IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v61y2014icp238-248.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowing their place on the roads: What would equality mean for walking and cycling?

Author

Listed:
  • Mullen, Caroline
  • Tight, Miles
  • Whiteing, Anthony
  • Jopson, Ann

Abstract

Trials and dangers faced by pedestrians and cyclists have not only created an impression of undesirable conditions, but have promoted arguments of injustice and inequality. High rates of death and injury coupled with reporting of poor infrastructure and fear of the behaviour of other road users point to a plausible prima facie concern that pedestrians and cyclists suffer inequalities. Yet this appearance masks uncertainty about what factors are relevant in judging inequality and how these should be treated against potentially competing claims. This article develops a framework assessing conditions for walking and cycling according to a theoretical conception of political and social equality, and so providing a basis on which to make arguments for change in transport policy, planning and law. In developing the framework we examine the relevance to equality of a range of factors, including measurement of road casualties, questions of responsibility to increase walking and cycling as means of contributing to pollution and carbon reduction, matters of fault and responsibility for road safety, and the economic impacts of improving conditions for walking and cycling.

Suggested Citation

  • Mullen, Caroline & Tight, Miles & Whiteing, Anthony & Jopson, Ann, 2014. "Knowing their place on the roads: What would equality mean for walking and cycling?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 238-248.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:61:y:2014:i:c:p:238-248 DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.01.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414000196
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harsman, Bjorn & Quigley, John M., 2010. "Political and Public Acceptability of Congestion Pricing: Ideology and Self Interest," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt77b5243v, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
    2. Karel Martens, 2012. "Justice in transport as justice in accessibility: applying Walzer’s ‘Spheres of Justice’ to the transport sector," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1035-1053, November.
    3. Mohammed A. Quddus & Alon Carmel & Michael G. H. Bell, 2007. "The Impact of the Congestion Charge on Retail: the London Experience," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 41(1), pages 113-133, January.
    4. Berdica, Katja, 2002. "An introduction to road vulnerability: what has been done, is done and should be done," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 117-127, April.
    5. G.A. Cohen, 1990. "Equality of What? On Welfare, Goods and Capabilities," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990035, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    6. Lucas, Karen, 2006. "Providing transport for social inclusion within a framework for environmental justice in the UK," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 801-809, December.
    7. Björn Hårsman & John M. Quigley, 2010. "Political and public acceptability of congestion pricing: Ideology and self-interest," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 854-874.
    8. Martens, Karel & Golub, Aaron & Robinson, Glenn, 2012. "A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 684-695.
    9. David Banister, 2012. "Transport and economic development: reviewing the evidence," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 1-2, January.
    10. Hills, John & Brewer, Mike & Jenkins, Stephen P & Lister, Ruth & Lupton, Ruth & Machin, Stephen & Mills, Colin & Modood, Tariq & Rees, Teresa & Riddell, Sheila, 2010. "An anatomy of economic inequality in the UK: report of the National Equality Panel," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28344, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Karel Martens, 2011. "Substance precedes methodology: on cost–benefit analysis and equity," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(6), pages 959-974, November.
    12. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1771-:d:113785 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Schwanen, Tim & Lucas, Karen & Akyelken, Nihan & Cisternas Solsona, Diego & Carrasco, Juan-Antonio & Neutens, Tijs, 2015. "Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 123-135.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Philosophy; Equality; Walking; Cycling; Risk; Access;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:61:y:2014:i:c:p:238-248. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.