Analyzing public transit accessibility to marginalized communities is critical to exploring the link between transportation inclusion and wellbeing in automobile-centered cultures. This study is an attempt to examine public transit accessibility to Indigenous residents in Winnipeg's North End. Apart from analyzing the current level of transit accessibility, the study explores barriers that hinder the use of public transit in the North End and examines strategies to improving transit accessibility to its residents. This study adopts a holistic approach to understanding 'accessibility' and recognizes the importance of socio-economic, perceptional, and demographic factors in shaping the demand for transit facilities in an area. Findings of the study illustrate the need to include transportation inclusion as an essential component of the urban Indigenous welfare policies in the country. The lessons learned will also provide an initial framework to understand the link between community wellbeing and transportation inclusion of other socio-economically vulnerable communities. / February 2017

Low-income groups have greater potential to gain from incorporating health promotion into daily living using bike-share to increase physical activity and expand transport options. The potential is unmet because of socioeconomics and access. Disproportionate uptake of bike-share by higher income individuals widens the gaps in health equity and transportation equity as bike-share use over-represents males with more resources, less need, and lower health risk. The Prescribe a Bike (RxBike) program, a key focus of this study, is a partnership between primary care providers (PCPs) at an urban safety net hospital and the city’s existing income-based, subsidized bike-share membership. Three studies using quantitative and qualitative methods were performed to: examine utilization of bike-share by Boston residents among subsidized and non-subsidized members; examine perceived attributes of the RxBike program by Boston Medical Center (BMC) PCPs; and evaluate BMC patient referrals. The overarching conceptual model uses elements of theories from health services and organizational behavior, in a public health framework. Analysis of Boston resident utilization at the trip-level (2012-2015) demonstrated overall ridership was increasingly by males and residents of more advantaged neighborhoods. Subsidized members had significantly higher likelihood of living in neighborhoods with socioeconomic and health disadvantage, and less gender disparity when compared to non-subsidized members. The impact was minimal because subsidized members made only 7.17% of trips. The survey of PCPs revealed mismatch between highly favorable opinion of RxBike appropriateness and lower intent to refer. Female gender and not being an urban biker predicted lower likelihood of intent to refer. Examination of open-ended survey comments mirrored quantitative data and expanded on the range of provider biking safety concerns in Boston. From 2013-2015, 27 BMC providers made only 72 referrals to RxBike. Patients referred had high cardiovascular health risk, resided in neighborhoods with extremely high levels of disadvantage, and in neighborhoods without meaningful access to bike-share kiosks. Overall, the subsidized membership extends reach of bike-share to residents of neighborhoods with more health and socioeconomic risk than the rest of the city; RxBike has strong potential to impact this vulnerable population. The most critical matters for program success are safety and neighborhood access.

abstract: Cordon pricing strategies attempt to charge motorists for the marginal social costs of driving in heavily congested areas, lure them out of their vehicles and into other modes, and thereby reduce vehicle miles traveled and congestion-related externalities. These strategies are gaining policy-makers` attention worldwide. The benefits and costs of such strategies can potentially lead to a disproportionate and inequitable burden on lower income commuters, particularly those commuters with poor accessibility to alternative modes of transportation. Strategies designed to mitigate the impacts of cordon pricing for disadvantaged travelers, such as discount and exemptions, can reduce the effectiveness of the pricing strategy. Transit improvements using pricing fee revenues are another mitigation strategy, but can be wasteful and inefficient if not properly targeted toward those most disadvantaged and in need. This research examines these considerations and explores the implications for transportation planners working to balance goals of system effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. First, a theoretical conceptual model for analyzing the justice implications of cordon pricing is presented. Next, the Mobility Access and Pricing Study, a cordon pricing strategy examined by the San Francisco County Transportation Authority is analyzed utilizing a neighborhood-level accessibility-based approach. The fee-payment impacts for low-income transportation-disadvantaged commuters within the San Francisco Bay area are examined, utilizing Geographic Information Systems coupled with data from the Longitudinal Employment and Household Dynamics program of the US Census Bureau. This research questions whether the recommended blanket 50% discount for low-income travelers would unnecessarily reduce the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the cordon pricing system. It is proposed that reinvestment of revenue in transportation-improvement projects targeted at those most disproportionately impacted by tolling fees, low-income automobile-dependent peak-period commuters in areas with poor access to alternative modes, would be a more suitable mitigation strategy. This would not only help maintain the efficiency and effectiveness of the cordon pricing system, but would better address income, modal and spatial equity issues. The results of this study demonstrate how the spatial distribution of the toll-payment impacts may burden low-income residents in quite different ways, thereby warranting the inclusion of such analysis in transportation planning and practice. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Environmental Design and Planning 2013

No description available.

An in-depth-analysis was carried out on short, medium and long commuters using the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) of 2001 and American Community Survey (ACS) of 2000 to determine the role of individual,household, trip and area related characteristics on commute length. The individuals with commute time less than or equal to 15 min were considered as short commuters and individuals with commute time greater than 15 min but less than 60 min were considered as medium commuters and the individuals with commute time 60 min or more were considered as long commuters. The commute time is considered as a link joining the residence and workplace locations. The availability of the desired mode used is considered as flexibility in moving the location of these points in the area. As the jobs get dispersed the lower income people face more and more transportation problems in linking the residence and workplace. There is a potential threat in their social, physical and economic isolation in the society. The individual, household, and area related characteristics are assumed to influence both the commute time and location of these points. The descriptive analysis using NHTS 2001 and ACS 2000 revealed that the characteristics of short and long commuters are different in nature. A commuter type choice model and commute length measurement models were used to estimate the influence of socio-demographic characteristics on the residential and workplace separation. Multinomial Logit Model (MNL) methodology was adopted to develop the commuter type choice model and Structural Equations Model methodology (SEM) was adopted with commute time and commute distance as endogenous variables to estimate the commute length on a continuous scale. The models confirmed the importance of demographic variables in explaining commuter length.

Public transport policies play a key role in shaping the social and spatial structure of cities. These policies influence how easily people can access opportunities, including health and educational services and job positions. The accessibility impacts of transport policies thus have important implications for social inequalities and for the promotion of just and inclusive cities. However, in the transportation literature, there is still little theoretically informed understanding of justice and what it means in the context of transport policies. Moreover, few studies have moved beyond descriptive analyses of accessibility inequalities to evaluate how much those inequalities result from transport policies themselves. This is particularly true in cities from the global South, where accessibility and equity have so far remained marginal concerns in the policy realm. This thesis builds on theories of distributive justice and examines how they can guide the evaluation of transport policies and plans. It points to pathways for rigorous assessment of the accessibility impacts of transport policies and it contributes to current discussions on transportation equity. A justice framework is developed to assess the distributional effects of transport policies. This framework is then applied to evaluate recent transport policies developed in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) in preparation to host sports mega-events, such as the 2014 FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games, which included substantial expansion of the rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) infrastructure. This research presents ex-post analyses of the policies implemented between 2014 and 2017 and ex-ante analysis of an as yet unfinished BRT project. It evaluates how the planned transport legacy of those mega-events impacted accessibility to sports venues, healthcare facilities, public schools and job opportunities for different income groups. The results show that there were overall accessibility benefits from the expansion in transport infrastructure between 2014 and 2017, but these were generally offset by the reduction in bus service levels that followed an economic crisis that hit the city after the Olympics. Quasi-counterfactual analysis suggests that, even if the city had not been hit by the economic crisis, recent transport investments related to mega-events would have led to higher accessibility gains for wealthier groups and increased inequalities in access to opportunities. Results suggest that those investments had, or would have had, greater impact on inequalities of access to jobs than in access to schools and healthcare facilities. The evaluation of the future accessibility impacts of the unfinished BRT corridor, nonetheless, indicates that such project could significantly improve access to job opportunities for a large share of Rio's population, particularly lower-income groups. Spatial analysis techniques show that the magnitude and statistical significance of these results depend on the spatial scale and travel time threshold selected for cumulative opportunity accessibility analysis. These results demonstrate that the ad-hoc methodological choices of accessibility analysis commonly used in the academic and policy literature can change the conclusions of equity assessments of transportation projects.

<p>  </p> <p>Transportation access is an important indicator of the quality of life and if it is inequitable, it will limit the work, leisure, and other essential opportunities for people and worsen the access for the disadvantaged groups. In the U.S., increased auto-dependency and the lack of other feasible alternative transportation modes exacerbate the negative impacts of this inequity, especially for the people without automobiles. The transportation equity in terms of the number of feasible transportation mode alternatives to serve a trip (i.e. mobility option equity) has not been extensively evaluated in the literature. Existing studies mainly analyzed the access to transportation infrastructures (e.g., bus stops, bike lanes, shared bike stations) based on the proximity at the zonal level. However, having access to a certain trip mode based on proximity does not necessarily add to the mobility option equity. First, mismatch may exist between the infrastructure and an individual’s travel demand. For example, if someone lives closely to a bus station but the bus route that can be accessed does not align with this person’s trip destination, they will not be able to use bus as a feasible mode for this trip. Second, existing accessibility-based studies often lack consideration of the trip feasibility (in terms of cost, quality, and safety) of using transportation infrastructures at the route level. For example, if a walking trip route is generated without considering the existence of sidewalks, the individual might have to walk on a unsafe busy road. In this case they will not be able to walk to satisfy their travel demand. Therefore, better transportation equity metrics concerning the feasibility of using transportation infrastructures to serve individuals’ travel demands are needed. </p> <p>To address this gap, this thesis defined the “travel-demand-relevant access” (mobility-need-relevant access) metric to evaluate transportation access in the context of individual travel demands and route-level infrastructure constraints and developed a framework to use GPS data to quantify the proposed metric for transportation equity analysis. Assessing which transportation modes are feasible alternatives to serve a trip, requires trip-level disaggregated travel demand data and detailed transportation infrastructure information. The recent development of information and communication technologies and open data efforts provide unprecedented opportunities for such trip-level analysis. With these developments it is now possible to evaluate the feasibility of a mode both the cost- and quality-based measures. The cost-based method estimates the monetary and time cost of using each mobility option and compares it with prominent trip mode (car) to examine “forced car use” concerning the travel demand. The quality-based method comprises accessibility and mobility-based performance measures to evaluate the feasibility of a certain trip mode regarding the ease of use and safety with relation to the infrastructure characteristics. The mobility options/alternatives deemed feasible with these two methods were used in the equity analysis, where the travel-demand-relevant access on the spatial and sociodemographic level was evaluated. </p> <p>The proposed framework was applied to the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) as a case study. The key insights of this study can be listed as (1) it is important to consider travel-demand-relevant access to evaluate transportation equity because we found that 40% of the trips that were identified as accessible by public transit are not feasible when travel-demand-relevant access is considered; (2) suburban areas on average have 12% less mobility options available compared with  the urban core which forces high car ownership in these areas; amd (3) people with non-college educational attainment, households with more crowded rooms, and larger families are the negatively impacted disadvantaged groups while census block groups with high composition of white middle-class suburban families have the lowest number of options (1.5 on average) available. </p> <p>The suburban populations with a low number of mobility options (with a vehicle) are not necessarily at a disadvantage in terms of mobility option equity, since suburban areas are by design made to be car dependent. However, the lower number of feasible mobility options in these areas possesses a risk for the future if the consequences are not evaluated carefully. In terms of urban migration, if out-migration from the urban core to suburban areas keeps increasing as the pandemic trend suggests, the forced car ownership in suburban areas could increase and create/worsen transport deserts. This increase in vehicle ownership contradicts equity and environmental goals regarding transportation. If we observe an increase in the suburban to urban core migration trend, it can force disadvantaged groups to move into suburban areas because of gentrification and increasing prices. These disadvantaged groups could suffer from the limited amount of mobility options in suburban areas, since their access to opportunities would decrease. </p>