportation systems in terms of the distribution
of benefits.” – Susan S. Fainstein, Author, The Just City
“Karel Martens has written an insightful, thoughtful book that will transform the field of equity
analysis of transportation systems. By focusing on accessibility and establishing new thresholds
for analysis, he presents a new analytical framework that focuses on justice.” – Deb Niemeier,
Ph.D., P.E., Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
California, Los Angeles, USA
Transport Justice develops a new paradigm for transportation planning based on principles of
justice. Author Karel Martens starts from the observation that for the last fifty years the focus of
transportation planning and policy has been on the performance of the transport system and
ways to improve it, without much attention being paid to the persons actually using – or failing
to use – that transport system.
There are far-reaching consequences of this approach, with some enjoying the fruits of
the improvements in the transport system, while others have experienced a substantial
deterioration in their situation. The growing body of academic evidence on the resulting
disparities in mobility and accessibility, have been paralleled by increasingly vocal calls
for policy changes to address the inequities that have developed over time. Drawing on
philosophies of social justice, Transport Justice argues that governments have the fundamental
duty of providing virtually every person with adequate transportation and thus of mitigating the
social disparities that have been created over the past decades.
Critical reading for transport planners and students of transportation planning, this book
develops a new approach to transportation planning that takes people as its starting point,
and justice as its end.
Karel Martens is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning,
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (Haifa, Israel) and at the Institute for Management
Research, Radboud University (Nijmegen, the Netherlands). He also holds the Leona Chanin
Career Development Chair at the Technion.
TRANSPORTATION
Cover image: © Shutterstock
www.routledge.com
Routledge titles are available as eBook editions in a range of digital formats
9780415 638326
ISBN 978-0-415-63832-6
... In line with this understanding, several authors have argued that justice in transport requires ensuring a sufficient level of accessibility to all people in society, also referred to as a sufficientarian stance (Martens 2017: Chapter 6;Lucas et al. 2016). A sufficient level of accessibility is closely linked to the notion of freedom; that people should have the freedom to reach and engage in the activities they find meaningful (see Martens (2017) for an elaboration). However, even if there is growing consensus surrounding an increased focus on accessibility and increased attention on the ways in which transport policies work out for different groups, there is hardly any debate, let alone consensus, on whether standards for accessibility should be set, and if so, how these standards should be defined and how the delivery of basic accessibility should be monitored. ...
... Sub-theme 2.2: The market and the customer Some informants highlighted that the market indicates which actions should be taken by authorities in terms of the provision of infrastructure and transport, partly by relying on what are referred to as quasi-market rules (Martens 2017). This was based on the premise that the market will point to what the most efficient solution will be. ...
... In several of the informants' responses, there was an implicit assumption that sufficient accessibility was an inherently rural problem. This assumption conflicts with findings in the literature that show that even if the standards are set very low, accessibility insufficiency is not (just) a rural problem but a problem of large suburbs and peri-urban towns, which are home to a substantial population without (reliable and affordable) access to a car (see Martens 2017;Singer et al. (2021)). Where areas lie outside the conditions for a basic standard of accessibility, DRT standards (of a certain quality) must be introduced, alongside ways of measuring and monitoring the accessibility conveyed through DRT services. ...
Article
Full-text available
Recent transport equity literature has proposed a sufficientarian approach to transport planning, according to which all individuals would be entitled to a minimum level of accessibility deemed adequate or sufficient. The implementation of this approach would require the adoption of an accessibility standard as a key performance indicator guiding transport investments, land use planning and service provision. While accessibility measures are increasingly operationalised in professional practice, the adoption of actual accessibility standards is rare. In this paper, we explore the barriers for adopting explicit accessibility standards and identify conditions within which such standards could be acceptable to practitioners and policymakers. The paper draws on interviews with professionals in three city-regions in Sweden, complemented with interviews with practitioners from the Flanders region in Belgium and from the UK. We find that authorities are hesitant to define and measure accessibility and that where definitions and performance indicators exist, there is a lack of agreement within and across authorities. The prospect of introducing a standard across the board without attaching any conditions comprises a further reason for shying away from standard-setting. The (dis)integration of transport and land use and complicated administrative and governance structures are described as a further barrier, while demand responsive transport is in some cases considered a panacea to all accessibility problems, making it possible to avoid setting standards. Our findings suggest that standards for minimum accessibility could gain political support if their reach is clearly circumscribed, and their benefits are clearly understood.
... Transportation planning, in line with this assertion, profoundly impacts human well-being as it directly or indirectly affects the ability to reach desired opportunities, opportunity costs, housing selection and pricing, and community cohesion, all of which can contribute to social (in)equity (Banister, 2018;Cao and Hickman, 2019b;Randal et al., 2020). Consequently, in recent decades, the modern transportation literature has intertwined with equity concepts, particularly within the contexts of distributive justice and project appraisal (Lewis et al., 2021;Martens, 2017;Nahmias-Biran et al., 2017;Nahmias-Biran and Shiftan, 2016;Pereira et al., 2017). The recent literature strives to go beyond considering the consequences of social justice for human development and takes individuals' potential to achieve beyond their current state into account. ...
... Hence, in the transport planning literature, accessibility has predominantly been regarded as the primary term for assessing equity. Growing studies have identified accessibility as the key purpose of equity-based planning (Cao and Hickman, 2019a;Lucas et al., 2016;Niehaus et al., 2016;van Wee, 2022) and believe that a fair transportation system should supply a sufficient level of accessibility for all people (Martens, 2017). Accessibility is a concept that has been defined and put into practice in multiple ways, resulting in a range of interpretations. ...
... Researchers argue that equity can be achieved when accessibility, as a distributed good, is fairly distributed among individuals. The concept of accessibility emphasizes the reasonable time, cost, and ease required to reach opportunities (Martens, 2017;Pereira et al., 2017;Randal et al., 2020;van der Veen et al., 2020). So, a shift in focus from planning for mobility to accessibility is underway that helps to provide effective interventions in obtaining equity-based policymaking (Martens et al., 2022). ...
... These impacts primarily involve the impact of plans, interventions, or policies on the outcome of specific factors, such as travel time, travel costs, and travel behavior, where the causal relationship is obvious and clear-cut. However, this approach does not address negative externalities in space or social justice, such as accessibility, habitability, and cost (Martens 2016). A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 5 For example, some studies utilize household income levels to measure the value of shorter commutes. ...
Article
Full-text available
Over the past three decades, Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), with transit as its central tenet, has emerged as a pivotal urban policy driving sustainable and intelligent urban growth, drawing significant attention from researchers worldwide. TOD involves creating high-density, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly urban areas around transit stations to enhance transit accessibility, promote social cohesion, and improve housing conditions. However, the global implementation of TOD has encountered challenges across various domains including transportation, housing, and employment, thereby exacerbating inequities within the built environment. This study adopts a TOD perspective to comprehensively review the equity impacts of urban rail transit (URT) station areas on the built environment, with a particular focus on social, travel, perception, health, and spatial dimensions, and their impacts on promoting or hindering equitable outcomes among diverse societal groups. Utilizing a scoping review methodology, the study encapsulates the progress and themes in the field, employing a systematic approach to meticulously analyze the outcomes of each research theme. The findings reveal that URT station areas have positive impacts on economic growth and property values. However, they can also contribute to gentrification, exacerbating disparities between different societal groups in station and non-station areas, along with an unequal distribution of resources and opportunities. Additionally, while these station areas encourage pedestrian activity and public transportation usage, they also carry the potential for environmental pollution, raising concerns about spatial accessibility and facility convenience, thereby impacting environmental equity. This study employs comprehensive and critical theoretical analyses, utilizing intricate methods and detailed indicators, to elucidate disparities in equity outcomes of URT station areas across different societal groups. This study aims to provide standardized and harmonized criteria for guiding equitable TOD planning policies, enhancing the scientific basis and effectiveness of planning strategies. It seeks to offer theoretical insights towards the creation of an equitable and inclusive urban built environment.
... Ke R błowski and , as if the supposed formality of transport systems in the global North meant that well-being of workers could be taken for granted. Similar absence can be observed in debates inspired by the notions of transport equity (Litman 2002), transport justice (Martens 2017), and mobility justice (Cook & Butz 2016;Sheller 2018), which attends to inequalities (re)produced by transport policy and infrastructure but, to our knowledge, do not specifically address transport workers' livelihoods and working conditions. This absence is strongly reflected in the Mobilities journal, where only three papers seem to have addressed head-on the question of transport labour, engaging with female seafarers (Stanley 2008), motorbike-taxi drivers in informal transport (Peters 2022), and cycle workers (Murthy and Sur 2022). ...
Article
Full-text available
While transport and mobility studies have focused on diverse challenges related to improving the quality of public transport (PT) for its passengers, they have hardly examined the well-being and livelihoods of PT workers. To address this gap, we explore the work spaces and times of bus drivers employed in PT in Gothenburg and Stockholm (Sweden), where PT operations are procured from private companies to ensure service quality and financial efficiency. Drawing upon studies on capitalist temporalities of work, we observe that the bus drivers are obliged to perform fatiguing work tasks under constant time pressure, which generates daily conflicts between bodily, personal, and work rhythms. The drivers’ time wealth is severely constrained, as they have limited capacity to control their own time and experience a near-constant work-life imbalance. Our findings indicate that such hindrances are not simply a product of work rhythms marked by the rigidity of the PT timetable. Rather, they emerge from the operational and financial logic of procurement that contradicts the well-being and livelihoods of PT workers. We conclude with a plea to place workers as essential actors for future reflections on inequalities and injustices related to transport and mobility.
... Porém, nos últimos anos, tem-se observado uma mudança no direcionamento da literatura de transportes. O que antes se dedicava a medir meramente as diferenças de acessibilidade ou exclusão social, passou a alinhar suas análises sobre equidade às teorias de justiça contemporâneas (Pereira et al., 2017;Martens, 2016 (Vecchio e Martens, 2021;Beyazit, 2011). ...
Article
Full-text available
Existe um consenso, tanto na prática de planejamento de transporte como na literatura acadêmica, que melhorar o acesso das pessoas a destinos importantes e de seu cotidiano deve estar entre os principais objetivos das políticas de transporte equitativas, principalmente em contextos em que há grandes disparidades socioeconômicas. O objetivo deste artigo foi analisar o arco de alcance geográfico que a população de baixa renda pode participar da vida urbana da cidade, explorando as ligações entre localização da moradia, as opções de modos de transportes e as oportunidades potenciais a educação e a saúde, aplicando a teoria da Abordagem das Capacidades de Amartya Sen como base teórica para avaliar o que os indivíduos podem acessar (capacidades) versus suas viagens reais (funcionamentos). O estudo foi realizado em duas comunidades de baixa renda na cidade de João Pessoa, Brasil. A análise dos dados foi feita através de estatística descritiva e análise centrográfica a fim de identificar o limite do arco de alcance geográfico dos moradores das áreas estudadas se concentrando nas oportunidades potenciais de educação e saúde. Os resultados demostraram que não houve diferenças significativas tanto na capacidade de mobilidade quanto nos elementos de funcionamento da mobilidade, no que diz respeito aos arcos de alcance para acessar as atividades definidas. Espera-se que os resultados obtidos possam subsidiar e orientar na formulação de políticas públicas de acessibilidade e mobilidade urbana integradas a outras políticas públicas, de forma a garantir um nível mínimo de acesso as atividades essenciais para atender às necessidades básicas dos indivíduos, como educação e serviços de saúde.
... Transport planners are increasingly interested in citizen participation, as it can help to achieve justice in relation to transport and mobility issues, although precise definitions of "justice" remain the object of rich debates (Martens 2017;Sagaris and Tiznado-Aitken 2020;Sheller 2019). From this perspective, transport justice tends to involve at least an equitable distribution of transport-related benefits and costs, accessibility to opportunities, and exposure to negative externalities (Di Ciommo and Shiftan 2017;Pereira, Tim, and David 2017;Vecchio, Ignacio, and Ricardo 2020), as well as more just procedures for decision-making (Karner et al. 2020, Slotterback 2010, Verlinghieri and Schwanen 2020. ...
Article
Full-text available
We examine to what extent Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) contributes to a successful participatory process and how context affects the tool’s role in both process and results. We tested a tool to visualize accessibility effects of transport projects, using it in participatory workshops related to a major bus corridor proposal in Santiago de Chile. We innovated in the tool itself, to visualize overcrowding effects as a way to include comfort issues. We found that the GIS encouraged a sincere and realistic conversation among participants. Perceptions of the project did not necessarily improve, but the tool did reduce polarization of opinions.
... The development of railway stations into multimodal transport hubs (Bell 2019) is a widely discussed strategy for promoting low-carbon transportation (Kinigadner and Büttner 2021;Buehler et al. 2017), creating sustainable urban environments (Cervero 2003;, and mitigating climate change (Banister 2011). More precisely, multimodal transport hubs can help to promoting active mobility (Shaheen et al. 2017), reducing traffic congestion (Balcombe et al., 2004), and increasing transport accessibility (Frank, Dirks, and Walther 2021;García-Palomares, Gutiérrez, and Cardozo 2013;Martens, 2016). However, such transformations involve complex challenges for the spatial development of cities and regions (Papa and Bertolini 2015;Bertolini, Curtis, and Renne 2012;de Wijs, Witte, and Geertman 2016;Miramontes et al. 2017) and affect not only transport hubs themselves but also the surrounding urban areas and their residents (Chen and Haynes 2015;Dong 2017;Ibraeva et al. 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Transport planning authorities and operators in various countries are planning far-reaching transformations of secondary railway stations into so-called mobility hubs with the aim to foster rail-based and intermodal mobility. The transformations of railway stations do not only affect the transportation network, but also the urban fabric surrounding railway stations. Projects of this nature, therefore, require a deeper understanding of the preferences of local residents, the key users of such hubs. We developed a three-stage adaptive survey experiment with a random sample of 2,028 adult residents in the perimeter of three secondary railway stations in Switzerland to identify preferences towards four potential railway station functions: public transport provision, access to multimodality, retail and services, and stations as a public space. The main findings are that the transportation function is the top priority, followed by the public space function. Other functions, such as retail, services, and multimodal mobility, are less preferred by residents. The findings reveal the importance of also considering non-commercial functions of these hubs and that residents are viewing railway station as more than merely transport hubs or shopping centres; they are considered key neighbourhood components that shape local identities through their role as public spaces. ARTICLE HISTORY
Article
Full-text available
The aging population is rapidly growing across the world, with the number of people aged 65 or older projected to reach 1.6 billion by 2050. As such, it is essential to consider how to develop sustainable transport systems that are age-friendly. This perspective paper investigates how to foster an age-friendly transport system with a particular focus on public and sustainable transport options for the elderly. Existing transport systems are evaluated to determine their adherence to an effective age-friendly transport system in terms of three main requirements, namely affordability, accessibility and safety. Then, a psychological perspective is introduced by considering the psycho-physical needs and preferences of the elderly as well as individual factors affecting them. Four areas are considered: (a) independence and autonomy, (b) comfort and convenience, (c) social inclusion and ageism, (d) physical health and well-being, especially injuries due to mobility and fear connected with them. Finally, a proposal is made about psychological training programs directed to both elderly users and transport workers to overcome concerns for an age-friendly transportation system. Such programs could effectively support the age-friendly use of public transport systems simply by increasing the age-friendly skills of both users as well as transport workers.
Preprint
Full-text available
Transportation systems play a pivotal role in facilitating access to out-of-home activities, enabling participation in various aspects of social life. But because of budgetary and physical limitations, they cannot provide equal access to all locations; inevitably, some places will be better served than others. This realization gives rise to two fundamental concerns in transportation equity: 1) accessibility inequality and 2) accessibility poverty. Accessibility inequalities may rise to the level of injustice when some socioeconomic groups systematically have lower access to opportunities than others. Accessibility poverty occurs when people are unable to meet their daily needs and live a dignified, fulfilling life because of a lack of access to essential services and opportunities. In this paper, we review two of the most widely used approaches for evaluating transport justice concerns with accessibility inequality and accessibility poverty: Gini coefficients/Lorenz curves and needs-gap/transit desert approaches, respectively. We discuss how their theoretical underpinnings are inconsistent with egalitarian and sufficientarian concerns in transport justice, and show how the underlying assumptions of these methods and their applications found in the transportation equity literature embody many previously unacknowledged limitations that severely limit their utility. We substantiate these concerns by analysing the equity impacts of Covid-19-related service cuts undertaken in Washington, D.C. during 2020. The paper also discusses how alternative methods for measuring transportation equity both better comport with the known impacts of such changes and are consistent with underlying moral concerns.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.