Advancing the practice of regional transportation equity analysis: a San Francisco bay area case study (original) (raw)
Related papers
Using principles of justice to assess the modal equity of regional transportation plans
While equity has been an important consideration for transportation planning agencies in the U.S. following the passage of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI specifically) and the subsequent Department of Transportation directives, there is little guidance on how to assess the distribution of benefits generated by transport investment programs. As a result, the distribution of these benefits has received relatively little attention in transportation planning, compared to transport-related burdens. Drawing on philosophies of social justice, we present an equity assessment of the distribution of accessibility in order to define the rate of “access poverty” among the population. We then apply this analysis to regional transportation plan scenarios from the San Francisco Bay Area, focusing on measures of differences between public transit and automobile access. The analysis shows that virtually all neighborhoods suffer from substantial gaps between car and public transport-based accessibility, but that the two proposed transportation investment programs reduce access poverty compared to the “no project” scenario. We also investigate how access and access poverty rates vary by demographic groups and map low-income communities within access impoverished areas, which could be the subject of further focused investments.
This paper provides guidance on incorporating equity impacts into transportation planning. It defines various types of equity, discusses ways of evaluating equity , and describes practical ways of incorporating equity objectives into decision-making. "Equity" refers to the fairness with which impacts (benefits and costs) are distributed. Transportation decisions often have significant equity impacts. Transport equity analysis can be difficult because there are several types of equity, numerous impacts to consider, various ways to categorize people for analysis, and many ways of measuring impacts. Equity analysis should usually consider a variety of perspectives and impacts.
Urban transport policies are characterized by a wide range of impacts, and trade-offs and conflicts among these impacts. The task of integrating and reconciling these impacts poses challenges, because they are incommensurable, and they affect different groups differentially. Further, impacts such as those related to social equity are hard to define and measure. In this paper we address two interrelated questions: How is social equity conceptualized, operationalized, and prioritized relative to environmental and other objectives; and how might social equity be more effectively integrated in urban transportation plans in North America? We critically analyze how social equity is incorporated into transportation plans in 18 large North American metropolitan areas, in terms of the quality of the related objectives, how meaningfully their achievement is assessed through the choice of performance measures or indicators, and their prioritization relative to other objectives. We observe that social equity goals and objectives are in many cases not translated into clearly specified objectives, and appropriate measures for assessing their achievement in a meaningful, disaggregated manner are often lacking. At the same time, there are good examples of social equity objectives and measures in several plans. In general, there is a stronger focus on the local environment (and congestion reduction) than on social equity in the plans. We end the paper with a discussion related to considerations for generating objectives and measures for better integrating social equity into urban transportation plans.
Enhancing transportation equity analysis for long-range planning and decision making
2013
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) regularly perform equity analyses for their longrange transportation plans, as this is required by Environmental Justice regulations. These regional-level plans may propose hundreds of transportation infrastructure and policy changes (e.g. highway and transit extensions, fare changes, pricing schemes, etc.) as well as land-use policy changes. The challenge is to assess the distribution of impacts from all the proposed changes across different population segments. In addition, these agencies are to confirm that disadvantaged groups will share equitably in the benefits and not be overly adversely affected. While there are a number of approaches used for regional transportation equity analyses in practice, approaches using large scale travel models are emerging as a common existing practice. However, the existing methods used generally fail to paint a clear picture of what groups benefit or do not benefit from the transportation improvements. In particular, there are four critical shortcomings of the existing transportation equity analysis practice. First, there is no clear framework outlining the key components of a transportation equity analysis at the regional-level. Second, the existing zonal-level group segmentation used for identifying target and comparison groups are problematic and can lead to significant biases. Third, the use of average equity indicators can be misleading, as averages tend to mask important information about the underlying distributions. Finally, there is no clear guidance on implementing scenario ranking based on the equity objectives.
Identifying environmental justice communities for transportation analysis
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2016
Environmental justice (EJ) refers to policy and advocacy intended to achieve equitable protection from environmental harms and access to benefits across demographic groups. Research has shown that low-income communities and communities of color are often exposed to greater harms and enjoy fewer benefits from transportation systems than the general population. However, federally-mandated EJ analyses rarely conclude that projects could result in disproportionate impacts to these communities. This paper investigates the methods used to define EJ communities-a key analytical step for which there is little specific guidance-as a potential driver of variation in observed EJ outcomes. Using a case study of transit accessibility in Fresno County, California, the paper contrasts three methods for the identification of EJ communities: (1) a commonly used threshold-based approach that groups geographic areas using demographics, (2) a population-weighted approach that calculates weighted means of performance measures, and (3) communitybased identification of EJ areas. The analysis indicates that the first method is appropriate for targeting transportation investments but not for assessing EJ outcomes, while the second two methods are appropriate for assessing EJ outcomes. Importantly, the method used to define EJ communities can substantially affect the analytical outcome, potentially shifting a finding of inequity from null to positive or vice versa. These results have important implications for transportation planning agencies and transportation service providers that conduct EJ and equity analyses, as a finding of inequity may lead to design changes or mitigations.
Equity Analysis of Land Use and Transport Plans Using an Integrated Spatial Model
2009
This paper describes a study to investigate how a spatial economic model can be used to evaluate the equity effects of land use and transport policies intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Activity Allocation Module of the PECAS (Production, Exchange, and Consumption Allocation) Model for the Sacramento region is used to simulate two scenarios for the year 2035 arising from a recent planning process, 'Business-As-Usual' and 'Preferred Blueprint.' Advanced aggregate travel models and activity-based travel models have been applied to evaluate distributions of travel time and cost effects of transport and land use policies across different socio-economic groups. But the PECAS model system, with its representation of the interactions among the transport system and the rest of the spatial economic system, enables an evaluation of the distributions of a wider range of economic impacts, including wages, rents, productivity, and consumer surplus, for segments of households, labor, and industry. In this study, the PECAS model is applied to illustrate the distributional measures that can be obtained from this type of model and to provide insights into the equity effects of different transport and land development patterns. The results show that a more compact urban form designed around transit stations may reduce travel costs, wages, and housing costs by increasing accessibility, which can lead to substantial net benefits for industry categories and lower income households. Higher income households may be net losers, since their incomes are more dependent on reduced wages, they are less willing to switch to higher density dwellings, and they are more likely to own their own home.
Journal of Transport Geography, 2013
Metropolitan planning organizations typically undertake an analysis of regional transportation plan equity to comply with federal anti-discrimination law, most prominently Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In this critical review, we examine the law, regulatory guidance, academic research, and agency practice pertinent to equity analysis. We find that recommendations are extensive but generally lack specificity and are rarely enforceable. In the absence of detailed guidance, practice has become dominated by a single method that has foundations in the spatial analysis of environmental exposures and the neighborhood effects literature. We argue that this method is not appropriate for the analysis of transportation investment benefits, in part because target populations must be defined a priori based on demographic thresholds for areal units rather than on the basis of exposure. Further, it does not represent the travel behavior of Title VI-protected populations adequately, most notably people of color. Newer travel demand modeling paradigms are capable of sidestepping methodological problems, and legacy models can be adapted and improved. However, agencies generally have not shifted from traditional methods and planners do not view race as a variable relevant to travel behavior. By relying on an analytical technique that is not likely to reflect the travel behavior of people of color, planning agencies reduce the likelihood that racially disparate outcomes will be identified and mitigated. Meaningful transportation equity analyses must include an assessment of both current and near-term conditions and provide racially specific outcomes, while seeking to mitigate inequities through programming decisions.
Transportation Equity Quantification and Related Issues and Challenges
Current Urban Studies
The main purpose of this article is to explore the different challenges that planners, engineers and policy makers face in quantifying transportation equity for design and implementation purposes. The first section-quantifying equity is a critical review of the most recent literature as well as some existing tools for quantifying transportation equity. The second part-implementing equity to design identifies several different methods that attempt to integrate equity in the planning and design processes. The third section-prioritizing alternate forms of transportation presents an overview of the challenges of vehicle ownership for many disadvantaged groups and how alternate forms of transportation may be able to help alleviate this problem. The fourth section-cost deterrents to driving discusses the advantages and disadvantages of congestion pricing and other cost deterrent methods. The fifth sectionbarriers to addressing equity presents some of the most challenging policy, planning, design and implementation issues for integrating equity into the transportation sector. Although much stride has been made in the last few years to address the important issue of social equity in transportation, more work and action are needed to make sure all people benefit equally from a safe, efficient and sustainable transportation system.
2021
This report examines if and to what extent state-level transportation departments in four states incorporate race and equity considerations into transportation planning technical analyses and modeling practices, particularly for long-range transportation plans, and how such equity-infused practices can be improved. The research team examined relevant literature, reviewed statewide long-range transportation plans for California and three other states, consulted with other experts, and conducted interviews with scholars and knowledgeable agency staff and practitioners. The findings indicate widespread acknowledgement that racial disparities in transportation exist, and state agencies have expressed a strong commitment to redressing the inequalities. However, while there has been progress in creating analytical equity tools to assess transportation projects and programs, they lack standardization. There have also been few noticeable revisions to existing regional transportation planning models to incorporate equity, and the profession lags behind what is technically possible based on the work of academic researchers. Technical staff need better training in regard to equity issues and agencies should encourage greater collaboration between equity and analytical units to develop and improve frameworks to assess equity performance in plans, programs, and projects.