Car Dependency and Exclusion from Social Mobility

Image via WikipediaTransport & Social Exclusion - A survey of the Group of Seven nations (44 page pdf, Summary Report, Editor: Dr Karen Lucas, Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, the FIA Foundation, Feb. 2004)

Also discussed here: Social inclusion as a transport planning issue in Canada: Contribution to the FIA Foundation G7 Comparison (31 page pdf, Todd Litman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Apr.4, 2003)

And here: Transport and Social Exclusion - A United States View (29 page Word doc, L. Kennedy, Experts' Seminar, University of Westminster, the FIA Foundation, London, UK, Apr.4, 2003)

Today’s focus is on the many ways that the mobility needs of the poor and disadvantaged are met (or not) in G7 nations. The review article compares the extent of car dependency and the extent to which national transportation policies affect this mobility with large differences between North America on the one hand and Europe on the other. One factor is the degree of sprawl and large distances in Canada and the USA, as well as the greater access to alternative modes such as public transit in Europe and Japan. Value pricing (and congestion charging and road pricing) is being explored in the US (less so in Canada) to partly overcome this.



Key Quotes:

“About 20% of Canadian households do not own an automobile, about 10% are low-income, and about 10% of the population has a disability that constrains mobility”

“Automobile ownership is approaching saturation (a vehicle for each driver), particularly for non-poor households living outside of a few large cities (New York, Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa)”

“[in Canada] the average rural resident lives 10 kilometers from a physician, compared with 2 kilometers for urban residents, and that 7% of rural residents live 25 kilometers or more from a physician”

“Canada has no standard process for collecting national transport data, a consequence of the near-absence of a direct federal role in roadway planning and investment”

“Americans travel almost one hundred times more by automobile than by transit, yet the US spends less than four times as much on highways as transit. The US population grew 50 percent and US jobs doubled, and urban driving increased 420 percent since 1960. Yet, commuters riding transit to work decreased from 7.8 million to 6.1 million since 1960”

“Federal support was continued for pricing initiatives creating the Value-Pricing Pilot Program in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st Century (TEA-21)…The projects involve HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes, toll roads, reversible HOV lanes, express passes, variable pricing and other alternatives”

“On the link between transport and social exclusion:

- access to a car.. seems to be essential to full participation in economic and social life in modern industrialised societies;

“On the public policy response in the Group of Seven:

• the United Kingdom seems to be alone in attempting to make connections between poor transport amongst low income groups and other inequalities ..
• in Canada, despite strong social programmes, there is little national effort to co-ordinate local transport planning or address transport related social exclusion problems;
• Germany, Japan and Italy have developed specific policies to address mobility problems of disabled, older mobility impaired and isolated populations..”

Related articles

• London riots: "Social exclusion" is a real problem, but it doesn't excuse looting and lawlessness. (slate.com)
• Another Wrong Turn (friendsofbanyule.wordpress.com)
• Riots were long time coming for black Britons (thegrio.com)
• It's Bigger Than You (livinglula.wordpress.com)
• Welfare state and Poverty in Flanders #6 Transport factor of immobilising financial growth (marcusampe.wordpress.com)
• Welfare state and Poverty in Flanders #10 Health (marcusampe.wordpress.com)