Transport Inequality in Today’s Cities at the Intersection of Mobility and Inequality

Abstract

One aspect of social inequality in today’s cities concerns transport inequality. This simply refers to the transport advantages of the rich compared to the poor (Gebresselassie & Sanchez, 2019). The transport inequality intersects with other forms of marginalization as well, based on gender, age, disability, and ethnicity. Yet for the mobile or kinetic elite (Andreotti, Le Gallès, & Moreno-Fuentes, 2013), all places and transport means are readily available. Furthermore, transport-related mega-projects accentuate the existing social inequalities of the neoliberal city. However, urban policy makers have begun to realize the importance of transport inequality and develop inclusive policies, such as “accessibility planning” in the UK (Lucas, 2012). Urban citizens are also forming mobility justice movements to protest against the increasing transport costs, as in Latin America (Díaz Pabón & Palacio Ludeña, 2021) and France. The encompassing mobility research is largely connected to social and environmental sustainability ideals. Hence, this paper will study the relationship between mobility and inequality through a thematic analysis of approximately 100 publications that were selected with certain keywords from the results of Web of Science searches, a few books, institutional reports and other sources. This literature review shows that transport inequalities are a reflection of the capitalist system and one of the main sources of social conflict in contemporary societies. Against the solution suggestions that range from rehabilitating the system to revolution as a process in the related literature, formation of place-based solutions that take into consideration both universal and local conditions is suggested in this study.

Keywords

• Social inequality
• Transport inequality
• physical, social, technological, and political-economic dimensions of transport inequality
• sustainable mobility
• mobility barriers

Hareketlilik ve Eşitsizliğin Kesişiminde Günümüz Kentlerinde Ulaşım Eşitsizliği

Abstract

Günümüz kentlerindeki toplumsal eşitsizliklerin bir yönünü ulaşım eşitsizliği oluşturur. Bu, basitçe, varlıklı insanların yoksullar karşısındaki ulaşım üstünlükleri anlamına gelir (Gebresselassie ve Sanchez, 2019). Ulaşım eşitsizliği, cinsiyet, yaş, engellilik ve etnik köken gibi başka ötekileştirme türleriyle de kesişir. Öte yandan, bütün yerler ve ulaşım araçları hareketli ya da kinetik seçkinlerin (Andreotti, Le Gallès ve Moreno-Fuentes, 2013) eli altındadır. Üstelik ulaşımla ilgili mega projeler neoliberal kentin var olan toplumsal eşitsizliklerini daha da belirginleştirirler. Bununla birlikte, kentsel politika yapıcıları ulaşım eşitsizliğinin önemini giderek ayırt etmeye ve İngiltere’deki “erişilebilirlik planlaması” örneğinde olduğu gibi kapsayıcı politikalar geliştirmeye başlamışlardır (Lucas, 2012). Dünya kentlerinin yurttaşları da, Latin Amerika (Díaz Pabón ve Palacio Ludeña, 2021) ve Fransa’daki gibi artan ulaşım giderlerini protesto etmek için, hareketlilik alanında adaleti hedefleyen toplumsal hareketler oluşturmaktadır. Konuyu kapsayan hareketlilik araştırmaları toplumsal ve çevresel sürdürülebilirlik hedefleriyle büyük ölçüde bağlantılıdır. Bu gerekçelerle, bu makalede hareketlilik ve eşitsizlik arasındaki ilişki belirli anahtar sözcüklerle, Web of Science arama sonuçlarından, birkaç kitaptan, kurum raporundan ve başka kaynaklardan seçilen yaklaşık 100 yayının tematik bir çözümlemesi yoluyla incelenecektir. Bu derleme makalesi ulaşım eşitsizliklerinin kapitalist düzenin bir yansıması olarak, günümüz toplumlarındaki başlıca toplumsal çatışma kaynaklarından biri olduğunu göstermektedir. Söz konusu yazındaki, düzeni iyileştirmekten, süreç olarak devrime dek uzanan çözüm önerilerine karşılık, bu çalışmada evrensel ve yerel koşulları birarada gözeten, yer odaklı çözümlerin oluşturulması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

• Toplumsal eşitsizlik
• ulaşım eşitsizliği
• ulaşım eşitsizliğinin fiziksel, toplumsal, teknolojik ve politik-ekonomik boyutları
• sürdürülebilir hareketlilik
• hareketlilik engelleri

References

1. A brief history of the disability rights movement. (2022, March). ADL Education. Retrieved from https://www.adl.org/education/resources/backgrounders/disability-rights-movement
2. Acheampong, R. A., Cugurullo, F., Gueriau, M., & Dusparic, I. (2021). Can autonomous vehicles enable sustainable mobility in future cities? Insights and policy challenges from user preferences over different urban transport options. Cities, 112, 1–32. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103134
3. Adams, J. (1996). Can technology save us? World Transport Policy & Practice, 2(3), 4–17.
4. Aldred, R., Verlinghieri, E., Sharkey, M., Itova, I., & Goodman, A. (2021). Equity in new active travel infrastructure: A spatial analysis of London's new Low Traffic Neighbourhoods. Journal of Transport Geography, 96, 1–22. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103194
5. Allen, J., & Farber, S. (2021). Suburbanization of transport poverty. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 111(6), 1833–1850. doi:10.1080/24694452.2020.1859981
6. Anastasiadou, K., Gavanas, N., Pyrgidis, C., & Pitsiava-Latinopoulou, M. (2021). Identifying and prioritizing sustainable urban mobility barriers through a modified Delphi-AHP approach. Sustainability, 13(18), 1–18. doi:10.3390/su131810386
7. Andreotti, A., Le Gallès, P., & Moreno-Fuentes, F. J. (2013). Transnational mobility and rootedness: The upper middle classes in European cities. Global Networks, 13(1), 41–59. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0374.2012.00365.x
8. Aveline-Dubach, N. (2022, July). Institutional perspectives: looking for anticipations and new governance devices for a faster pace of change in mobility spaces. In A. Borthagaray (Chair), Public spaces of mobility in Paris, Tokyo and Buenos Aires Design, management, and governance for a social and post-pandemic transition. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the FFJ-Michelin Foundation, Paris.

9. Badji, S., Badland, H., Rachele, J. N., & Petrie, D. (2021). Public transport availability and healthcare use for Australian adults aged 18–60 years, with and without disabilities. Journal of Transport & Health, 20, 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.jth.2020.101001
10. Baeten, G. (2000). The tragedy of the highway: Empowerment, disempowerment and the politics of sustainability discourses and practices. European Planning Studies, 8(1), 69–86. doi:10.1080/096543100110938
11. Basu, R., & Ferreira, J. (2021). Sustainable mobility in auto-dominated Metro Boston: Challenges and opportunities post-COVID-19. Transport Policy, 103, 197–210. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.01.006
12. Beck, M. J., Hensher, D. A., & Wei, E. (2020). Slowly coming out of COVID-19 restrictions in Australia: Implications for working from home and commuting trips by car and public transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 88, 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102846
13. Boschmann, E. E., & Kwan, M.-P. (2008). Toward socially sustainable urban transportation: Progress and potentials. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 2(3), 138–157. doi:10.1080/15568310701517265
14. Boterman, W. R. (2020). Carrying class and gender: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles of urban middle classes in Dutch inner cities. Social & Cultural Geography, 21(2), 245–264. doi:10.1080/14649365.2018.1489975
15. Buhr, F., & McGarrigle, J. (2017). Navigating urban life in Lisbon: A study of migrants’ mobilities and use of space. Social Inclusion, 5(4), 226–234. doi:10.17645/si.v5i4.1105
16. Campbell, K. B., & Brakewood, C. (2017). Sharing riders: How bikesharing impacts bus ridership in New York City. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 100, 264–282. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.017
17. Casas, I. (2007). Social exclusion and the disabled: An accessibility approach. The Professional Geographer, 59(4), 463–477. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9272.2007.00635.x
18. Celis, N., Cuarón, A., & Rodriguez, G. (Producers), & Cuarón, A. (Director). (2018). Roma [Motion picture]. Mexico and USA: Esperanto Filmoj and Participant Media.
19. Cervero, R. (2013). Linking urban transport and land use in developing countries. The Journal of Transport and Land Use, 6(1), 7–24. doi:10.5198/jtlu.v6i1.425
20. Chen, Y.-J., Matsuoka, R. H., & Tsai, K.-C. (2015). Spatial measurement of mobility barriers: Improving the environment of community-dwelling older adults in Taiwan. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 23(2), 286–297. doi:10.1123/japa.2014-0004
21. Cirianni, F. M. M., Comi, A., & Luongo, A.S. (2022). A sustainable approach for planning of urban pedestrian routes and footpaths in a pandemic scenario. TeMA - Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 15(1), 125–140. doi:10.6093/1970-9870/8629
22. Dianin, A., Ravazzoli, E., & Hauger, G. (2021). Implications of autonomous vehicles for accessibility and transport equity: A framework based on literature. Sustainability, 13(8), 1–17. doi:10.3390/su13084448
23. Diaz Olvera, L., Plat, D., & Pochet, P. (2013). The puzzle of mobility and access to the city in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Transport Geography, 32, 56–64. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.08.009
24. Díaz Pabón, F. A., & Palacio Ludeña, M. G. (2021). Inequality and the socioeconomic dimensions of mobility in protests: The cases of Quito and Santiago. Global Policy, 12(S2), 78-90. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12944
25. Eliasson, J. (2017). Is congestion pricing fair? Consumer and citizen perspectives on equity effects. In OECD-ITF (Ed.), Income Inequality, Social Inclusion and Mobility (Roundtable Report No. 164, pp. 165-192). Paris Cedex: International Transport Forum.
26. Faber, K., & van Lierop, D. (2020). How will older adults use automated vehicles? Assessing the role of AVs in overcoming perceived mobility barriers. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 133, 353–363. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2020.01.022
27. Falchetta, G., Noussan, M., & Hammad, A.T. (2021). Comparing paratransit in seven major African cities: An accessibility and network analysis. Journal of Transport Geography, 94, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103131
28. Farla, J., Alkemade, F., & Suurs, R. A. A. (2010). Analysis of barriers in the transition toward sustainable mobility in the Netherlands. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(8), 1260–1269. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2010.03.014
29. Fiocco, A. J., Millett, G., D’Amico, D., Krieger, L., Sivashankar, Y., Lee, S. H., & Lachman, R. (2021). Virtual tourism for older adults living in residential care: A mixed-methods study. PLoS ONE, 16(5): 1–15. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250761
30. Florida, R. (2018). Soylulaştırma, eşitsizlik ve seçkinler şehri ile gelen yeni kentsel kriz [The New Urban Crisis: How Our Cities Are Increasing Inequality, Deepening Segregation, and Failing the Middle Class-and What We Can Do About It] (D. Nükhet Özer, Trans.). Istanbul: Doğan Kitap. (Original work published 2017)
31. Gates, S., Gogescu, F., Grollman, C., Cooper, E., & Khambhaita, P. (2019). Transport and inequality: An evidence review for the Department for Transport. London: NatCen Social Research.
32. Gebresselassie, M., & Sanchez, T. W. (2019, September 5). Banister: Inequality in transport [Review of the book Inequality in Transport, by D. Banister]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 85(4), 593-594. doi:10.1080/01944363.2019.1641385
33. Graham-Harrison, E. (2015, August 26). Women-only carriages around the world: Do they work? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/26/women-only-train-carriages-around-the-world-jeremy-corbyn
34. Groth, S. (2019). Multimodal divide: Reproduction of transport poverty in smart mobility trends. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 125, 56–71. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2019.04.018
35. Hamnett, C. (2019). Urban Inequality. In T. Schwanen & R. van Kempen (Eds.), Handbook of Urban Geography (pp. 242-254). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
36. Harb, M., Malik, J., Circella, G., & Walker, J. (2022). Glimpse of the future: Simulating life with personally owned autonomous vehicles and their implications on travel behaviors. Transportation Research Record, 2676(3), 492–506. doi:10.1177/03611981211052543
37. Harvey, D. (2022). Anti-Kapitalist Günlükler [The Anti-Capitalist Chronicles] (U. Özmakas, Trans.). Istanbul: Sel Yayıncılık. (Original work published 2020)
38. Hidayati, I., Tan, W., & Yamu, C. (2021). Conceptualizing mobility inequality: Mobility and accessibility for the marginalized. Journal of Planning Literature, 36(4), 492–507. doi:10.1177/08854122211012898
39. Hjorteset, M. A., Böcker, L., Røe, P. G., & Wessel, T. (2021). Intraurban geographies of car sharing supply and demand in Greater Oslo, Norway. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 101, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2021.103089
40. How reforming fossil fuel subsidies can go wrong: A lesson from Ecuador. (2019, October). International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). Retrieved from https://www.iisd.org/articles/lesson-ecuador-fossil-fuel-subsidies
41. Inequality (social inequality). (2014). In J. Scott (Ed.), Oxford Dictionary of Sociology (4th ed., p. 352). Oxford University Press.
42. Işık, O., & Pınarcıoğlu, M. M. (2021). Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk. Gecekondulaşma ve Kent Yoksulları: Sultanbeyli Örneği [Poverty in Turns. Squatting and the Urban Poor: the Case of Sultanbeyli] (13th ed.). Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
43. Jain, J., & Guiver, J. (2001). Turning the car inside out: Transport, equity and environment. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5), 569–586. doi:10.1111/1467-9515.t01-1-00254
44. Jahanshahi, K., Jin, Y., & Williams, I. (2015). Direct and indirect influences on employed adults’ travel in the UK: New insights from the National Travel Survey data 2002–2010. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 80, 288–306. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2015.08.007
45. Jaroš, V. (2017). Social and transport exclusion. Geographia Polonica, 90(3), 247–263. doi:10.7163/GPol.0099
46. Jin, S. T., Kong, H., & Sui, D. Z. (2019). Uber, public transit, and urban transportation equity: A case study in New York City. The Professional Geographer, 71(2), 315–330. doi:10.1080/00330124.2018.1531038
47. Jirón, P., Carrasco, J.-A., & Rebolledo, M. (2020). Observing gendered interdependent mobility barriers using an ethnographic and time use approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 140, 204–214. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2020.08.018
48. Kębłowski, W., Van Criekingen, M., & Bassens, D. (2019). Moving past the sustainable perspectives on transport: An attempt to mobilise critical urban transport studies with the right to the city. Transport Policy, 81, 24–34. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.05.012
49. Kerzhner, T., Kaplan, S., & Silverman, E. (2018). Physical walls, invisible barriers: Palestinian women's mobility in Jerusalem. Regional Science Policy and Practice, 10(4), 299–314. doi:10.1111/rsp3.12162
50. Ledsham, T., Zhang, Y., Farber, S., & Hess, P. (2022). Beyond downtown: Factors influencing utilitarian and recreational cycling in a low-income suburb. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 1–22. doi:10.1080/15568318.2022.2091496
51. Liu, Q., An, Z., Liu, Y., Ying, W., & Zhao, P. (2021). Smartphone-based services, perceived accessibility, and transport inequity during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-lagged panel study. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 97, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2021.102941
52. Lubitow, A., Rainer, J., & Bassett, S. (2017). Exclusion and vulnerability on public transit: Experiences of transit dependent riders in Portland, Oregon. Mobilities, 12(6), 924–937. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1253816
53. Lucas, K. (2006). Providing transport for social inclusion within a framework for environmental justice in the UK. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(10), 801–809. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2005.12.005
54. Lucas, K. (2012). Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? Transport Policy, 20, 105–113. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.01.013
55. Lucas, K. (2018). Editorial for special issue of European transport research review: Transport poverty and inequalities. European Transport Research Review, 10, 1–3. doi:10.1007/s12544-018-0288-6
56. Luscher, D. (2020, July 13). Access, not mobility: It’s not about how fast you can go [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.15minutecity.com/blog/access
57. Mahieux, A., & Mejia-Dorantes, L. (2017). Regeneration strategies and transport improvement in a deprived area: What can be learnt from Northern France? Regional Studies, 51(5), 800–813. doi:10.1080/00343404.2016.1177174
58. Martin-Fuentes, E., Mostafa-Shaalan, S., & Mellinas, J. P. (2021). Accessibility in inclusive tourism? Hotels distributed through online channels. Societies, 11(34), 1–12. doi:10.3390/soc11020034
59. Massey, D. (1993). Power-geometry and a progressive sense of place. In J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, G. Robertson, & L. Tickner (Eds.), Mapping the futures: Local Cultures, Global Change (pp. 59–69). London: Routledge.
60. McArthur, J., Robin, E., & Smeds, E. (2019). Socio-spatial and temporal dimensions of transport equity for London's night time economy. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 121, 433–443. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2019.01.024
61. McCray, T., & Brais, N. (2007). Exploring the role of transportation in fostering social exclusion: The use of GIS to support qualitative data. Networks and Spatial Economics, 7, 397–412. doi:10.1007/s11067-007-9031-x
62. Millonig, A. (2019). Connected and automated vehicles: Chances for elderly travellers. Gerontology, 65, 571–578. doi:10.1159/000498908
63. Montoya-Robledo, V. & Escovar-Álvarez, G. (2020). Domestic workers’ commutes in Bogotá: Transportation, gender and social exclusion. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 139, 400–411. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2020.07.019
64. Nikitas, A., Avineri, E., & Parkhurst, G. (2018). Understanding the public acceptability of road pricing and the roles of older age, social norms, pro-social values and trust for urban policy-making: The case of Bristol. Cities, 79, 78–91. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2018.02.024
65. Nosal Hoy, K., & Puławska-Obiedowska, S. (2021). The travel behaviour of Polish women and adaptation of transport systems to their needs. Sustainability, 13(5-2693), 1–27. doi:10.3390/su13052693
66. OECD. (2016). Making Cities Work for All: Data and Actions for Inclusive Growth. Retrieved from https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/urban-rural-and-regional-development/making-cities-work-for-all_9789264263260-en#page4
67. OECD-ITF. (2017). Income Inequality, Social Inclusion and Mobility (Roundtable Report No. 164). Retrieved from https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/income-inequality-social-inclusion-mobility.pdf
68. Özkazanç, S., & Özdemir Sönmez, F. N. (2017). Spatial analysis of social exclusion from a transportation perspective: A case study of Ankara metropolitan area. Cities, 67, 74–84. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2017.04.013
69. Özkazanç, S. (2021). Transportation experiences of Syrian refugees under the clampdown of poverty, social exclusion and spatial segregation. Cities, 112, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103117
70. Pamucar, D., Deveci, M., Canıtez, F., Paksoy, T., & Lukovac, V. (2021). A novel methodology for prioritizing zero-carbon measures for sustainable transport. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 1093–1112. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.02.016
71. Parsha, A., & Martens, K. (2022). Social identity and cycling among women: The case of Tel-Aviv-Jaffa. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 89, 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2022.05.023
72. Pérez-Peña, M.d.C., Jiménez-García, M., Ruiz-Chico, J., & Peña-Sánchez, A.R. (2021). Transport poverty with special reference to sustainability: A systematic review of the literature. Sustainability, 13(3-1451), 1–13. doi:10.3390/su13031451
73. Pojani, E., Boussauw, K., & Pojani, D. (2017). Reexamining transport poverty, job access, and gender issues in Central and Eastern Europe. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(9), 1323–1345. doi:10.1080/0966369X.2017.1372382
74. Pooley, C. (2016). Mobility, transport and social inclusion: Lessons from history. Transport Policy and Social Inclusion, 4(3), 100–109. doi:10.17645/si.v4i3.461
75. Portegijs, E., Keskinen, K.E., Eronen, J., Saajanaho, M., Rantakokko, M., & Rantanen, T. (2020). Older adults’ physical activity and the relevance of distances to neighborhood destinations and barriers to outdoor mobility. Frontiers in Public Health, 8(335), 1–11. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00335
76. Qamhaieh, A., & Chakravarty, S. (2017). Global cities, public transportation, and social exclusion: A study of the bus system in Abu Dhabi. Mobilities, 12(3), 462–478. doi:10.1080/17450101.2016.1139805
77. Ritzer, G. (Ed.). (2007). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. USA, UK, and Australia: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
78. Ryan, J., Wretstrand, A., & Schmidt, S. M. (2019). Disparities in mobility among older people: Findings from a capability-based travel survey. Transport Policy, 79, 177–192. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.04.016
79. Sánchez-Ávila, M., Mouriño-García, M. A., Fisteus, J. A., & Sánchez-Fernández, L. (2020). Detection of barriers to mobility in the smart city using Twitter. IEEE Access, 8, 168429-168438. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3022834
80. Sancho-Reinoso, A., Saxinger, G., Fink, C., Povoroznyuk, O., Wentzel, S. I., Illmeier, G., Schweitzer, P., Krasnoshtanova, N., & Kuklina, V. (2022). Mapping hierarchies of mobility in the Baikal Amur Mainline region: A quantitative account of needs and expectations relating to railroad usage. Polar Geography, 45(3), 157–176. doi:10.1080/1088937X.2022.2046195
81. Schwanen, T., Lucas, K., Akyelken, N., Solsona, D. C., Carrasco, J.-A., & Neutens, T. (2015). Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 74, 123–135. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2015.02.012
82. Schwartz, N., Buliung, R., & Wilson, K. (2021). Experiences of food access among disabled adults in Toronto, Canada. Disability & Society, 1–25. doi:10.1080/09687599.2021.1949265
83. Sheller, M. (2015). Racialized mobility transitions in Philadelphia: Connecting urban sustainability and transport justice. City & Society, 27(1), 70–91. doi:10.1111/ciso.12049
84. Sheller, M. (2017). From spatial turn to mobilities turn. Current Sociology, 65(4), 623–639. doi:10.1177/0011392117697463
85. Sheller, M. (2018). Theorising mobility justice. Tempo Social, revista de sociologia da USP, 30(2), 17-34. doi:10.11606/0103-2070.ts.2018.142763
86. Sheller, M. (2020). Mobility justice. In M. Büscher, M. Freudendal-Pedersen, S. Kesselring, & N. Grauslund Kristensen (Eds.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications for Mobilities (pp. 11–20). UK and US: Edward Elgar Publishing.
87. Shirmohammadli, A., Louen, C., & Vallée, D. (2016). Exploring mobility equity in a society undergoing changes in travel behavior: A case study of Aachen, Germany. Transport Policy, 46, 32–39. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.11.006
88. Singer, M. E., Cohen-Zada, A. L., & Martens, K. (2022). Core versus periphery: Examining the spatial patterns of insufficient accessibility in U.S. metropolitan areas. Journal of Transport Geography, 100, 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103321
89. Strohmeier, F. (2016). Barriers and their influence on the mobility behavior of elder pedestrians in urban areas: Challenges and best practice for walkability in the city of Vienna. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 1134–1143. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.184
90. Tirachini, A., & del Río, M. (2019). Ride-hailing in Santiago de Chile: Users’ characterisation and effects on travel behaviour. Transport Policy, 82, 46–57. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.07.008
91. Tirachini, A. (2020). Ride‑hailing, travel behaviour and sustainable mobility: An international review. Transportation, 47, 2011–2047. doi:10.1007/s11116-019-10070-2
92. Tirachini, A., & Cats, O. (2020). COVID-19 and public transportation: Current assessment, prospects, and research needs. Journal of Public Transportation, 22(1), 1–21. doi:10.5038/2375-0901.22.1.1
93. Tiwari, G. (2003). Transport and land-use policies in Delhi. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 81(6), 444–450.
94. Tonetta, M., & Semi, G. (2022, August). Going up! Real estate market and the pandemic Alps. Paper presented at the meeting of the RC21, Athens.
95. Tortosa, E. V., Lovelace, R., Heinen, E., & Mann R. P. (2021). Infrastructure is not enough: Interactions between the environment, socioeconomic disadvantage, and cycling participation in England. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 14(1), 693–714. doi:10.5198/jtlu.2021.1781
96. Tsai, L.-T., Rantakokko, M., Portegijs, E., Viljanen, A., Saajanaho, M., Eronen, J., & Rantanen, T. (2013). Environmental mobility barriers and walking for errands among older people who live alone vs. with others. BMC Public Health, 13(1054), 1–8. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-1054
97. Turoń, K. (2021). Social barriers and transportation social exclusion issues in creating sustainable car-sharing systems. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 9(1), 10–22. doi:10.9770/jesi.2021.9.1(1)
98. Utsunomiya, K. (2016). Social capital and local public transportation in Japan. Research in Transportation Economics, 59, 434–440. doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2016.02.001
99. Wells, P. (2012). Converging transport policy, industrial policy and environmental policy: The implications for localities and social equity. Local Economy, 27(7) 749–763. doi:10.1177/0269094212455018
100. Wells, P., & Xenias, D. (2015). From ‘freedom of the open road’ to ‘cocooning’: Understanding resistance to change in personal private automobility. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 106–119. doi:10.1016/j.eist.2015.02.001
101. What inequality means for transport. (2018). Built Environment. Retrieved from https://inequalityintransport.org.uk/exploring-transport-inequality/what-inequality-means-transport
102. Yousefzadeh Barri, E., Farber, S., Kramer, A., Jahanshahi, H., Allen, J., & Beyazit, E. (2021). Can transit investments in low-income neighbourhoods increase transit use? Exploring the nexus of income, car-ownership, and transit accessibility in Toronto. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 95, 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2021.102849
103. Zhang, M., Zhao, P., & Qiao, S. (2020). Smartness-induced transport inequality: Privacy concern, lacking knowledge of smartphone use and unequal access to transport information. Transport Policy, 99, 175–185. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.08.016