Citation

Iglesias V, Giraldez F, Tiznado-Aitken I, Muñoz JC. Transp. Res. Rec. 2019; 2673(11): 59-70.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences USA, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0361198119849588

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A central issue in urban inequity has to do with distributive justice in the costs and benefits associated with urban transport, and whether certain population groups are systematically disadvantaged about mobility, accessibility, affordability, and externalities, the preponderant factors in transport poverty. This article proposes a methodology for analyzing how investment in transport infrastructure and non-housing construction, mobility levels (trip distances, times, and speeds) and the associated trip costs (monetary, accidents, pollution, and energy consumption) are distributed across the different socioeconomic quintiles of a city. The methodology was applied to the real-world case of Santiago de Chile. The results showed that compared with the lowest income quintile, people in the highest income quintile made 1.2 times more trips at an average speed 1.6 times higher. In relation to costs, the richest quintile generated 6.7 times as much pollution and used 7 times as much energy but consumed a significantly lower share of their income (10% vs. 45%). In addition, the top quintile was the beneficiary of 2.5 times more investment in both transport infrastructure and new construction space for commercial activities and services over the period considered. Finally, private car use in the top quintile was 5.3 times greater. This transport mode accounts for 6.8 times more of the accident rate than public transport, bicycles, or walking combined. This clearly inequitable scenario points to the needs for progressive policies that target lower income groups and promote a more rational use of cars in view of their negative impacts on the city.

Language: en