Daily Mobility and Inequality: The Situation of the Poor

Abstract

International audienceFor a number of years, French local authorities have been pursuing special pricing policies designed to help the most disadvantaged social groups. Schemes vary in different cities, as do the criteria for determining the beneficiaries. This paper shows, however, that notwithstanding the scale of the agreed efforts, the policies' effectiveness has, on the whole, been limited. In addition to the transit system failing to cater to the needs of some segments of the population, low-income workers and the non-registered unemployed remain excluded from the subsidized pricing schemes

Immobility in Rio de Janeiro, beyond poverty

“…Such clear income-based differences in mobility are not found in French cities (Olvera et al, 2004;Paulo, 2006). While trip distance is lower for poorer populations, in general they still have access to automobiles.…”

“…This could also be one of the factors explaining the higher degree of immobility in Rio de Janeiro. Several authors have pointed out the percentage of active workers and professional trips as factors capable of explaining differences in mobility level, especially when they vary with income (Olvera et al, 2004;Paulo, 2006).…”

Conceptualizing Mobility Inequality: Mobility and Accessibility for the Marginalized

“…In both streams, mobility inequality is discussed as differences in the ability and capacity to move, investigating the causes and impacts of such differences. Mobility inequality, as a physical act, is often measured in technical terms, such as travel time, distance, mode, pattern, and options (Banister 2018;Olvera, Mignot, and Paulo 2004). As social practices, differences in mobility are described in relation to the freedom to travel and travel experiences as generated by and attached to sociocultural constructs (Cresswell 2010;Sheller 2018;Uteng 2006).…”

“…Meanwhile, in Chile, the low-income group voluntarily limit their mobility within walking distance and only travel for work, education, or daily necessities (Ureta 2008). In the French context, Olvera, Mignot, and Paulo (2004) and Purwanto (2016) suggest that the level of income is less significant than access to a car in defining mobility inequality. This might be related to extrinsic factors such as the availability of public transport, city size, and concentration of urban functions enabling low-income groups to overcome barriers to mobility.…”

Coping with the costs of car dependency: A system of expedients used by low-income households on the outskirts of Dijon and Paris

“…Low-income households make extremely sparing use of the car (Orfeuil, 2004) compared with richer households. All told, low-income households are less mobile (Olvera et al, 2004;Pucher and Renne, 2003), which reflects their limited accessibility to essential activities such as work (Kawabata and Shen, 2007), especially for women (Camarero and Oliva, 2008), food shopping (Clifton, 2004) or health care (Syed et al, 2013). Depending on the geographical zones or urban spatial structures, highly auto-oriented areas (Los Angeles or Dallas) vs metropolitan areas with high public transport usages (London, Tokyo or Paris), accessibility made possible by cars varies but remains greater than accessibility by public transport.…”