Content uploaded by Alison Gwynne-Evans
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alison Gwynne-Evans on May 07, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Research Article
Transportation Research Record
1–12
ÓNational Academy of Sciences:
Transportation Research Board 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0361198119854087
journals.sagepub.com/home/trr
Perceptions of Gender, Mobility, and
Personal Safety: South Africa Moving
Forward
Marianne J. W. A. Vanderschuren
1
, Sekadi R. Phayane
1
, and
Alison J. Gwynne-Evans
1
Abstract
Transport users make mode choices based on a variety of factors. These factors are economic or service driven, based on
individual roles, habits, and interests, as well as age, life cycle stage, and gender. Analysis reflects different mobility patterns
for males and females relating to care activities. Literature suggests that experiences of harassment have a significant effect
on user choices. This study examines how South African data compares with international studies. Mode use and trip pur-
poses, distances, and times differ depending on gender and are affected by the experience of harassment, which affects
females more than males. Analyzing trip making in South Africa revealed that travel modes, distances, and times are not signif-
icantly different across gender. South African females make fewer trips than males, but significantly more care trips. Different
modes of public transport score differently regarding potential experience of harassment, with trains performing the worst.
The reason mode choice is not significantly different between females and males is assumed to be because of financial rea-
sons. Investigating harassment perception in Cape Town reveals that females experience harassment more often and this
influences their choices regarding care trips. These findings have significant implications for transport policy in South Africa
and suggest that more nuanced policies are required.
The South African Constitution (1) states that ‘‘everyone
has the right of freedom of movement’’ and that ‘‘every
citizen has the right to enter, to remain in, and to reside
anywhere in the Republic.’’ It also prescribes that the
state may not unfairly discriminate, directly or indirectly,
against anyone on one or more grounds, including
gender.
Civil rights of citizens within urban areas are dynamic,
responding to that environment: ‘‘The right to the city is
far more than the individual liberty to access urban
resources: it is a right to change ourselves by changing
the city’’ (2). This implies that the right to the city offers
hope for change, not only for future cities and their gov-
ernance, but also for our ‘‘socially constructed’’ selves, so
that women and men, girls and boys can live everyday
lives in both recognition and equality (3).
Transport as a sector is assumed to be gender neutral.
Scrutiny of the access of women and men to public and
private transport internationally, however, reveals that
mobility patterns of men and women are different.
Research into the field of transport planning and prac-
tice has consistently failed to apply a social science per-
spective in determining patterns of transport and travel,
including the demonstration of a systematic lack of
understanding of the gender-based differences in system
requirements resulting in mobility deprivation (4, 5).
Mainstream transport planning still remains largely
untouched by debates on diversity and gender differences
(3). In the context of the global South, research on gen-
der and transport issues is still relatively scarce (6).
The South African National Development Plan (7)
sets a positive framework in which to position specific
policy initiatives. The vision is that, by 2030, investment
in the transport sector will enable:
Improved access to economic opportunities, social
spaces, and services by bridging geographic dis-
tance affordably, reliably, and safely.
1
Centre for Transport Studies, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch,
South Africa
Corresponding Author:
Address correspondence to Marianne J. W. A. Vanderschuren:
marianne.vanderschuren@uct.ac.za
Economic development, by supporting the move-
ment of goods from points of production to where
they are consumed, facilitating regional and inter-
national trade.
Greater mobility of people and goods through
transport alternatives which support minimized
environmental harm.
Here the state is positioned as the navigator within a
framework of strong and effective regulation of public
and private transport. The National Development Plan
(7) recommends focusing on safe, affordable, and effec-
tive transport options to enable equitable access to
opportunities for all and to reduce poverty.
Transport policy in South Africa is developed accord-
ing to the White Paper on National Transport Policy
1996 (8), which sets out to provide a basis for transport
to play a more strategic role in social development and
economic growth to ‘‘promote a strong, diverse, efficient
and competitive industry’’ (8) for the ‘‘development of a
stable institutional capacity to manage the implementa-
tion’’ (8).
The objectives set out in the 1996 White Paper
include:
To support the goals of the prevailing, overarch-
ing plan for national development to meet the
basic accessibility needs of the residents of South
Africa, grow the economy, develop and protect
human resources, and involve stakeholders in key
transport-related decision making.
To enable customers requiring transport for peo-
ple or goods to access the transport system in ways
that best satisfy their chosen criteria.
To improve the safety, security, reliability, quality,
and speed of transporting goods and people.
To improve South Africa’s competitiveness and
that of its transport, infrastructure, and opera-
tions through greater effectiveness and efficiency
to meet the needs of different customer groups
better, both locally and globally.
To invest in infrastructure or transport systems in
ways that satisfy social, economic, or strategic
investment criteria.
To achieve the above objectives in a manner that
is economically and environmentally sustainable
and minimizes negative side effects (8).
These goals form part of the structure of the revised
White Paper published in 2017. It is out of these objec-
tives that the focus on care mobility must be
approached—specifically looking at harassment as an
issue affecting the supply of safe, secure, and reliable
transport within South Africa. To make sensible changes
to South Africa’s policies and practices, a good under-
standing of mobility differences between females and
males is required. Do females make more (care) trips?
Which modes of transport are used and what considera-
tions influence these mode choices? This paper will
unpack what these differences mean for care mobility in
South Africa.
This paper comprises of two parts. In the first part,
international trends in travel-pattern differences between
females and males are introduced as the context for the
research by referring to the literature. Secondly, the
research examines available data on mobility, based on
the South African National Household Travel Survey
2013 (SANHTS) (9), and different trends in mobility
between females and males in South Africa. In particu-
lar, it looks for trends regarding trip frequency, duration,
distance, and mode choice. Globally, it has been estab-
lished that mode choice by females is influenced by their
experiences of harassment and violence. The second part
of this paper, therefore, unpacks harassment experiences
in the South African context in an exploratory manner,
which is based on primary data collected in Cape Town.
Methodologies
Data from the SANHTS (9) is examined to see how it
engages with issues of harassment. It is evident that the
SANHTS (9) only collects and provides information
regarding harassment provided by household heads
within the home, either female or male, rather than
household members’ experience of harassment in their
utilization of transport options.
The secondary data, provided by Statistics South
Africa, was complemented by primary data acquired by
fieldwork with four focus groups from particular consti-
tuencies and interviews with individual rail commuters.
For the focus groups, four group discussions were
conducted in 2015 and 2016, with between seven and ten
participants each. The groups were selected within par-
ticular urban areas representative of typical communities
making choices regarding transport on a regular basis.
The four groups were:
A group of unemployed females from Langa, an
established township within the greater Cape
Town municipality.
A group of general female bus users.
A female group from Atlantis (a satellite town).
A male group (viewed as the control) from
Atlantis.
Notes were taken during the focus groups relating to rea-
sons for transport mode choice as well as experiences
relating to harassment. This involved both anecdotes
2Transportation Research Record 00(0)
with regard to personal experiences and experiences relat-
ing to persons known by the interviewee (secondhand).
These findings were supplemented by interviews with 285
rail passengers. Rail passengers were interviewed on the
station platform regarding their experiences of harass-
ment and their answers were recorded on paper.
Mobility Patterns of Women and Men
The International Context
With limited access to individual means of transport, the
vast majority of female residents in developing countries
are dependent on either walking or on public means of
transport, which can be both motorized (e.g., buses, sub-
ways) or non-motorized, such as rickshaw taxis in Asia,
or boda-boda and bicycles in Uganda (10). Women tend
to use different and cheaper modes of transport than
men, particularly women with low incomes (3).
As reported in literature from different parts of the
world, adult women make more person trips than men of
the same age group: see, for example, McGuckin and
Murakami (11). In the U.S.A. over 60% of married
women are part of the paid labor force, while still retain-
ing substantial child care and domestic obligations (11).
Women typically have to make multiple stops, pay multi-
ple fares, and travel during off-peak hours when public
transport services are less reliable and waiting areas are
less safe (10). Vance and Iovanna (12), also in the U.S.A.,
established that gender differences are more distinct
among younger individuals.
Gender-blind provision of urban services may not
meet the needs of women if their priorities are not taken
into consideration (13). Poor women and men tend to
walk more than those who are better off, with low-
income women tending to walk the most (14, 15).
Inexaminingdataforadifferentcontext,referencing
Spain, Negro
´n-Blanco et al. (16) established the house-
bound status (people who do not travel) as 9.8% for the
Spanish population. Housebound individuals tended to be
older, female, and having a lower educational level (16).
Internationally, travel time expenditure is strongly
related to individual and household characteristics,
including gender (17). The literature on gender and travel
time shows varied results. A number of researchers have
found that men spend more time traveling than women
(18–23). Lu and Pas (24) found that women spent more
time traveling than men; however, they acknowledged
under-reporting of short trips, which might be more
commonly made by women, affecting the validity of their
conclusion. An insignificant relationship between gender
and travel time expenditure was found by Zahavi and
Talvitie (25). Around the world, men predominantly use
private vehicles and public transport to commute to
work. Women, in contrast, make more frequent and
shorter trips and stop more often. They are more likely
to ‘‘trip chain’’ and to combine the daily commute with
shopping, picking up or dropping off children, visiting
relatives, or running small errands (26). Overall, it can be
concluded that there are significant gender inequities
globally.
The South African Context
This section elaborates on travel patterns in South Africa
and, particularly, gender differences. The analysis is
based on the SANHTS (9). The data collection included
a total of 51,341 households (dwelling units), represent-
ing the South African total of 14.55 million dwelling
units. The SANHTS provides weightings so that findings
can be converted to the total South African population.
At the time, South Africa had a population of 52.72 mil-
lion people, of whom 49.9% were female. Of the 42.4
million people who took one or more trips during the
seven days prior to the survey day, approximately 85%
consisted of individuals in urban and metropolitan areas,
while 75.4% were individuals living in rural areas.
Overall, 5.57 million women and 4.12 million men did
not undertake any trips during the surveyed seven-day
period. Figure 1 shows the reasons for not traveling. The
majority (over 50%) of people who did not travel in the
seven-day survey period indicated that they did not have a
need/reason to travel (see Figure 1). The second most
important reason for not traveling during the survey period
is age related. Over 22% of women and almost 25% of
men indicated that they were too old to travel. A total of
12.6% of females and 14.5% of men indicated that they
did not travel because of financial reasons. Although care
for children or the sick is not among the most important
reasons for not traveling, the percentage of females who
Figure 1. Reasons for not traveling in South Africa (past seven
days) (9).
Vanderschuren et al 3
stayed at home for this reason was significantly higher than
their male counterparts—5.1% vs. 0.6%.
Based on the SANHTS (9), excluding the part of the
population that did not make any trips during the survey
period, women appear to make 2.3 trips on average per
day, while their male counterparts make 2.9 trips. This is
in contrast to international trends which show that
women make more trips than men.
On a daily basis women need to balance competing
demands which influence their daily travel. In South
Africa (see Figure 2), a higher percentage of women than
men (31% vs. 27%) travel to work, while males make
more business trips (25% vs. 4%). Around 4% of trips
made by both men and women are to look for a job.
More women than men (10% vs. 6%) make educational
trips (excluding children aged under 18 years). In line
with international literature, South African women make
more care trips. In relation to Figure 2, the categories
‘‘serve passenger’’ (taking others to school, clinic, etc.)
and ‘‘shopping’’ represent care trips. Women make 2%
more ‘‘serve passenger’’ trips and 8% more shopping
trips than men, which indicates that South African
women, like their international counterparts, make more
care trips than men.
Internationally, travel experiences between men and
women vary (18–23, 26). Figure 3 shows the modal split
according to gender in South Africa.
The most prevalent mode in South Africa is walking:
48.6% of females and 47.6% of males walk for all trip
purposes. More males (16.9%) than females (11.8%) are
car drivers, while more females (13.2%) than males
(10.9%) are car passengers. Slightly more females
(26.5%) than males (23.5%) use public transport.
Females favor bus and minibus taxi (MBT) over train
travel.
Gender disparities in relation to transport need to be
investigated in the light of earning power, because men
and women experience and respond to financial strains
differently. This affects travel volumes and mode choices.
Access to income and assets, housing, transport, and
other basic services is influenced by gender-based con-
straints and opportunities. As mentioned, low-income
women and men tend to walk more than those who are
better off, with low-income women tending to walk the
most (14, 15).
Overall, 60% of trips made in South Africa by persons
from the poorest income quintile are made by men, based
on the SANHTS (9). The modal share between females
and males does not differ substantially (see Figure 4).
Less than 1% of females and males use bicycles and
motorcycles. Train use is also very limited, however;
slightly more males use this mode. Females are more
inclined to use bus/bus rapid transit (BRT) or MBT, or
travel as a passenger in private transport. There is no sig-
nificant difference between the percentage of female and
male drivers, while men are more likely to walk.
Compared with the overall population, those in the
poorest quintile walk significantly more. In the case of
Figure 2. Trip purposes per gender in South Africa (%) (9). Figure 3. Modal split per gender in South Africa (%) (9).
Figure 4. Modal split per gender for the poorest quintile in
South Africa (%) (9).
4Transportation Research Record 00(0)
females, walking increases by 38.6%, while male walking
trips increase by 50.7%. Correspondingly, use of all
other modes decreases among the poorest quintile, with
car driver and passenger showing the most significant
decline.
The literature indicates that there may be a relation-
ship between gender, employment status and travel time
expenditure. Prendergast and Williams (18) found that,
internationally, a combination of gender and employ-
ment increased the differences between the maximum
and minimum travel time significantly. The maximum
average travel time expenditure by full-time employed
males was about three times the minimum average travel
time recorded for retired women.
SANHTS (9) only provides overall travel times for
work trips and trips to educational institutions. Females
travel for 35.5 min, on average, to an educational institu-
tion, while males travel for 34.6 min, on average. For the
work trip, the averages are 46.4 min and 48.3 min, for
females and males, respectively. The difference in overall
travel time categories between females and males going
to work is insignificant (see Figure 5); the maximum per-
centage difference per travel time category is 0.8%.
Analysis of educational trips show similar results.
Moreover, analysis of educational trips for adults (age
18 years and above) again shows insignificant differ-
ences. This contradicts international findings.
Personal Safety Experiences of Women and
Men
The International Context
International literature identifies harassment as the indi-
cator for personal safety in relation to public transport.
All forms of harassment affect women more than men.
Women’s access to opportunities and quality of life is
particularly affected. Harassment can take various
forms, such as verbal harassment (cat calling or
unwanted teasing); visual harassment (such as leering or
staring); and physical forms (for example, men exposing
themselves, groping, or other forms of touching, etc.).
Harassment often takes place in public places, as women
travel to and from educational institutions or the work
place. Harassment seems to occur especially in relation
to public transport. This may be in, or around, bus and
train stations, or other public transport hubs and stops,
and on the vehicles themselves, especially if they are
crowded (26).
Harassment is a problem for women on all transport
modes and routes. For example, a study in Delhi, India,
found that: ‘‘Women are the targets of sexual harassment
while travelling to work and practically every woman
interviewed had anecdotal evidence of suffering from the
same. Harassment while walking down the street or tra-
velling on a bus is a common occurrence for working
women and is exacerbated by the absence of adequate
lighting on streets and subways and by the small, lonely
paths connecting the slum with the bus stops.’’ (14).
Fear of crime is widely recognized as a barrier to pub-
lic transport (27, 28). Research in the U.K. has identified
that 10.5% more rail trips would be generated if people
felt more secure when traveling and waiting at stations
(27). A majority of car drivers in inner Los Angeles
claimed they would use transit if public buses were per-
ceived as safe and clean (29). The most recent survey by
Eurobarometer of city dwellers in all European cities
makes a correlation between life satisfaction and a ‘‘feel-
ing of safety’’ (http://ec.europa.eu/ commfrontoffice/
publicopinion/index.cfm). Feeling safe while traveling
around a city has effects on the confidence, productivity,
and quality of life of everyone (26), but more particularly
women.
Allen and Vanderschuren (26) established that women
face harassment while using public transport on a daily
basis all over the world. It is reported as an issue of con-
cern from Baku, Azerbaijan to Bogota
´, Colombia—and
everywhere in between. It is also not confined in any way
to the developing world, and appears to be just as preva-
lent in rich, highly industrialized cities, such as London,
New York, or Paris.
Acts of harassment happen frequently on public trans-
port. Women use public transport that is overcrowded
and travel for long distances. They are most likely to
experience harassment, be it verbal or physical, from the
men using the same mode of transport. Overcrowding is
a high security issue for women, as it is the breeding
ground for physical harassment and inappropriate beha-
vior (26). Women are also concerned about their security
on the journey to access public transport, as they may
Figure 5. Travel time for work trips per gender in South Africa
(%) (9).
Vanderschuren et al 5
have to walk along the road if there is no safe sidewalk,
or in the dark if there is no street lighting. They may also
be fearful of unwelcome advances from others, as well as
the journey in the public transport vehicle and, of course,
have the same concerns for their trip to their final
destination.
The South African Context
Between the 2003 (30) and 2013 SANHTS (9), access to
private motorized transport (i.e., car ownership per
household) in South Africa increased from 25% to 35%.
This means that the majority of people still have no
access to private vehicles and, therefore, have to use (for-
mal or informal) public transport or non-motorized
transport. Household heads questioned for the SANHTS
in 2013 reported that personal safety is a major concern.
Figure 6 provides an overview of the reported harass-
ment perception in South Africa for various public trans-
port modes.
An alarming percentage of household heads expressed
concerns related to personal safety related to Metrorail
train services (see Figure 6). Metrorail, operated by the
Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA), is a
commuter rail service in the major urban areas of South
Africa. Metrorail is responsible for 2.2 million trips daily
(38% at the Witwatersrand/Gauteng, 30% in the
Western Cape, 15% in Tshwane/Pretoria, and 13% in
Durban). Household heads were particularly concerned
regarding the walking trips to and from the station
(56.5%). Many also expressed concern regarding the part
of the journey spent on the train (47.3%), and 32.4%
indicated concerns regarding the Metrorail stations.
For all parts of the trip with MBTs and buses, around
30% of household heads indicated concerns with per-
sonal safety. Despite BRT being perceived as the most
secure mode of public transport, around 20% of
household heads stated security concerns regarding this
mode. Given the fact that various South African metro-
politan areas are investing in BRTs, this statistic is still
considered high. Household heads reported that they
were (very) unsatisfied with the walk to/from public
transport (35.6%), waiting for the public transport vehi-
cle (27.7%), and while inside the public transport vehicle
(27.8%).
Focus Group Discussions in Cape Town. The results of four
focus group discussions are provided in Table 1. All the
respondents were of working age (between 18 and 61
years).
The mobility of the unemployed females focus group
was relatively low (they traveled out of the township less
than one day per week, and often only once a month),
compared with their working counterparts, who on aver-
age traveled from five to seven days a week. The group
of unemployed females traveled to collect their welfare
grant once a month and did their grocery (and other)
shopping at the same time. Their working counterparts
traveled mostly for work and leisure. The female group
from Atlantis also traveled for medical and grant collec-
tion purposes.
When respondents travel alone, especially female pas-
sengers, they often meet up with the same people while
traveling. Over time, people will start keeping an eye out
for each other. If they are planning not to travel the next
day, they will let other passengers know.
The unemployed females, on average, used the train
because it is the cheapest option. Their employed coun-
terparts used the bus, which is deemed better and rela-
tively safe. The BRT system is safer, but expensive (and
overcrowded in some cases).
There is a clear difference regarding the perception of
risk between males and females. Male bus users in
Atlantis did not perceive a security risk during their trip
at any time of the day, while females in Atlantis did not
like to travel in the evening. Although they did not use
the train, they perceived the off-peak hours, when it is
quiet, as dangerous. The other female focus groups had
a higher risk perception. They thought that public trans-
port modes are dangerous at any time of the day. While
males found the trip to the station/stop/rank the most
dangerous, females were also intimidated and felt inse-
cure waiting at the platform/stop and in the train.
Remedial action varied widely between the focus
groups. The unemployed females indicate that they did
not have solutions (although the presence of neighbor-
hood stewards did help at certain times of the day). This
feeling of heightened insecurity may also be associated
with the fact that they made few trips outside of their
habitual areas and, therefore, were less comfortable in
the public transport environment. The working bus users
Figure 6. Security concerns per mode according to household
heads in South Africa in 2013 (%) (9).
6Transportation Research Record 00(0)
Table 1. Cape Town Focus Groups Findings
Criteria
Langa unemployed
females Cape Town bus females Atlantis bus females Atlantis bus males
Sample size 10 8 10 7
Age range 18–60 37–54 43–61 23–60
Employment (%) 0% 100% 50% 57%
Number of days
travel/week
\1 5 7 (1) 7 (7)
Reason for travel Collect social welfare
grants, shop at same
time, hospital or clinic
Travel to work, other
services, shopping and
leisure
Travel to work, hospital/
clinic, collect social
welfare grant, shopping
and leisure
Travel to work,
shopping and leisure
Travel companions Alone or with friend/s Alone, with same
passengers daily
Friend/s, spouse Wife
Mode choice Paratransit Expensive Not preferred Unavailable Expensive
Bus Expensive Better option Better option Only option
BRT Unknown system Expensive Expensive, overcrowded Expensive
Train Only affordable option,
when the station is
close
Not preferred Station too far Station too far
Security questions
Feeling toward
public transport
Paratransit Not safe Violence between
operators
Not safe Relatively safe
Bus Relatively safe Relatively safe Relatively safe Relatively safe
BRT Unknown system Safer than other modes Safer than other modes Safer than other modes
Train Least safe Least safe Least safe Least safe
Dangerous times to
use public transport
Paratransit Any time Any time, sexual
harassment happens
more during peak
After work None
Bus Any time In the evening
BRT Unknown None
Train Any time Between 09:00 and 16:00
hours
Where does harassment take place? On route to transit, on
platform, in train
On route to bus stop, on
platform, and on the
train
In paratransit, at bus stop,
on the bus, on the train
On route to bus stop
Reason for harassment Unknown No respect No respect Women seen as weak
Remedial action for violence Nothing seems to help;
local stewards to
accompany students,
school children, and
women to the stations
and home have helped
Leave valuables at home;
tell bus company
Tell conductor and other
passengers
Raise awareness about
violence
Note: BRT = Bus Rapid Transit; Paratransit = informal transport which operates between public and individual private spheres.
7
would leave their valuables at home, minimizing the risk
of theft. In Atlantis, females shared their experiences of
harassment with the conductor and other passengers,
while males would raise awareness about violent beha-
vior among bus passengers and within the community.
In the focus groups, almost all women shared different
strategies regarding how they coped with the personal
security threat and harassment. This included not travel-
ing at night or in the dark, only taking a small amount
of money, and using the phone (or pretending to speak
to someone).
Train Passenger Interviews in Cape Town. The general percep-
tion of the focus groups was that the train poses the high-
est security risk but, when the security risk of train travel
is disaggregated, the type of perceived security risk dif-
fers. More than 10% of respondents had personal fears
about being at the station, while the station is perceived
to be less dangerous than walking to/from the station or
being on the train. Using Cape Town traffic analysis
zones (TAZs), for example, in areas such as Simonstown,
Central Cape Town, Khayelitsha, Mitchells Plain, and
Blue Downs, over 40% of respondents feared walking to
the station most. In Wynberg, Oostenberg, Belgravia,
and Atlantis, more than 40% of respondents perceived
the train ride itself as the most dangerous part (see
Figure 7). Other public transport modes show similar
variations.
As indicated above, Simonstown is one of the areas
identified as having train-related security issues. In addi-
tion, many train users in this area are choice users (in
that they have access to cars as an alternative mode of
transport). The study team, therefore, decided to inter-
view train users in Simonstown, focusing mainly on
female travelers, in line with the research topic. However,
for comparison reasons (control group), some male tra-
velers were also questioned. In total 202 females (70.9%)
and 83 males (29.1%) were interviewed. Of these trave-
lers, 80.3% used the train as their main mode of trans-
port throughout the year. Some 27.7% of travelers
traveled Monday to Friday, while another 10.9% tra-
veled Monday to Saturday, and 7.4% traveled every day
of the week. The remainder of travelers traveled less than
five days: 9.9% traveled four days a week and 23.5%
three days a week.
Based on the SANHTS (9), when using public trans-
port, a total of 91.6% of users in Cape Town indicated
that they favor train travel, mainly because it is cheaper
than other public transport options (75.1%). Almost
65% of travelers are alone when they travel. For the peo-
ple who travel with a companion, most travel with their
spouse, children, other family (e.g., brother/sister), or
friends.
Train users in Simonstown were asked how secure
they feel when using the trains (see Figure 8). The vast
majority of the males interviewed (89.2%) felt that train
travel does not pose a security threat to them, or they
were indifferent about their personal security in train
travel. A majority (70.3%) of female interviewees also
felt secure, or indifferent. However, there was a large dif-
ference between the numbers of females (30%) and males
(70%) who felt safe or very safe—no females felt train
travel was very safe. It needs to be pointed out here that
the interviews for this study were conducted on the
southern suburban line—a line that is considered more
secure than other lines in the Cape region.
Train users were also asked how secure they feel dur-
ing the ingress and egress part of the train journey. It was
found that 87.5% of males and 84.4% of females felt less
secure when traveling to/from the station. Nevertheless,
this generally does not keep them from using the train:
84.1% of males and over 90% of females indicated that
they would use the train regardless of the security risk.
When asked if the train users themselves, or any of
their family members, have ever been harassed using the
Figure 8. Personal safety according to interviewed train
passengers (n= 285).
Figure 7. Risk perception related to train travel in Cape Town
(%) (9).
8Transportation Research Record 00(0)
train, 28.9% of males and 37.6% of females indicated
that they had been harassed or have a family member
who had been harassed.
There is a clear difference between the harassment
that men and women experience, according to the train
users interviewed in Simonstown (see Figure 9aand b).
Both males and females were worried about petty crime,
such as mugging (males, 17%) or pick-pockets (males,
83%) on (the way to/from) the train. Females experi-
enced more than double the rate of muggings (47%), but
less pick-pocketing (37%). They also encountered verbal
harassment (10%) and sexual harassment (6%). The
majority of males (88.8%) and females (81.6%) indicated
that the harassment happens mostly on the train. Neither
males nor females indicated that robbery or harassment
is acceptable.
When the train users were asked what measures
should be put in place to combat security issues, the
overwhelming comment was the need for more security
personnel. A total of 82% of males and 87% of females
indicated that more security personnel are required.
Males did not indicate any other potential measures,
while females suggested that people can ask for help
(3%) and that workshops with criminals could be held
(2%). The workshops should be focused on the youth, as
they are the main cause of the harassment on the trains,
according to these respondents.
Train users do not think that harassment is encour-
aged by travellers: 95.8% of males and 93.2% of females
indicated that this is not the case. When asked if the train
users ask for help if they are harassed, some 58.8% of
males indicated that they do and 88.8% of them would
ask other train users for help. Only 25% of males indi-
cated that they do report crimes, however, of the males
that do report crimes, 95.5% indicated they had confi-
dence in the reporting channels.
Of the female train users, 81.3% indicated that they
would ask for assistance, of which 75% would ask other
train users, while 18.8% would contact the transport
operator (Metrorail) and 6.3% would contact the police.
A total of 57.9% of female train users indicated that they
actually report the crimes. In contrast to the male respon-
dents who are very confident about the reporting chan-
nels, only 27.4% of females indicated confidence in the
reporting channels.
The Cape Town train users on the southern suburban
line were aware that crime is also an issue in other cities.
All females indicated that this is the case, while 95.5% of
males indicated the same.
Conclusions, Recommendations, and Policy
Implications
South African mobility patterns show both similarities
and significant differences to international trends. The
phenomenon of gender-related travel differences is the
topic of numerous studies (10–12, 16), but the findings in
the literature are not always significant and can contra-
dict each other. This research project sets out to supple-
ment the quantitative data obtained in large samples with
qualitative data of smaller samples, obtained through
more in-depth focus group interviews.
Internationally, one gender pattern that has been iden-
tified relates to the tendency to stay home and avoid
travel being more prevalent among females (16). This
correlates to the findings in this study, although the per-
centage of people who are housebound in South Africa is
larger, around 20% (9), compared with around 10%
internationally (16). Although care for children or the
sick is not among the most important reasons cited for
not traveling (9), the percentage of females who stay at
home for this reason is significantly higher their male
counterparts, 5.1% vs. 0.6%. Internationally, females
make more trips than their male counterparts, mainly
because of the additional care trips that females make. In
South Africa trip making for males is higher, although
females do make more care trips (2% more ‘‘serve pas-
senger’’ trips and 8% more shopping trips), which is in
line with international literature.
Interestingly, South African females and males do not
have significant differences in travel distances, travel
times or (to a lesser extent) mode choice. This contradicts
international studies where differences are often found.
The lack of significant gender-related differences between
mode choices is remarkable, as the perception of harass-
ment varies significantly between females and males.
Overall, between 20% and 56.5% of household heads
consider (parts of) the public transport journey risky.
Trains are considered the least safe and are mainly used
for affordability reasons. Most dangerous is the walk to/
from the station, followed by the time spent on the train.
The station itself is considered relatively safe.
Figure 9. Types of harassment for (a) males (n= 24) and (b)
females (n= 79).
Vanderschuren et al 9
The focus group discussions revealed that users of
MBT and buses, especially female travelers, combat har-
assment risks by traveling in pairs or with the same pas-
sengers every day. The time of day does not appear to
influence the risk of harassment significantly in the South
African context, as revealed during the focus group dis-
cussions. This contradicts global findings, where evening
travel was considered more dangerous (26).
The contribution by transport users of concrete and
positive suggestions to improve safety in the transport
sector through enhancing the visibility and deployment
of security personnel demonstrates engaged, active citi-
zens with a vision for improved service delivery. This
augurs well for moving transport delivery in South
Africa into a new and safer era.
Based on primary and secondary data, it can be con-
cluded that there is gender inequity in the South African
transport system, especially in the public transport ser-
vices. The inequity is in sharp contrast with the country’s
progressive Constitution. Furthermore, treating commu-
nities as homogenous is a major flaw in current policies
and practices. These policies fail to recognize that women
and men have varying mobility and accessibility needs.
Currently, there is little guidance for transport plan-
ners and city authorities to plan better and more gender
sensitive networks and services. There is significant need
to develop more responsive and nuanced measures within
transport modes, accommodating women’s personal
safety requirements, as gender-blind practices have been
failing to address their needs.
The South African government has policies and strate-
gies to invest in public transport modes as safe, afford-
able, and reliable systems, accessible to all. Recent
investments in public transport have not resulted in the
anticipated personal safety improvements. Consequently,
the policy recommendations derived from this paper are:
Improvements to the South African transport sys-
tem require public transport integration providing
improved personal safety. This will encourage
women within South African cities to utilize a
safer public transport network available to them,
accommodating the care trips that women make
in the service of others.
Public transport and non-motorized transport
masterplans should feature women’s need for per-
sonal safety as a unifying element for investment.
Key linkages are needed between communities
and public transport stations/precincts and the
required infrastructure. The infrastructure would
include: proper lighting, secure paved sidewalks,
and designs that encourage safety and security—
especially around rail stations, as train travel is the
transport mode where women feel most unsafe.
Civil society should be actively involved in assist-
ing government with awareness campaigns, with a
focus on the personal safety of women in public
transport and the options available within the law
to address effectively the security concerns raised.
The MBT industry remains unregulated within
South Africa. With a focus on integrated public
transport networks, the MBT is an integral part
of the South African public transport system and
has the opportunity to position itself as a safe and
secure service. Government should partner with
MBT organizations to advocate for better security
at taxi ranks. Pilot projects are underway.
Visible policing and security, at night and during
the day, should be the norm for public transport
precincts. Currently, this is common practice for
BRT stations within South Africa and the percep-
tions is that BRT is the safest mode of public
transport.
The research paper has shown that men and
women perceive safety differently in South Africa.
The SANHTS (9) rationale of only addressing
questions to the heads of households might be lim-
iting. Thus, it is recommended that the SANHTS
uses women within the household as the bench-
mark for security concerns.
The country has the necessary legislative frame-
works in place to ensure the safety of women in
public transport. However, there is a lack of ade-
quate implementation (e.g., by-laws), as the fear
of harassment remains a barrier to women’s mobi-
lity and access to public transport. Although the
Constitution does not make explicit reference to
the right to transport, access to safe public trans-
port is intrinsically linked to the right to freedom
and security of the person, and the right to free-
dom of movement (1).
Future Research
In this research, travel distances were not explored, as
these are not included in the SANHTS (9). This is in line
with the way data is gathered by Statistics South Africa
on behalf of the National Department of Transport. In
the future it may be useful to define different categories
of journey length, such as journeys less than 5 km, jour-
neys between 5 km and 10 km, and journeys of more
than 10 km, or even journeys from one urban center to
another or across provincial boundaries.
Future research can look at the degree to which insti-
tutional constraints relating to the health service affect
mobility patterns relating to the care of the sick. For
example, recent government initiatives in South Africa,
such as mobile clinics, have the potential to affect
10 Transportation Research Record 00(0)
decisions relating to transport. The newly proposed
National Health Initiative may have significant effects
on mobility trends relating to care.
While this research builds on international findings
demonstrating that males experience less harassment
than females, expanding the range of focus groups to
include a more equal distribution of male and female
groups may provide interesting data and enable a more
nuanced understanding of both female and male choices
regarding transport relating to care.
As the sample focus groups in this research were all
situated within the Cape Town metropolitan area, it may
be useful to compare transport-user behavior in different
South African urban centers over similar distances and
to contrast this with transport-user behavior in rural
areas.
This research has not distinguished between the terms
‘‘violence’’ and ‘‘harassment’’ although international liter-
ature suggests these may be examined as distinct areas. A
finer distinction between these terms in the language of
the interview questions and responses may show increased
differences of perception of the likelihood of experiencing
either violence or harassment by males and females.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Heather Allen for including them in the
original work conducted for the FIA Foundation that resulted
in the publication, Safe and Sound – International Research on
Women’s Personal Safety on Public Transport (26). Their invita-
tion to work with Heather Allen sparked a wide interest in this
topic in the South African context. The authors also thank all
the students who have assisted this study, in particular during
the data collection stage. Without the contributions of Jennifer
Baufeldt, Rea Molefi, and Felix Martinez this publication
would not have been possible. Last but not least, the authors
acknowledge the reviewing efforts of Cheryl Wright.
Author Contributions
The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study
conception and design: MJWAV; data collection: MJWAV;
analysis and interpretation of results: MJWAV, SRP; draft
manuscript preparation: MJWAV, AJG-E, SRP. All authors
reviewed the results and approved the final version of the
manuscript.
References
1. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.14th edition,
2016. Juta, Cape Town, South Africa, 1996.
2. Harvey, D. The Right to the City. New Left Review, Vol.
53, Sept–Oct, 2008.
3. Levy, C. Travel Choice Reframed: ‘‘Deep Distribution’’
and Gender in Urban Transport. Environment and
Urbanization, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2013, pp. 47–63. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0956247813477810.
4. Lucas, K. Transport and Social Exclusion: A G7
Comparison Study. FIA Foundation for the Automobile
and Society, Paris, France, 2004. http://www.fiafoundatio-
n.org/../social_exclusion.pdf.
5. Root, A., L. Schintler, and K. Button. Women, Travel and
the Idea of ‘‘Sustainable Transport’’. Transport Reviews,
Vol. 20, No 3, 2000, pp. 369–383.
6. Venter, C., V. Vokolkova, and J. Michalek. Gender, Resi-
dential Location and Household Travel: Empirical Find-
ings from Low-Income Urban Settlements in Durban,
South Africa. Transport Reviews, Vol. 27, No 6, 2007,
pp. 653–677.
7. National Development Plan: Vision for 2030. National
Planning Commission, Pretoria, South Africa, 2011.
8. White Paper on Transport Policy. Department of Trans-
port, Pretoria, South Africa, 1996.
9. South African National Household Travel Survey. Statistics
South Africa and Department of Transport, Pretoria,
South Africa, 2013.
10. Peters, D. Gender and Transport in Less Developed Coun-
tries: A Background Paper in Preparation for CSD-9.
Background Paper for the Expert Workshop, Gender Per-
spectives for Earth Summit 2002: Energy, Transport,
‘‘Information for Decision-Making.’’Berlin, Germany,
2001, pp. 10–12.
11. McGuckin, N., and E. Murakami. Examining Trip-Chain-
ing Behavior. A Comparison of Travel by Men and Women.
Working Document, Undated. https://nhts.ornl.gov/1995/
Doc/Chain2.pdf.
12. Vance, C., and R. Iovanna. Gender and the Automobile –
An Analysis of Non-Work Service Trips. Ruhr Economic
Papers, No. 11, Rheinisch-Westfaelisches Institut fuer
Wirtschaftsforschung (RWI), Essen, Germany, 2007.
13. Masika, R., A. de Haan, and S. Baden. Urbanisation and
Urban Poverty: A Gender Analysis, Bridge Development –
Gender. Report No. 54, Gender Equality Unit, Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida),
Stockholm, Sweden, 1997.
14. Anand, A., and G. Tiwari. A Gendered Perspective of the
Shelter-Transport-Livelihood Link: The Case of Poor
Women in Delhi, Transport Reviews, Vol 26, No 1, 2016,
pp. 63280.
15. Salon, D., and S. Gulyani. Mobility, Poverty and Gen-
der: ‘‘Travel Choices’’ of Slum Residents in Nairobi,
Kenya. Transport Reviews, Vol. 30, No. 5, 2010,
pp. 641–657.
16. Negro
´n-Blanco, L., J. de Pedro-Cuesta, J. Almaza
´n,
C. Rodrı
´guez-Bla
´zquez, E. Franco, and J. Damia
´n. Preva-
lence of and Factors Associated with Homebound Status
among Adults in Urban and Rural Spanish Population, on
Behalf of the DISCAP-ARAGON Research Group. BMC
Public Health, Vol. 16, p. 574.
17. Mokhtarian, P. L., and C. Chen. TTB or Not TTB, That Is
the Question: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Lit-
erature on Travel Time (and Money) Budgets.
Vanderschuren et al 11
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol.
38, 2004, pp. 9–10.
18. Prendergast, L. S., and R. D. Williams. Individual Travel
Budgets. Transportation Research, Vol. 15A, 1981, pp. 39–46.
19. Gunn, H. F. Travel Budgets – A Review of Evidence and
Modeling Implications. Transportation Research, Vol. 15A,
1981, pp. 7–23.
20. Wigan, M. R., and J. M. Morris. The Transport Implica-
tions of Activity and Time Budget Constraints. Transporta-
tion Research, Vol. 15A, 1981, pp. 63–86.
21. Kitamura, R., Y. O. Susilo, K. Fukui, J. Murakami, and
K. Kishino. The Invariants of Travel Behavior: The Case of
Kyoto-Osaka Metropolitan Area of Japan, 1970–2000.
Paper Presented at the 10th Conference of the International
Association for Travel Behaviour Research, Lucerne, Swit-
zerland, 2003, pp. 10–14.
22. Levinson, D., and A. Kumar. Activity, Travel, and
the Allocation of Time. Journal of the American Planning
Association, Vol. 61, No. 4, 1995, pp. 458–470.
23. Robinson, J. Time for Life. The Surprising Ways Americans
Use Their Time. The Pennsylvania State University Press,
University Park, PA, 1997.
24. Lu, X., and E. I. Pas. Socio-Demographics, Activity Partic-
ipation and Travel Behavior. Transportation Research, Vol.
33A, 1999, pp. 1–18.
25. Zahavi, Y., and A. Talvitie. Regularities in Travel Time
and Money Expenditures. Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1980. 750:
13–19.
26. Allen, H., and M. Vanderschuren. Safe and Sound,
International Research on Women’s Personal Safety
on Public Transport. The FIA Foundation, Paris,
France, 2016.
27. Crime Concern. People’s Perceptions of Personal Security and
Their Concerns about Crime on Public Transport: Literature
Review. Department for Transport, London, UK, 2002.
28. Delbosc, A., and G. Currie. Modelling the Causes and
Impacts of Personal Safety Perceptions on Public Trans-
port Ridership. Transport Policy, Vol. 24, 2012,
pp. 302–309.
29. Loukaitou-Sideris, A. How Safe Is the Ride? Evaluation of
Design and Policy Responses to Women’s Fear of Victimiza-
tion and Crime. University of California Transportation
Center, Berkeley, CA, 2006.
30. South African National Household Travel Survey. Statistics
South Africa and Department of Transport, Pretoria,
South Africa, 2003.
The Standing Committee on Women’s Issues in Transportation
(ABE70) peer-reviewed this paper (19-03432).
12 Transportation Research Record 00(0)
