Niek Mouter , Jetske Mulder , Martijn Olivier de Vries
{"title":"公民如何优先考虑荷兰国家政府的可达性目标,而不是其他交通目标?参与性价值评估的结果","authors":"Niek Mouter , Jetske Mulder , Martijn Olivier de Vries","doi":"10.1016/j.tra.2025.104643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The goals of transportation planning have been broadened in the last decades. Scholars increasingly argue to include goals such as reducing social exclusion and providing a minimal level of accessibility to all in the appraisal of transport policies. We conducted a Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) with 6,784 Dutch citizens to investigate how different segments of the Dutch population prioritize these goals against other goals of transportation planning. In the PVE, participants indicated for 14 accessibility and mobility goals whether they thought a goal should receive more attention or less attention, subject to a budget constraint. We find that respondents recommend the government to pay the most attention to goals related to providing a basic level of accessibility for everyone such as ‘being able to access important facilities easily’, ‘being able to reach places affordably’ and ‘accessibility for people with disabilities’. Participants think that safeguarding these accessibility standards should be a core government task. They particularly prioritize improving accessibility to healthcare facilities such as hospitals and general practitioners. Participants think that the government should give relatively little attention to other goals such as ‘reducing travel times’, ‘being able to access different jobs’, ‘more pleasant and comfortable travel’ and ‘improving connections to other countries’. Many participants do not think that achieving such goals should be a core task of the government. They believe that the responsibility for achieving these goals lies more with citizens themselves, or with the market.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49421,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","volume":"200 ","pages":"Article 104643"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do citizens prioritize the accessibility goals of the Dutch national government against other transport goals? Results of a Participatory Value Evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Niek Mouter , Jetske Mulder , Martijn Olivier de Vries\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tra.2025.104643\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The goals of transportation planning have been broadened in the last decades. Scholars increasingly argue to include goals such as reducing social exclusion and providing a minimal level of accessibility to all in the appraisal of transport policies. We conducted a Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) with 6,784 Dutch citizens to investigate how different segments of the Dutch population prioritize these goals against other goals of transportation planning. In the PVE, participants indicated for 14 accessibility and mobility goals whether they thought a goal should receive more attention or less attention, subject to a budget constraint. We find that respondents recommend the government to pay the most attention to goals related to providing a basic level of accessibility for everyone such as ‘being able to access important facilities easily’, ‘being able to reach places affordably’ and ‘accessibility for people with disabilities’. Participants think that safeguarding these accessibility standards should be a core government task. They particularly prioritize improving accessibility to healthcare facilities such as hospitals and general practitioners. Participants think that the government should give relatively little attention to other goals such as ‘reducing travel times’, ‘being able to access different jobs’, ‘more pleasant and comfortable travel’ and ‘improving connections to other countries’. Many participants do not think that achieving such goals should be a core task of the government. They believe that the responsibility for achieving these goals lies more with citizens themselves, or with the market.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"200 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104643\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585642500271X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585642500271X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
How do citizens prioritize the accessibility goals of the Dutch national government against other transport goals? Results of a Participatory Value Evaluation
The goals of transportation planning have been broadened in the last decades. Scholars increasingly argue to include goals such as reducing social exclusion and providing a minimal level of accessibility to all in the appraisal of transport policies. We conducted a Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) with 6,784 Dutch citizens to investigate how different segments of the Dutch population prioritize these goals against other goals of transportation planning. In the PVE, participants indicated for 14 accessibility and mobility goals whether they thought a goal should receive more attention or less attention, subject to a budget constraint. We find that respondents recommend the government to pay the most attention to goals related to providing a basic level of accessibility for everyone such as ‘being able to access important facilities easily’, ‘being able to reach places affordably’ and ‘accessibility for people with disabilities’. Participants think that safeguarding these accessibility standards should be a core government task. They particularly prioritize improving accessibility to healthcare facilities such as hospitals and general practitioners. Participants think that the government should give relatively little attention to other goals such as ‘reducing travel times’, ‘being able to access different jobs’, ‘more pleasant and comfortable travel’ and ‘improving connections to other countries’. Many participants do not think that achieving such goals should be a core task of the government. They believe that the responsibility for achieving these goals lies more with citizens themselves, or with the market.
期刊介绍:
Transportation Research: Part A contains papers of general interest in all passenger and freight transportation modes: policy analysis, formulation and evaluation; planning; interaction with the political, socioeconomic and physical environment; design, management and evaluation of transportation systems. Topics are approached from any discipline or perspective: economics, engineering, sociology, psychology, etc. Case studies, survey and expository papers are included, as are articles which contribute to unification of the field, or to an understanding of the comparative aspects of different systems. Papers which assess the scope for technological innovation within a social or political framework are also published. The journal is international, and places equal emphasis on the problems of industrialized and non-industrialized regions.
Part A''s aims and scope are complementary to Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Part C: Emerging Technologies and Part D: Transport and Environment. Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. The complete set forms the most cohesive and comprehensive reference of current research in transportation science.