Abstract
Accessibility planning with reference to sustainability and equity principles has been advocated as the best approach to deal with the urban mobility complexity. It has enabled the development of more sustainable and fair policies in relation to access provision. However, despite this paradigm shift, many planning initiatives in practice are still focused on assessing alternatives and proposing solutions, instead of centering on the understanding and assessment of problems as the primary activity of planning. Therefore, in order to contribute for the problem-oriented paradigm in the accessibility planning, this work proposes a strategic assessment methodology for unequal and inequitable distribution problems of accessibility and mobility. This methodology relies on spatial analysis techniques and allows the characterization of accessibility and mobility conditions, as well as the diagnosis of accessibility and mobility problems and their causal relationships. It was applied for the case of Lisbon and the results of the performed assessment allowed an intelligent reading of the problems considered. Specifically, it was found that Lisbon presents an unequal and inequitable distribution of job accessibility and mobility by private car and public transport, and also that job accessibility, along with other transportation, land-use and socioeconomic variables, impact the mobility levels of its citizens.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
02 July 2021
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-021-09544-7
References
Arora A, Tiwari G (2007) A Handbook for Socio-economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) of Future Urban Transport (FUT) Projects. New Delhi
Banister D (2002) Transport Planning. Spon Press, London
Banister D (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp Policy 15:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
Baradaran S, Ramjerdi R (2001) Performance of Accessibility Measures. Eur J Transport Stat 4:31–48
Beder S (2000) Costing the Earth: Equity, Sustainable Development and Environmental Economics. N Z J Environ Law 4:227–243
Bertolini L, le Clercq F, Kapoen L (2005) Sustainable accessibility: a conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in the Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transp Policy 12:207–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.006
Boschmann EE, Kwan MP (2008) Toward socially sustainable transportation: progress and pitfalls Int J Sustain Transp :138–157 doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15568310701517265
Cervero R (2005) Accessible Cities and Regions: A Framework for Sustainable Transport and Urbanism in the 21st Century.eScolarship. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/27g2q0cx. Accessed 22 May 2016
Cervero R, Kockelman K (1997) Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 2:199–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6
Cheng G, Zeng X, Duan L, Lu X, Sun H, Jiang T, Li Y (2016) Spatial difference analysis for accessibility to high level hospitals based on travel time in Shenzhen, China. Habitat Int 53:485–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.12.023
CML (2005) Lisboa: O desafio da mobilidade. Câmara Municipal de Lisboa - Licenciamento Urbanístico e Planeamento Urbano Lisboa
Condeço-Melhorado A, Christidis P (2017) Road Accessibility in Border Regions: a Joint Approach. Netw Spat Econ :1–21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-011-9153-z
Curtis C (2008) Planning for sustainable accessibility: The implementation challenge. Transp Policy 15:104–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.003
Curtis C, Scheurer J (2010) Planning for sustainable accessibility: Developing tools to aid discussion and decision-making. Prog Plan 74:53–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2010.05.001
Derrible S, Kennedy C (2010) Characterizing metro networks: state, form, and structure. Transportation 37:275–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-009-9227-7
Dou Y, Luo X, Dong L, Wu C, Liang H, Ren J (2016) An empirical study on transit-oriented low-carbon urban land use planning: Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis (ESDA) on Shanghai. China Habitat Int 53:379–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.12.005
El-Geneidy A, Levinson D (2011) Place Rank: Valuing Spatial Interactions. Netw Spat Econ 11(4):643–659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-011-9153-z
Ewing R, Cervero R (2010) Travel and the Built Environment. J Am Plan Assoc 76:265–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944361003766766
Feitelson E (2002) Introducing environmental equity dimensions into the sustainable transport discourse: issues and pitfalls. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 7:99–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-9209(01)00013-x
Garcia CSHF (2016) Strategic Assessment of Accessibility on Urban Mobility Networks. Ph.D. thesis, Instituto Superior Técnico - Univerisdade de Lisboa
GEE/ME (2011) Quadros de Pessoal. Gabinete de Estratégias e Estudos - Ministério da Economia, Lisboa
Geurs KT, van Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J Transp Geogr 12:127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005
Goulias KG (2003) Transportation Systems Planning: Methods and Applications. In: Goulias KG (ed) Transportation Systems Planning. CRC Press LLC, pp 17–61
Grengs J (2001) Does Public Transit Counteract the Segregation of Carless Households? Measuring Spatial Patterns of Accessibility. Transport Res Rec: J Transport Res Board 1753:3–10. https://doi.org/10.3141/1753-01
Griffith DA, Chun Y (2015) Spatial Autocorrelation in Spatial Interactions Models: Geographic Scale and Resolution Implications for Network Resilience and Vulnerability. Netw Spat Econ 15(2):337–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-014-9256-4
Halden D (2009) 10 years of Accessibility Planning in the UK — What has been achieved? In European Transport Conference-Association of European Transport, Amsterdam
Handy SL (2005) Planning for Accessibility: in theory and in practice. In: Access to Destination. 1st edn. Elsevier, pp 131–147
Hansen WG (1959) How accessibility shapes land-use. J Am Inst Plann 25(2):73–76
Horn RV (1993) Statistical indicators for the economic and social sciences. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge
INE (2002) Censos 2001 Resultados Definitivos - Portugal. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, Lisboa
Jeon CM (2007) Incorporating Sustainability into Transportation Planning and Decision Making: Definitions, Performance Measures and Evaluation. PhD, Georgia Institute of Technology
Jones P, Lucas K (2012) The social consequences of transport decision-making: clarifying concepts, synthesising knowledge and assessing implications. J Transp Geogr 21:4–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.01.012
Kenworthy J (2007) Urban Planning and Transport Paradigm Shifts for Cities of the Post-Petroleum Age. J Urban Technol 14:47–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630730701531708
Levine J, Garb Y (2002) Congestion pricing's conditional promise: promotion of accessibility or mobility? Transp Policy 9:179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0967-070x(02)00007-0
Li H, Wang Q, Shi W, Deng Z, Wang H (2015) Residential clustering and spatial access to public services in Shanghai. Habitat Int 46:119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.11.003
Litman T (2017) Evaluating Transportation Equity: Guidance For Incorporating Distributional Impacts in Transportation Planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. http://www.vtpi.org/equity.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2017
Lucas K, van Wee B, Maat K (2015) A method to evaluate equitable accessibility: combining ethical theories and accessibility-based approaches. Transportation :1–18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-015-9585-2
Macário R (2005) Quality management in urban mobility systems: an integrated approach. PhD thesis, Instituto Superior Técnico - Universidade de Lisboa
Macário R (2007) What is Strategy in Urban Mobility Systems? In: 10th Conference on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport - Thredbo, Hamilton Island, Australia
Macário R (2014) Access as a social good and as an economic good: is there a need of paradigm shift? In: Sclar, E. et al. (ed) Urban Access for the 21 st Century, Finance and Governance Models for Transport Infrastructures. New York, NY, pp 87–115
Martens K (2006) Basing Transport Planning on Principles of Social Justice. Berkeley Plan J 19:1–17 ucb_crp_bpj_11486. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0tg6v7tn
Martens K, Golub A, Robinson G (2012) A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States. Transp Res A Policy Pract 46:684–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.01.004
Martínez LM, Viegas JM (2013) A new approach to modelling distance-decay functions for accessibility assessment in transport studies. J Transp Geogr 26:87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.08.018
Meyer L (2014) Intergenerational Justice. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/justice-intergenerational/. Accessed 15 Feb 2014
Meyer LH, Roser D (2009) Enough for the future. In: Gosseries A, Meyer LH (eds) Intergenerational Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mondschein A, Taylor BD, Brumbaugh S (2011) Congestion and accessibility: what's the relationship?. eScolarship. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6bh2n9wx. Accessed 5 April 2012
Moya-Gómez B, Salas-Olmedo MH, García-Palomares JC, Gutiérrez J (2017) Dynamic accessibility using big data: the role of the changing conditions of network congestion and destination attractiveness. Netw Spat Econ :1–18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-017-9348-z
Novak DC, Hodgdon C, Guo F, Aultman-Hall L (2011) Nationwide Freight Generation Models: A Spatial Regression Approach. Netw Spat Econ 11(1):23–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-008-9079-2
Parthasarathi P, Hoschmair H, Levison D (2009) The Influence of Network Structure on Travel Distance. SSRN. doi:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1736326
Primerano F and Michael APT (2005) An Accessibility Framework for Evaluating Transport Policies. Access Destinations :325–346
Ramos RAR, Silva ANR (2003) A data-driven approach for the definition of metropolitan regions. In: International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management., Sendai, Japan
Rawls J (1971) A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, Boston
Reggiani A, Bucci P et al (2011) Accessibility and Network Structures in the German Commuting. Netw Spat Econ 11(4):621–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-010-9149-0
Reggiani A, Martín JC (2011) Guest Editorial: New Frontiers in Accessibility Modelling: An Introduction. Netw Spat Econ 11(4):577–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-011-9155-x
Salomon I, Mokhtarian PL (1998) What happens when mobility-inclined market segments face accessibility-enhancing policies? Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 3(3):129–140
Tsiotas D, Polyzos S (2017). The Complexity in the Study of Spatial Networks: an Epistemological Approach. Netw Spat Econ :1–32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-017-9354-1
Uteng TP (2007) Social sustainability in the transport sector: an essential requisite for sustainable mobility. Int J Environ Sustain Dev 6:113–135. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijesd.2007.014198
Vallance S, Perkins HC, Dixon JE (2011) What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts. Geoforum 42:342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.01.002
van Wee B (2002) Land use and transport: research and policy challenges. J Transp Geogr 10:259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(02)00041-8
van Wee B, Geurs KT (2011) Discussing Equity and Social Exclusion in Accessibility Evaluations. Eur J Transp Infrastruct 11:350–367
Weiss EB (1992) In Fairness To Future Generations and Sustainable Development American University International. Law Rev 8:19–26
Wolf C (2009) Climate change and climate policies. In: Gosseries A, Meyer LH (eds) Intergenerational Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ziemke D, Joubert JW, Nagel K (2017) Accessibility in a Post-Apartheid City: Comparison of Two Approaches for Accessibility Computations. Netw Spat Econ:1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-017-9360-3
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia for financing the development of this PhD research through the scholarship SFRH/BD/ 60424/ 2009, the partnership funding support from CNPq, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Brazil, and the valuable comments of Francisco Oliveira-Neto and two anonymous referees.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The author name has been updated from Maria do Rosário Mauricio Ribeiro Macário to Rosário Macário
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Garcia, C.S.H.F., Macário, R., Menezes, E.D.d.A.G. et al. Strategic Assessment of Lisbon’s Accessibility and Mobility Problems from an Equity Perspective. Netw Spat Econ 18, 415–439 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-018-9391-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-018-9391-4