Publications

This paper proposes a relational egalitarian framework for conceptualizing justice in transport planning and policymaking. Building on Elizabeth Anderson's work, we argue that transport justice should be understood in terms of dismantling oppressive social hierarchies rather than merely redistributing resources. The paper outlines three key dimensions of relational (in)equality in transportation: hierarchies of power, standing, and esteem. It examines how these hierarchies manifest in governance processes, in the delivery of transport infrastructure and services, and in the social norms that affect the mobility of people, systematically disadvantaging marginalized groups. By focusing on the relational aspects of transport inequalities, this approach offers both a broader and more nuanced understanding of injustice in transport and provides planners with a comprehensive analytical tool to identify and address previously overlooked forms of discrimination in mobility systems. The aim of the paper is then to propose a framework able to reorient transport planning as a tool for fostering a society of equals.

In this paper, we explore how psychology professionals understand and treat the mobility issues of people diagnosed with anxiety disorder, based on 13 in-depth interviews. All interviewees regularly treat clients facing challenges using various modes of transportation due to anxiety disorders. Their clients exhibit a range of mobility issues, with some struggling with driving or being a passenger in a car, while others encounter difficulties when using public transport, cycling, or being a pedestrian. The mobility problems their clients experience affect their daily lives. Next to applying individual Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) adopted by most interviewees, they also suggest that adjustments in the mobility system could assist individuals with anxiety disorders to participate more fully in society. Hence, we advocate for more research on the mobility system that integrates psychological perspectives on mobility-related problems caused by anxiety disorder to support a more inclusive mobility planning, design, and organization of the system. Inclusive planning implies (1) designing mainstream infrastructures and services enabling people with anxiety disorders to move around independently while reducing anxiety-triggering situations without them becoming disclosed; (2) enhancing walkability and cyclability through both transport and land use planning, since having destinations within a short distance from home seems to be especially beneficial for people with anxiety disorders.

A high level of integration of public transport services in terms of scheduling, ticketing, and cross-operator data provision and others is crucial to provide a high level of service to potential users. Transport integration issues are a growing need as transport providers consider low cost ways of increasing ridership following the travel pattern disruptions exacerbated by the recent pandemic. Particularly in Europe, there has been increasing privatization of services, which are tendered to private operators that bid in a competitive process, though public authorities often retain the power to define such services (Pettersson and Hrelja, 2020).  This has created operator fragmentation (Pettersson & Hrelja, 2020), and requires further research on cross-operator service integration.  Previous scholarship has found that larger tenders and more integrated tenders should, over time, facilitate further cooperation (Veeneman & van de Velde, 2014), but more research is needed on the process for developing such tenders, how its ability to overcome transport fragmentation is influenced by the centralization of the process and the centralization of government decision making (Veeneman and Mulley, 2018).  Israel presents a case with a highly centralized transport decision making process that will add to existing literature on tendering and transport fragmentation. The challenge of delivering an integrated system has increased over the past decades, due to the (gradual) privatization of public transport services over multiple private public transport providers in many countries. Israel is one of the countries that have followed this path since the early 2000s, with the public tendering process resulting in the fragmentation of services from merely 2 into 17 bus operators. In this paper, we use document analysis as well as interviews with key members of the national government, private consultants, private operators and municipalities, to understand how the Israeli tendering process fragmented services into 17 operators, but also developed ways to integrate them. The study uses this information to understand the role of formal institutions in coordinating schedules, integration of fares and fare cards, shared use of terminals, and cross-operator data sharing across the country. We identify a number of ways integration was enhanced in each category, with the national government making use of its strong leverage over private operators. We also highlight the limitations of this approach due to the separate management of bus and rail services within the national government. The study closes with findings that Israel has achieved coordination despite a large amount of private ownership and fragmentation across operators.  Flexibility over time has helped to refine this coordination with each new tender.  However the results have been confined to the bus system, with poor coordination across modes (bus/rail), and results that are unsatisfactory to local municipalities, which are often not included in the decision making process.  In this case, the use of a higher level of government to effect coordination has been effective, though it has also impeded their ability to adapt to local needs.

Every workplace has an explicit or implicit transportation policy with respect to its employee mobility. Whether it is officially managed or not, employer's policies regarding parking provision, travel allowances and other transport related financial or non-financial benefits affect employee transport-related decisions, such as vehicle ownership and mode choice. These employee decisions, in turn, have substantial impacts on the environment and society, raising the question whether workplaces take up employee mobility – business travel and commuting – as part of their corporate social responsibility commitments. To answer this question, we selected a sample of 30 leading companies worldwide and examined to what extent they are committed to promote sustainable employee transportation, using companies’ sustainability reports for the year 2022. Our findings indicate: (1) inconsistency in reporting on environmental or social domains, and on reporting on business travel or commuting; (2) the narrow scope of social and environmental impacts of employee mobility being addressed, mostly limited to GHG emission and traffic accidents; (3) the limited level of commitment, with most companies failing to set targets or specify actions ; and (4) the importance of reporting frameworks in shaping sustainable practices of companies. Taken together, our findings indicate that the current reporting process appears to have only a modest impact on inducing companies to adopt more sustainable employee mobility policies. Given the dominance of reporting frameworks, it is suggested to expand these to include employee transportation. Such adjustments may help close the gap between extensive academic knowledge on sustainable employee transportation and current company mobility management policies.

The massive investment in, and development of, automated and connected transport (ACT) technology development has triggered much debate about this breakthrough technology’s potential positive and negative impacts. Multiple studies have explored the potential direct implications for users in terms of road safety, ‘productive’ travel time, mobility of the elderly and physically less mobile persons, as well as indirect impacts such as reduced emissions and freed road space. Through a critical review of the literature on ACT deployment types and discussions with an expert working group on the wider impacts of ACT implementation, this chapter examines four distinct deployment types of ACT technology and their opportunities and threats in transitioning toward inclusive transport systems. Of the four types, we posit that ACT-based public transport has the greatest potential to contribute to a more inclusive mobility future. Examining the case of Singapore using policy documents, academic literature and interviews with representatives of public and private sectors and academia, the chapter draws policy recommendations for governance toward more inclusive ACT innovation and deployment.

The assessment of transport systems has traditionally focused on congestion and ridership as its core performance measures. These perspectives fail to account for the actual service people seek from the transport system—the ability to reach destinations. Recent studies have shifted to focus on accessibility as a performance indicator, but do not address the question whether the observed accessibility is sufficient for meeting people’s daily needs. This paper contributes to the accessibility literature by (1) applying a people-centered approach to the performance assessment of transit systems and (2) exploring the factors explaining the differences in performance between regions. The paper proposes the Accessibility Sufficiency Index (ASI) as a performance standard. The ASI is based on a sufficiency threshold representing an accessibility level that is assumed to enable adequate access to destinations. The paper uses neighborhood transit job accessibility data to calculate separate ASI scores for different sufficiency thresholds for 49 large US metropolitan areas. Regression analyses show that transit system performance is shaped most strongly by transit vehicle revenue miles, mixed land uses, and activity centering. Importantly, the size of these effects varies by the employed sufficiency threshold, suggesting that transportation and land use factors affect transit performance at different spatial scales. The results have implications for the ways we evaluate transport and transit systems and for our understanding of the factors that affect their performance.

Employers significantly influence employee travel habits through their policies and benefits, impacting workforce selection, equality of opportunities, and the environment. This study analyses what the fast-growing body of business sustainability standards and reporting frameworks (also known as Corporate Social Responsibility or Environment-Social-Governance (ESG) reporting) require from employers with respect to employee mobility. Analysing 29 leading frameworks using document analysis methods, our findings reveal that the majority (n = 19) do not address employee mobility in their reporting requirements. Among those that do (n = 10), their focus is notably limited, primarily centred on greenhouse gas emissions calculations. Only two frameworks emphasise employer responsibility for preventing transport injuries as part of workforce health and safety management. None of the frameworks mandate reporting on efforts to create an accessible workplace for all potential employees, regardless of abilities or car ownership. These results highlight a significant disparity between the limited expectations expressed in reporting frameworks and the far-reaching impacts of workplace mobility policies. We critique the GHG protocol's methodology concerning business travel and employee commuting on practical and normative grounds. We recommend that future reporting frameworks adopt broader requirements for employer transport policies, in the expectation that higher standards will trigger greener and more inclusive employer policies.

This paper presents an approach to use GPS-based travel behavior surveys to determine who is being served well and who is being served poorly by the transport system. We draw on the extensive literature on travel behavior, which has shown that people’s travel behavior is at least in part shaped by the travel barriers they experience. Starting from this basic insight, we define 17 parameters that may provide insight into a person’s relative ease of movement. These ease of movement parameters cover dimensions related to trip frequency (e.g., overall and in evening hours), transport mode use (e.g., as driver or passenger), travel speed (e.g., for public transport legs), distance (e.g., trip detour ratio), and effort (e.g., ratio between trip legs and out-of-home activities). None of these parameters by themselves is sufficient to determine whether someone is served well or poorly by the transport system, as behaviors may be the result of choice as well as constraint. However, we argue that jointly the parameters are likely to differentiate well-served from poorly-served people. We apply our approach to data from six GPS-based travel behavior surveys conducted in Israel’s four main metropolitan areas (N=62,981). We calculate z-scores for all ease of movement parameters, with negative values suggesting mobility problems and positive values relative ease of movement compared to the entire sample. We conduct four known-group analysis, comparing mean z-scores by level of access to a private motorized vehicle, age, gender, and disability. Results are systematically in line with expectations: population segments identified in the literature as experiencing (more severe levels of) transport disadvantage show systematically lower composite mobility scores. These outcomes are particularly striking, taking into account the short observation period of only one day per respondent. Taken together, these findings provide a first indication that revealed travel behavior patterns can be used to identify population segments poorly served by the transport system and thus to determine both success and failure of the existing transport system. While more research is needed, the approach holds promise to determine the impacts of transport investments on people’s ease of movement.

We introduce and test a visual analogue scale (VAS) to measure to what extent people experience difficulties in reaching destinations (N=180). Known-group analyses showed that respondents who are younger, without vehicle access, or in need of a walking aid, had significantly worse accessibility. Regression analysis with reported mobility problems as dependent variables, showed that VAS replaced car availability as the sole significant explanatory variable. A separate regression model revealed that the mobility problems explain more than half of the variance in VAS (R2=0.528). These results are promising but more research is needed to scrutinize the validity of the VAS.

Bus stops are critical transit infrastructure but, despite their importance, are among the least studied elements of transit systems. There is growing evidence that the amenities provided at bus stops positively influence ridership, reduce perceived wait times at bus stops, enhance rider satisfaction, can help reduced crime at stops, and improve riders sense of safety at night. The goal of this paper is to gain insight into bus stop amenity policies of selected US transit agencies. We provide a review of academic literature and general guidance documents on bus stop amenity provision, define bus stop amenity policies, and analyze 38 selected current transit agency policies on bus stop amenities. We find that the policies are primarily passive guidelines that share key common criteria for amenities provision while having widely varying details (or lack thereof). In all, there appears a need for more rigorous polices supported by more research and professional guidance, as well as the need for more active policies that commit to goals and processes that can hasten the improvement of bus stop amenities in the US as part of a broader transport justice agenda.