A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches

被引:318
作者
Lucas, Karen [1 ]
van Wee, Bert [2 ]
Maat, Kees [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Inst Transport Studies, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Delft Univ Technol, Transport & Logist Grp, POB 5015, NL-2600 GA Delft, Netherlands
关键词
Accessibility; Ethics; Equity; Transport-related social exclusion; Egalitarianism; Sufficientarianism; COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS; SOCIAL EXCLUSION; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; INFRASTRUCTURE;
D O I
10.1007/s11116-015-9585-2
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
In this paper, we present the case that traditional transport appraisal methods do not sufficiently capture the social dimensions of mobility and accessibility. However, understanding this is highly relevant for policymakers to understand the impacts of their transport decisions. These dimensions include the distribution of mobility and accessibility levels over particular areas or for specific population groups, as well as how this may affect various social outcomes, including their levels of participation, social inclusion and community cohesion. In response, we propose a method to assess the socially relevant accessibility impacts (SRAIs) of policies in some of these key dimensions. The method combines the use of underlying ethics principles, more specifically the theories of egalitarianism and sufficientarianism, in combination with accessibility-based analysis and the Lorenz curve and Gini index. We then demonstrate the method in a case study example. Our suggestion is that policymakers can use these ethical perspectives to determine the equity of their policies decisions and to set minimum standards for local transport delivery. This will help them to become more confident in the development and adoption of new decision frameworks that promote accessibility over mobility and which also disaggregate the costs and benefits of transport policies over particular areas or for specific under-served population groups.
引用
收藏
页码:473 / 490
页数:18
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], SOC EXCL PROV AV PUB
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2003, MAKING CONNECTIONS F, DOI DOI 10.1680/MUEN.2003.156.2.81
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2014, THE GREEN BOOK, Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2000, EVALUATION INFRASTRU
[5]  
Arentze T.A., 1993, Papers in Regional Science, V72, P239, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF01434275
[6]  
Arrow K. J., 1963, Social Choice and Individual Values, V2nd
[7]  
Bristow A., 2000, Transport Pol., V7, P51, DOI [DOI 10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00010-X, 10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00010-X]
[8]   Investigating links between transport disadvantage, social exclusion and well-being in Melbourne-Preliminary results [J].
Currie, Graham ;
Richardson, Tony ;
Smyth, Paul ;
Vella-Brodrick, Dianne ;
Hine, Julian ;
Lucas, Karen ;
Stanley, Janet ;
Morris, Jenny ;
Kinnear, Ray ;
Stanley, John .
TRANSPORT POLICY, 2009, 16 (03) :97-105
[9]   Using Lorenz curves to assess public transport equity [J].
Delbosc, Alexa ;
Currie, Graham .
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY, 2011, 19 (06) :1252-1259
[10]  
Department for Transport, 2006, ACC PLANN FULL GUID