将公平纳入公交绩效衡量标准:公交线路层面的分类方法

IF 2.4 Q3 TRANSPORTATION
Alexander Tabascio , Ignacio Tiznado-Aitken , Christopher Higgins , Steven Farber
{"title":"将公平纳入公交绩效衡量标准:公交线路层面的分类方法","authors":"Alexander Tabascio ,&nbsp;Ignacio Tiznado-Aitken ,&nbsp;Christopher Higgins ,&nbsp;Steven Farber","doi":"10.1016/j.cstp.2024.101256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Marginalized communities usually experience inadequate public transport services in North America. Within these communities, buses play a vital role in everyday activity participation. Unfortunately, transport services that may advance equity by improving coverage and service for disadvantaged population groups and areas are often overlooked in transit planning since they usually underperform in ridership-based metrics.</p><p>To address this problem, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) introduced an equity service policy in 2019 to enhance bus services in vulnerable neighbourhoods known as Neighbourhood Improvement Areas (NIAs). This policy involves augmenting observed ridership counts for buses serving NIAs to improve or protect services for these communities. Although this proposed measure can improve bus services in NIAs, its current form might exclude other equity-deserving riders (EDRs) living outside NIAs, increasing their accessibility barriers.</p><p>Our study uses quantitative and spatial analytical methods to better understand the equity impacts of this service policy change. We propose moving from the aggregate neighbourhood-based approach using NIAs to a more comprehensive and disaggregated person-based approach. First, we create an alternate method that identifies EDRs at the bus stop level using a fusion of census and travel survey data. We then explore the differences in augmented ridership levels created by the two approaches and evaluate whether the augmented ridership levels are likely to result in meaningful service changes using existing TTC service standards.</p><p>We found that 2 out of 3 transit riders in Toronto are equity-deserving, with 72% residing outside NIAs. Our approach reveals increased ridership on routes with many EDRs, which receive minimal augmentation under the NIA-based method. Conversely, if all riders in NIAs are considered EDRs, our approach shows a 19% ridership overestimation equivalent to 35,245 users. Based on these results, we recommend creating a dedicated equity tool with an individual-centric focus, identifying areas with low transit service and high EDR percentages. This tool could then be integrated as an equity perspective into annual bus service planning.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46989,"journal":{"name":"Case Studies on Transport Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213624X24001111/pdfft?md5=f1b1c339918428d409efc4aab3ed1e7f&pid=1-s2.0-S2213624X24001111-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorporating equity into transit performance measures: A disaggregated bus route level approach\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Tabascio ,&nbsp;Ignacio Tiznado-Aitken ,&nbsp;Christopher Higgins ,&nbsp;Steven Farber\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cstp.2024.101256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Marginalized communities usually experience inadequate public transport services in North America. Within these communities, buses play a vital role in everyday activity participation. Unfortunately, transport services that may advance equity by improving coverage and service for disadvantaged population groups and areas are often overlooked in transit planning since they usually underperform in ridership-based metrics.</p><p>To address this problem, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) introduced an equity service policy in 2019 to enhance bus services in vulnerable neighbourhoods known as Neighbourhood Improvement Areas (NIAs). This policy involves augmenting observed ridership counts for buses serving NIAs to improve or protect services for these communities. Although this proposed measure can improve bus services in NIAs, its current form might exclude other equity-deserving riders (EDRs) living outside NIAs, increasing their accessibility barriers.</p><p>Our study uses quantitative and spatial analytical methods to better understand the equity impacts of this service policy change. We propose moving from the aggregate neighbourhood-based approach using NIAs to a more comprehensive and disaggregated person-based approach. First, we create an alternate method that identifies EDRs at the bus stop level using a fusion of census and travel survey data. We then explore the differences in augmented ridership levels created by the two approaches and evaluate whether the augmented ridership levels are likely to result in meaningful service changes using existing TTC service standards.</p><p>We found that 2 out of 3 transit riders in Toronto are equity-deserving, with 72% residing outside NIAs. Our approach reveals increased ridership on routes with many EDRs, which receive minimal augmentation under the NIA-based method. Conversely, if all riders in NIAs are considered EDRs, our approach shows a 19% ridership overestimation equivalent to 35,245 users. Based on these results, we recommend creating a dedicated equity tool with an individual-centric focus, identifying areas with low transit service and high EDR percentages. This tool could then be integrated as an equity perspective into annual bus service planning.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Case Studies on Transport Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213624X24001111/pdfft?md5=f1b1c339918428d409efc4aab3ed1e7f&pid=1-s2.0-S2213624X24001111-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Case Studies on Transport Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213624X24001111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Case Studies on Transport Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213624X24001111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在北美,边缘化社区通常面临公共交通服务不足的问题。在这些社区内,公共汽车在日常活动参与中发挥着至关重要的作用。遗憾的是,通过改善弱势群体和地区的覆盖面和服务来促进公平的交通服务往往在公交规划中被忽视,因为这些服务通常在基于乘客量的指标上表现不佳。为解决这一问题,多伦多公交委员会(TTC)于 2019 年推出了一项公平服务政策,以加强被称为 "邻里改善区"(NIAs)的弱势社区的公交服务。该政策包括增加对服务于 NIAs 的公交车的乘客数量观察,以改善或保护这些社区的服务。虽然这项建议措施可以改善 NIAs 的公交服务,但其目前的形式可能会将居住在 NIAs 以外的其他需要公平的乘客(EDRs)排除在外,从而增加他们的出行障碍。我们建议从以邻里为基础、使用 NIAs 的综合方法转向更全面、更细分的以人为本的方法。首先,我们创建了一种替代方法,利用人口普查和旅行调查数据的融合,在公交站点层面识别 EDR。然后,我们探讨了两种方法所产生的新增乘客量的差异,并评估了新增乘客量是否有可能导致使用现有的 TTC 服务标准进行有意义的服务变更。我们发现,多伦多每 3 名公交乘客中就有 2 名是需要公平对待的,其中 72% 的人居住在 NIA 以外。我们的方法显示,在有许多紧急乘客登记册的线路上,乘客人数有所增加,而根据基于国家影响评估的方法,这些线路的乘客人数增加极少。相反,如果将 NIA 中的所有乘客都视为 EDR,我们的方法显示乘客量高估了 19%,相当于 35 245 名用户。基于这些结果,我们建议创建一个专门的公平工具,以个人为中心,识别公交服务水平低和 EDR 百分比高的地区。然后,该工具可作为公平视角纳入年度公交服务规划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incorporating equity into transit performance measures: A disaggregated bus route level approach

Marginalized communities usually experience inadequate public transport services in North America. Within these communities, buses play a vital role in everyday activity participation. Unfortunately, transport services that may advance equity by improving coverage and service for disadvantaged population groups and areas are often overlooked in transit planning since they usually underperform in ridership-based metrics.

To address this problem, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) introduced an equity service policy in 2019 to enhance bus services in vulnerable neighbourhoods known as Neighbourhood Improvement Areas (NIAs). This policy involves augmenting observed ridership counts for buses serving NIAs to improve or protect services for these communities. Although this proposed measure can improve bus services in NIAs, its current form might exclude other equity-deserving riders (EDRs) living outside NIAs, increasing their accessibility barriers.

Our study uses quantitative and spatial analytical methods to better understand the equity impacts of this service policy change. We propose moving from the aggregate neighbourhood-based approach using NIAs to a more comprehensive and disaggregated person-based approach. First, we create an alternate method that identifies EDRs at the bus stop level using a fusion of census and travel survey data. We then explore the differences in augmented ridership levels created by the two approaches and evaluate whether the augmented ridership levels are likely to result in meaningful service changes using existing TTC service standards.

We found that 2 out of 3 transit riders in Toronto are equity-deserving, with 72% residing outside NIAs. Our approach reveals increased ridership on routes with many EDRs, which receive minimal augmentation under the NIA-based method. Conversely, if all riders in NIAs are considered EDRs, our approach shows a 19% ridership overestimation equivalent to 35,245 users. Based on these results, we recommend creating a dedicated equity tool with an individual-centric focus, identifying areas with low transit service and high EDR percentages. This tool could then be integrated as an equity perspective into annual bus service planning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
12.00%
发文量
222
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信